The Sociopath Psyop
Have you noticed the increased interest in psychopaths and sociopaths? Doesn't it seem confusing?
This interest may or may not be grassroots, but it certainly is being promoted, co-opted, and distorted by government, mainstream media, and academia in order to benefit their agenda, which benefits real psychopaths.
First, let's consider an honest understanding of psychopaths, and then sociopaths.
A psychopath is someone who always lacks empathy and a conscience and thus lacks those particular self-restraints on hurting others, but who doesn't necessarily gain any more pleasure than the rest of us do from hurting others, and who is rational and possesses substantial self-control for purely rational reasons. A psychopath will thus avoid crimes for which he might be punished and will be useful if others will reward him. A psychopath is thus fairly well behaved — in a healthy society.
A psychopath learns early that he must pretend to have empathy and a conscience in order to succeed, and thus every psychopath is a very good actor — unless he encounters a situation for which he hasn't learned to mimic the corresponding human emotion yet.
A lack of empathy naturally makes the psychopath a narcissist.
A psychopath might like you if you do things for her such as providing compliments or amusement, but a psychopath is not your friend. She is willing to suddenly abandon you without warning for a trivial personal gain. Therefore, even if you are extremely competent and mature, in a society designed to empower psychopaths, it is best to stay off the psychopath's radar screen.
Psychopaths always lack empathy and a conscience. Whereas, others can temporarily suspend their empathy or conscience, such as when they have just been wronged by someone, or such as when they see others as less than human — usually during wartime, or such as when a cop "turns on his mean gene".
A sociopath is similar to a psychopath.
A sociopath tends to frequently hurt others because of reduced or suppressed empathy and conscience, and because of reduced self-control, and because he likes it. Sociopaths thus include less intelligent psychopaths, but are mostly ordinary people who are like that as a result of abuse or government training. Sociopaths have usually been created by psychopaths and other sociopaths. For example, Obama's Department of Homeland Security began what we can now see was an attempt to manufacture sociopaths with their No More Hesitation program. That program may or may not still exist, but it was just one of many programs.
Once one understands psychopaths and sociopaths, it becomes clear that politicians and lawyers are usually psychopaths, and that cops are often sociopaths. Clearly, these are creations of government, but corporations are also creations of government because government grants immunity to corporate executives for actions by the corporation, but that is not the only reason CEOs are often psychopaths.
Another way in which government helps psychopaths become CEOs is because government causes cronyism, which benefits the most corrupt corporate executives. Cronyism also makes companies larger than they would naturally be in a free-market, which not only attracts psychopaths like flies to honey, but which also makes those psychopaths even more powerful.
A final way in which government helps psychopaths become CEOs is because government has created a nauseatingly politically correct environment in which any honest person who is in touch with reality would have to become an actor and hide his disgust with such fascism; whereas, a psychopath is already a very good actor and doesn't care about reality or integrity and actually enjoys saying whatever manipulates others into believing him and rewarding him. Socialist government has therefore given a huge advantage to the psychopath in the business world — and blamed it on capitalism! The solution is not to give government more power over the business world, but to give it less.
Naturally, such powerful people don't want the world thinking of them as sociopaths or psychopaths, so they are taking control of the narrative.
For example, for several years now, I have observed first-hand how the progressives, who dominate the mainstream, accuse their opponents of being a sociopath — just like how they accuse every opponent of being racist. If you look at the common denominator of those they label a sociopath (or a racist), it is anyone who is not a socialist.
I can't tell you how many times some progressive has told me that someone, such as Rand Paul, is a sociopath, and then those progressives almost always refuse to back up their frivolous claim — just like their frivolous claims of racism, but when I keep demanding evidence, sometimes one of them will not shut down debate, and I will get to the bottom of their claim. For example, with Rand Paul, I was given his voting record as the proof he is a sociopath. I asked which votes were incriminating and why, and I was told that there was no one incriminating vote, and that it was the pattern itself that was the proof. However, the only pattern in Rand Paul's voting record was that he is not a socialist.
In order for the establishment to indirectly convince the majority that anyone who is not a socialist is a sociopath, they had to switch the definitions of sociopath and psychopath because psychopaths are hard to detect (like racists); whereas, sociopaths are easy to detect, so progressives couldn't have successfully labeled their opponents as sociopaths using the original definition or else anyone could clearly see that we are obviously not sociopaths. Likewise, they couldn't call us psychopaths, because, although psychopaths have the benefit of being much harder to detect, the term psychopath just doesn't resonate when used as the opposite of socialist.
One very popular effort to switch the definitions of sociopath and psychopath, is the book, "The Sociopath Next Door", which talks about how to spot that closeted sociopath next door by careful observation. It implies that among those clues you are looking for is a man who is a little too masculine, a little too capitalist, and a little too politically incorrect.
The implication is that anyone who is a sociopath (code for not-a-socialist) should be registered, taxed, exiled, jailed, and/or killed. Of course, that is something a sociopath would say, but I have actually heard these kinds of ideas many times from those who have succumbed to the propaganda. I have even seen multiple self-proclaimed voluntaryists promote this propaganda.
I sometimes test others by pointing out that a psychopath might actually be better at those jobs that require dispassion, such as a scientist or a surgeon, and this statement usually outs those who have been infected by The Sociopath Psyop. For example, the catalyst for this article was when I posted this positive idea as a comment on the YouTube channel of James Corbett, the most trusted voluntaryist in the world, and he ... censored it! The exact text of my comment was: "Psychopaths aren't evil or useless. They could be best at jobs that require dispassion, such as scientists or surgeons. But ... as long as they exist, we must be eternally vigilant." Not only is such censorship very bizarre for the most trusted voluntaryist in the world, but it is even more bizarre given that he has not censored any of my many other comments — not even the ones where I question his motives! He didn't even censor another of my comments for that same video in which I said, "Didn't James used to be a voluntaryist?" What could possibly be so dangerous about my other more innocuous comment?
I can imply that James Corbett might not be a voluntaryist anymore, but I had better not counter the narrative that psychopaths and sociopaths must die ... very strange.
Although psychopaths would usually be useful and well behaved in a healthy society, we don't live in a healthy society. We live in a psychopathic cronyist system — much like everyone else — except we (America) went from being one of the best to being one of the worst — a government of the psychopath, by the psychopath, for the psychopath. Our governments today, attract psychopaths, and manufacture sociopaths. Who rises to the top in a psychopathic cronyist system? — a psychopathic crony.
Therefore, psychopaths are indeed an enormous and growing threat, not because they are psychopaths, but because we accept the illusion of legitimacy of our unhealthy system. Some psychopaths realize they would be happier in a voluntaryist system where they could be, or do, anything they want as long as they do not initiate force or fraud. In a voluntaryist world, a sociopath would get shot in the head pretty quickly, and yet, more psychopaths than ordinary people would want to live in a voluntaryist society because they are not sociopaths, and they have self-control, and they are not afraid to compete.
It was not the average psychopath that created our unhealthy system. It was a few at the top, who may or may not be psychopaths, and they did it by manipulating the majority who are afraid to compete; whereas, psychopaths are not afraid to compete. Therefore, don't be distracted by The Sociopath Psyop — it is another dead end.
The Sociopath Psyop is another attempt by the psychopathic cronyist establishment to cause division and conflict and to misdirect blame (away from them and onto their opponents). It is the establishment's effort to switch the definitions of psychopath and sociopath, so they can convince as many as possible that anyone who is not a socialist is a sociopath, and then blame sociopaths (non-socialists) for the all the problems in our society and especially the problems that are actually caused by government. The root of the problem is that so many accept the illusion of legitimacy. Given that even real sociopaths and psychopaths are not the root of the problem, such extreme misdirection (blaming fake sociopaths) is .. well ... extreme psychopathy. It is just one more attempt to convince as many as possible that the solution to psychopaths wielding government power is ... to give government more power.