Sociopaths / Psychopaths

Would I be correct in the assumption that - among your list of 'probable' sociopaths - Russel Brand falls somewhere in the list?

Is there a 'spectrum' to the topic of sociopathy? Like, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, and Chaotic Evil as an example.

 

Quite the résumé. An opportunistic parasite. Sociopaths usually are.

Parasites are often like that.

 

You can have a similar experience in church, therapy, a political rally, "clubs" or any other cult.

We're getting somewhere.

If you have an external locus of control then you can fall into the trap of a totalitarian worldview - the "we/they syndrome" - it affects your dependence, it promotes the goals of the group over the individual and approves unethical behavior while claiming goodness.

 

And it is broad-stroke comments like that which invalidate the foundation of your position.

Go on, by all means, qualify that statement about how non-sociopaths will find it repugnant and sociopaths will react enthusiastically. I look forward to the numerous consensuses you plan to cite and/or present.

The problem is that it is impossible to put solid lines around 'who is' and 'who isn't' without including a variety of behavior patterns, dispositions, etc. that are not - by virtue - sociopaths.

For example, though I am loathe to dignify your assertion with any kind of response, there are a multitude who can attest to my own degree of empathy. I don't show it to you of course, I'm quite particular about whom I express it to/around, but that it is evident and undeniable is a position held by a sufficient plurality that your 'impression' doesn't amount to jack shit.

Next you'll be assuming that because I have studied the occult means I've sacrificed babies?

That 'non-sociopaths' find the work repugnant speaks more to their own psychology. If it were a cognitive "Ok, I see his points but I disagree on premises A., B., C.," that would be all fine and 'good'.

REPUGNANCE is quite a significant brain drug; you don't get brain drug experiences like that every day. That one is reserved for particular occurrences which - and I'm sorry, but I'm drawing from the results of years of my research - involve a profound self deception so deeply rooted that the subconscious will find it preferable to subject the body to fear/disgust/displeasure rather than face/experience the anticipated consequences of a thorough evaluation.

It is the lashings of a foundational lie so firmly entrenched in the individual that it can almost be said to have its own consciousness.

But forget all that, that's just the manipulative illustration of a sociopath right?

 

The difference in the reactions to The 48 Laws of Power is the difference of psychology. Non-sociopaths will find it repugnant. Sociopaths will find it illuminating and exciting. For sociopaths, it is a valuable field manual. For non-sociopaths, it is a summary of a diseased mind.

It is astounding the difference that empathy makes.

 

Please! I can be accused of many things, but excepting those who expected mild manners, I never disappoint (politeness, yes, but not mild manners ^_~).

And you will find that I employ all of the methods, practices, and vetting processes I advocate for (unless otherwise indicated). I advocate doing one's best after all,... <clears his throat quite noisily to obscure an undoubtably uncomplimentary quip>.

The rest that follows I would have you - and the audience - listen up for as it will be rarely cited but highly pivotal on what I am trying to do here.

Everyone is the villain. If a person stands in opposition to another, they are each-other's villain. A person can live the most objectively OR subjectively 'upright' life and still find themselves in opposition to someone, for whom they are the villain. You are quick to describe me as the villain, for I have and will readily take that label - and that's all it is, is a label - and utilize it for the point of conveying the ideas I would convey. What you have neglected to realize is that you are just as much the villain - arguably moreso - as I am. Perhaps not in as many minds, but perhaps more; likewise for degrees of significance, intensity,... moral authority (ha, I'm kidding with that one).

But I am in agreement, I think this will be fun for all concerned; that is one of my objectives for victory, which is yet another of the reasons I never lose. ^_~

 

No surprise there. That almost calls for a celebration.

We've got sociopaths who want back in. We've got at least one sociopath who wants to "play" the villain. It seems they are crawling out of the woodwork. Why? Because they can't resist the allure of "the game", especially when it is challenging. It's the challenging game they live for. It's where they can really test their skills of deception and manipulation against someone who isn't a pushover. Want to catch sociopaths? Use that as bait. They can't resist it.

I know they will think me unkind, but Stephen and Rhiannon will just have to sit this one out. They can always back-channel with Shezbeth and cooperate on strategy. Better refer back to the 48 laws of power, too.

When Stephen was running Atticus1 (or was it Rhiannon?), he had to ban me twice to maintain control over his subjects. And all I did was respectfully and truthfully point out how his characteristics matched the ones listed for sociopaths. Now the tables are turned, and it is Stephen who is banned so that he won't regain control. Ironic, isn't it?

What was that solution to the sociopath problem that I am always referring back to? Oh, yeah...

1. Identify the sociopaths
2. Disqualify them from positions of power and control

For a sociopath, participation in a forum is essentially a position of power and control. It's an easy stepping stone to climbing the hierarchy (moderator, administrator, owner, etc.). It's like giving a soap box to a con-artist; it's all he needs to build his evil empire. So once sociopaths have been identified, they should be disqualified. No soap box for them. If ever there was an exception to the principle of freedom of speech, that would surely be it. Sociopaths speak with malicious forked tongue. Why should scheming, hurtful, manipulative liars be allowed freedom of speech?

 

__________________________________________________
.
This just in:
These are NOT my words.

This just in from SNOW, The Sociopathick Network of the World...

Dear Mr. No Name Horse:
We here at SNOW recognize your tactics of not telling your name. It excites the weak minded and makes the smart question. We believe we have got them right where we want them. We know you are one of ours.

PS. Only show the back of your head. HA HA HA. That drives them crazy. Post this for us.

Thank you,
SNOW

__________________________________________________

We here at Sociopathick Network of the World take umbrage in your opinionated opinions which have been shaped by our members. We are putting it to you clearly: We have been intently trying to destroy the world as you know it, countries, politics, and interpersonal relationships. We also have come up with a way to reach into all of God's creatures to make them self centered, self interested, sexually promiscuous, commercially selfish and defensive if anyone sees through our ultimate goal to take over the world.

This is our goal: To destroy you. To take up all your time talking about us as your own life slowly slips away. Guess what? We have all the new technology so we are already cloned. Look at Hillary. Does she look like the same person? Math and science are on our side. Two Hillarys are better than one. They will live long enough to be declared the first twin saints. We just bought the church off with all of Canada and Aruba. They are so weak.

SNOW

(These opinions are not the opinions of A Horse with No Name)

 

You are wonderful, Shezbeth -- consistent, right on cue, and you do not disappoint.

You actually can do some self-reflection! This is beautiful to me, that you would put this out here for public consumption. You really are going to "play the villain", just like you said! Pretty easy role, huh? All you have to do is toss aside the mask and reveal your true intentions. Like I always say, sociopaths can't help but expose themselves if you know what to look for. I know what to look for, and you know how to be yourself. It's a match made in Heaven! Why yes indeed, that does resonate with me. Looks like you got me!

And your prior post was all about manipulating me into the victim's shoes just as you describe in your above quote. You expect me to step into those shoes, don't you. Will I? Maybe I just did. I'm not going to say. I know your game, as I've witnessed it with Zook, Warponies, Ice Cold, Atticus, Bill Ryan, AndyWight, and many more. From my perspective, we're going to play for the benefit of everyone watching. This will be for educational purposes, for me and everyone else. From your perspective, this will be about deceiving and manipulating another victim in order to "win the game". You're going to have fun, and so will I. I think everyone will have fun, all while learning about sociopaths from the experience. It's a Win-Win-Win scenario. You already know you will win no matter what, because you can "throw" the game whenever you want and declare it a victory in your own mind. It's the perfect storm. I'm already enjoying it.

 

Now, among the most effective tools to a sociopath - when working on a prospective/active victim - is Positive/Negative reinforcement.

The Soc (abbreviated) will identify individual, environmental, psychological, etc. ways of causing adversity or removing it from the victim and use them readily to manipulate the victim into their desired 'position' (whether logistical, psychological, etc.). Rewards can be material, social/psychological, or even fake (the dangled carrot). The victim perceives the manipulation as OTHER than manipulation because,... da da da daaaaaa,... there is some aspect of the Soc's sales pitch which resonates with the victim or incentivizes them to see it as other than a manipulation.

For example, if a group of people were so viciously hurt by a soc but did NOT want to address the weaknesses in their strategy/position, then they would be ready prey to a soc who preached the line "End All Sociopaths".

 

"Shebeth 'claims' to practice"?! smmile2

Notice how the question of zealous advocacy is danced around and never answered? The 'answer' comes by way of deflection and false polarization. "His way is wrong, and my way is different, so my way is right".

Then it is followed with rationalized savior-crap ("My perspective is broader" - that sounds like narcissism to me) that fails to recognize that the world is - regardless of how an individual perceives it - quite naturally in the state it is in.

Ever - as a child - hear the phrase 'don't talk to strangers'? Question #1!

How did children who can readily understand that concept suddenly turn into a bunch of hapless victims since they're 'all grown up'?

And by the way, I wasn't saying YOU are a loser Chico, I am saying the ideology you are touting strikes me as one which is all but certain to incur loss and adversity, and the failure to recognize it strikes me as a losing proposition.

I.e. I'm not saying you're a loser, I'm saying your philosophy is making a loser of you, as long as you maintain it. The first step is to stop foisting the blame and to take responsibility for your own part in the sociopathic, which should be easy for your becuase 'you're not a sociopath' (again, I don't think you're a sociopath, I only point that out because you're so quick to label me a sociopath, and when I suggest the same on the same criteria you deflect by saying 'thats what sociopaths do!',... its quite silly).

Anyway, all you have to do is this: Stop being a victim. Sociopaths are not looking for victors, they are looking for victims. If you think grabbing a bullhorn and irritating the piss out of everyone around you is 'the best method to confront sociopaths',... well good luck with that.

You're RIGHT that exposing them is the key, but you've omitted the fact that if the person exposing is THEMSELVES an insufferable prick, then it doesn't matter what they say as it will remain primarily ignored.

Beyond that, this whole "STS is Sociopathy" is an extreme degree of cognitive dissonance. I don't contest that sociopaths operate from a purely STS standpoint, but surely you've done those math exercises? I'll walk you through it just so you don't get lost.

All sociopaths are STS, but not all STS are sociopaths.

There, that wasn't so hard was it?

 

Earlier I expressed my pity for Rhiannon, considering she is hooked up with a sociopath of Stephen's caliber. It occurs to me, reading your description, that Rhiannon may be cut from the same cloth as Stephen. Maybe it is a match along the lines of Bill and Hillary Clinton, two raving sociopaths who watch each other's back. I don't really know anything about Rhiannon, which is why I just assumed she would be a victim of Stephen's guile. Perhaps she is his equal, or his superior! Thin Pine suggests everyone could see through Stephen's psychology (which I doubt):

So my question is, how did everyone see Rhiannon?

 

Do you think you know Charles/Atticus/Stephen/Houdini (or whatever alias he is currently using)? What you probably know is the mask he has selected to project for you. That mask can be very different depending on the intended audience, because it is, after all, a deception. It will be custom tailored to the chump. Yes, to a sociopath, other people are just chumps. They are pawns on the board to be pushed around. To get the chumps to move, you manipulate them. Manipulation first requires observation, or feedback. Sociopaths are always observing you very closely to catch your reactions. They are constantly on the prowl for hints and clues that can guide their "mask projections". They hide their fishing for feedback as best they can, of course, to avoid having you catch on to their methods. They also probe you constantly, but again they do it subtly and clandestinely. It's a skill they have developed over a lifetime, and it works very much like a "cold reading" that fraudulent psychics use.

Note that normal people do something similar but to a much less degree. The degree is less because normal people have normal empathy. As a result, they don't see others as chumps, so they are not focused on deceiving and manipulating others at anywhere near the same intensity level as sociopaths. Sociopaths will often take advantage of this fact and justify their deceptions and manipulations to others by pointing out that "you do it too." But it's not the same thing. When you have empathy, you know to draw a line at "Do not do to others what you would not want done to you." Yes, the Golden Rule. Sociopaths don't play by that rule, because without empathy, the rule doesn't exist for them. For sociopaths, there is no line. That's why, from our perspective, they always cross the line. And that's why they are so harmful to humanity.

 

And you know you should stop, as smoking is self-destructive. You have much more than this, and all of that is not self-destructive.

A worthy question, very much related to the self-reflection Shezbeth claims to practice.

So why am I a zealous advocate? Is it for selfish benefit, or is it service to others? For comparison, think back to Shezbeth, who is focused on "winning". He never loses, he claims. He "throws" games when he believes he's won. He's not a loser, but he will say I am. Clearly, his approach is Service-To-Self. That is the philosophy of the sociopath.

My perspective is broader. I see humanity, my species, in a world of hurt. I do not want this to be our reality. I want it changed. I am convinced that we can do better. I want to know how this happened to us, and how we can fix it. All the research I've done, all the study, all the questions I've asked, and all the possibilities I've considered, all lead to the same conclusion -- sociopaths are killing us. They are the source, the root, of all of our biggest problems.

If I am a zealous advocate for this "truth", it is because I want it overturned if it is not true. If it is a lie, I want it exposed as such. But if it is true, then I want us to act on it and heal humanity! I want us to transform this "world of hurt" into a world of wonder and abundance. I want the cancer in our species controlled so that we thrive rather than waste away.

Does that sound like a relentless psycho crusade to you? It doesn't to me. It sounds like freedom.

Stephen, a dancing bear for our entertainment. That sounds like Service-To-Self.

Now you are making the con-artist's argument that the rubes are responsible for being taken, that they deserve it, they asked for it, and their own greed is to blame. This is how the sociopath shamelessly justifies his actions. It's never his responsibility. The blame lies with the victim.

That leads to my next post that I came here to do. Now that is some interesting synchronicity.

 

Hello.

This is my first post, which I was going to leave for the confession thread, but it seems apt that I put it here for context.

I am a reformed alcoholic and a drug addict beginning in my late teens and not peaking until I was on the wrong side of 30. I lost all my friends, I couldn’t hold down a job (or even want one) my family avoided me - you’ve heard it all before I am sure. I filled any remaining gaps in my waking hours with nicotine.

Just before my 40th birthday, you could have found me in rehab but you would never have believed me had I told you I would never overdose again - but it’s true, I’m clean.

It took a little longer with the booze, I hit 50 before I could claim that I’d tasted my last drop of alcohol.

These days, I have friends again, close ones. My family adore me - the prodigal son, welcomed back into the fold. Life is peachy.

I still smoke. Come on, it’s practically all I have!

Anyway, I’ve been reading the Deception and the Sociopath / Psychopath related threads with great interest, particularly Chico’s contributions which are well thought through and mostly either true or said with conviction.

That said, someone who enjoys a persistent hatred (or a continuous fondness) towards another person or group is to some extent a slave to that resentment or devotion - and I do wonder if you, Chico, are becoming the victim in your own zealous advocacy - your relentless psycho crusade.

I don’t, for a minute, doubt that virtually anyone reading this site would deny that Stephen (substitute Atticus etc etc) was and still is both a psychopath and a sociopath. That is what drew people here - to watch people dance his pied-piper tune. Do you remember the 'crow thing' when he had everyone hopping from one foot to the next with his implausible (laughable) mathematics? (member 'Dale' remembers)

People LOVE a good bit of psycho-babble and through his repetitive mantra (promises, contradictions and lies - repeat) we could see the extent of how desperately deluded he had become. He was as transparent as you could wish for.

I’m sad to see him leave actually, reading this site when he reached the zenith of his paranoia was.. well, it was FUN wasn't it - pure entertainment.

I say all this because there exists, amongst the majority, an uncanny need to seek leadership from without rather than from within. A need to plaintively call to the ‘theys’ and the ‘thems’ for solutions and guidance AND blame. It helps people sleep at night and it motivates them throughout the day. The majority are totally lost without this external locus of control.

It could be argued that the majority enable or even encourage the minority to abuse them - that the psycho/sociopath ONLY exists because of a vacuum created by the abandonment of ‘self’ and the abnegation of responsibility.

The very essence of sadomasochism (without the sex).

I should know.

Self denial is a losing game.

 

I recently heard Stephen described as a "genius". I understood immediately what was being expressed by this, even though the terminology is not accurate. I'm sure Stephen thinks he is a genius, and he surely gets an ego boost to hear himself described as such. But what is being expressed here is not at all flattering. What is being expressed is that Stephen is an accomplished sociopath. He is very practiced at deceiving and manipulating others. And he should be, having practiced his entire life. He is a successful con-man, able to charm almost anyone. He is an expert liar, able to convince almost anyone of anything. He hurts people without any genuine care. He scams them, he fools them, he tricks them, and he abuses them. He feels no shame for his actions, and he does not feel any responsibility for the damage he causes. He is arrogant, selfish, and hateful, but he disguises it well. He is simply doing what comes naturally to him, and what comes naturally to any sociopath. Of course, sociopathy comes in degrees. Sociopaths can run the gamut from bumbler to expert, just like normal people. But unlike normal people, sociopaths are no good for humanity. They are bad for humanity. The experts among them are so bad, they are the very definition of evil.

So when Stephen is described as a genius, we are really thinking foul, vile, repugnant, deviant, and diseased. We are really thinking evil.

As bad as that is, it gets much worse. The more empathy we have, the more we want to dismiss that anyone could be so evil. The more empathy we have, the more we want to excuse this evil, even forgive it. Guess who benefits when we do that? Sociopaths.

Justice is only possible when we hold sociopaths accountable for the evil they do. That's why I hold Shezbeth accountable for the lies he tells. He will rant and rave that we are all liars in order to escape accountability and justice, but this is just the deception and manipulation that sociopaths do. We saw the same thing when Bill Clinton said, with his best poker face, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."



Clinton, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman...


Did justice prevail in the case of Bill Clinton? Was he ever held accountable for any of the evil he committed during his long reign of con-artistry, which continues to this day?

Not even close.

 

Thanx for the kind greets, Rose.
Double thanx for the new color scheme. My eyes can relax now!!! eepipe

 

Hi everyone.

This is my first post on this forum. My eyes are still getting used to the dark background and light foreground. If there are any other background/foreground themes for this forum, please apprise me.

To the point, then, I decided to join this forum because Rose left an open invitation on United People, specifically, to discuss the topic of sociopathy. I'm not an expert. But I have read many of the arguments on the topic and have some basic grasp of it. My decision to join was also informed by Chico's comments above, e.g. where he lumped me with other personalities that he has had run-ins with. Chico has curious criteria for defining a sociopath. Apart from Bill Ryan and Atticus - who I would have to agree are sociopaths based just on my own observations of them - the others seem reasonable enough people with reasonable empathy. And I don't need others to tell me who I am; the mirror keeps me restless when I behave badly. Even the best of the human species, e.g. its biggest empaths, behave badly on the odd occasion. I'm far from the best of the human species. My saving grace is that I'm even farther from the worst.

That said, conscience is essentially that which we end up with after a lifetime of negotiating crime and punishment with the mirror (after those occasions of behaving badly). That's a part of being human ... being foibled ... being remorseful ... being alive. Empaths have a surfeit of conscience. Sociopaths have a deficit. Somewhere in between the twain do meet in the average human being.

In any event, I find it a little amusing that I am being categorized by Chico as a sociopath. I doubt objective study is involved in his determinations. But if it is, then I must indeed be a sociopath. And you all will have the opportunity to assess me on your own terms, on this forum; equally to determine the validity of Chico's criteria for evaluating sociopaths.

Well, this is my entry post on this forum, so I will end it here.

Pax

 

Oh dear Chico, if you're going to selectively and non-contextually quote me from private then I would hope you would have the decency to quote the entire exchange?

Naughty, naughty. ^_~

P.S. I have a copy if you need

 

I probably have an early backup on my old macbook, but don't have a power supply for it and it's in storage somewhere. Not sure if that thread would be in there as it was happening around the same time that I left if my memory is correct.

 

HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT

How is it that Hillary Clinton is still a candidate for president of the United States? Anyone with a knowledge of sociopathy who has studied her knows she is a hard-core sociopath. Yet she is still being held up for our highest leadership position, where she is guaranteed to do incredible damage, just like her sociopathic partner Bill Clinton did during his two(!) terms. And even Bill is still politically influential, when he should already be serving life in prison.

What is wrong with us?

It turns out sociopaths have all the attributes necessary to fool us. And we, the non-sociopaths, have all the attributes necessary to be fooled. It's a marriage made in Heaven! Well, actually... Hell.

Sociopaths hide in plain sight. They are right in front of our eyes, and we don't see them. Bill Ryan wows them over at Avalon, so charming, seemingly warm, caring, and genuine, but it's all an act! It's a mask. Get him behind closed doors, one on one, and the real monster will come out. A few people can see he is hiding behind a mask, but the vast majority can't. That's the way it is in the world, and we had better get a clue.

I am getting better at seeing the masked men (and women), but it is still a struggle. For example, I watched the beginning of the Christine interview of Shezbeth posted on InPhiNet shortly after I joined the forum (due to my interest in the Christine/Bill Ryan split-up that has been recently wracking Avalon). I could only watch a few minutes of the video, because alarm bells were going off like crazy for me. I couldn't figure out why at first. Something was “off”. Shezbeth's behavior was odd – his comfort level was artificial, he was slightly hyper, he didn't feel “genuine”. He was physically hiding behind a mask. Christine was obviously charmed. Wait a minute! I've seen this dynamic before, more than once. You could even exchange Shezbeth for AndyWight and Christine for Chicodoodoo and you would have a slice from my own forum experiences!

Yesterday, I forced myself to read some of Stephen/Houdini's posts here. He was casting out “privileged knowledge”, a most attractive lure, onto the water to catch a few hungry fish. He was such an accomplished fisherman, tugging on the line to make the lure move in a certain manner that fish can't resist. He was a maestro, lying with the greatest of ease, spinning stories as naturally as most people breathe, working the crowd like a snake-oil salesman. I remember when he did this at Avalon, when I was just a young and inexperienced fish. I couldn't keep my eyes off that most attractive lure, nipping at it slightly to see if I should swallow it. A few others had alarm bells going off, and fortunately they said so publicly. They were shouted down by the majority, but I decided not to dismiss them and to remain wary. I kept investigating, and I eventually learned they were right. But I had to swim close to the shore and study the fisherman before I realized that the lure was just a mask controlled by the predator relaxing near the water.

 

You need not even ask. All are welcome to post whatever they want. I have no desire to control this thread, or what people post, or enforce the ridiculous "stay on topic" rule that sociopaths have taught us to love. That's what they do -- they teach us to love the chains they bind us with.

I laughed out loud at the ending of your audio, so you made me laugh. Thanks for that.