Politics and the Sociopath World - Definition of Sociopathy - Part III
Barack Obama - Sociopathic Tears
The Political Psychology of Sociopaths
Politics has become the perfect nesting ground for sociopaths. It allows the sociopath to freely express all of their behavioural characteristics without the consequences. Pathological lying, manipulation, use of shallow emotions, a tough demeanour showing that of neither shame nor guilt, the desire to control, the lust for power at any costs, risky behaviour, etc. are all traits we have no doubt witnessed from politicians over the years.
Of course, politics is a game that only works if people are willing to play along. If people lose faith in politics than there's the risk people will refuse the play the game. If that were to happen, the sociopaths would lose their vice grip of power. So sociopaths socially engineered a concept I like to call "moral authoritarianism."
Moral authoritarianism is the belief that following and winning the approval of an authority figure is virtuous. Authoritative followers often express adjectives such as duty, honour, courage, work ethic, pride, hard work, noble, loyalty, etc. when describing occupations they have in service to an authoritative figure or entity (such as the state).
Authoritarians, for their part, have developed a system of rewards and punishment that are proven to be addictive to authoritarian followers. Rewards are distributed out in the name of rank and titles. The authoritarian promises promotions and rewards in exchange for valuable service. Of course, very rarely do these promotions and rewards ever materialize as promised, as in order for the system to function we require an army of a hundred slaves to be chasing and fighting after the one marble. Humans, in their nature, are not meant to sacrifice themselves into the service of another. However, if you can convince people that the sacrifice is only temporary in exchange for great wealth and fame at a later date, there's no limit to how far people can get pushed. This works wonderfully for the authoritarian as he/she can get service and labour at rock bottom prices without any obligations in the present. The authoritarian's end of the deal is in a suspended mode were often the promises are put on hold indefinitely.
For example, a sociopathic authoritarian can promise to his loyal employees that if they work exceptionally hard, there is a management position waiting in the wings. Of course, it's an illogical argument to make, because if all of his employees were to equally work exceptionally hard, there's no way this promise can be fulfilled. However, regardless of the repercussions afterwards, the carrot dangling on a stick has already served its purpose. Our authoritarian for a span of several years achieved excellent productivity from his staff and gave little in return. He has already pocketed his money, even in the face of complete rebellion; he can always simply sell out and move on to a fresh new batch of people to fool. Even if his reputation is so adversely affected till the point he can't conduct business anywhere; he still has enough money to now retire comfortably. However, rarely does the situation escalate to that level. In most cases the employees continue to work diligently in the hope their sacrifices are not in vain. To make matters worse, the promised management position may never come to exist. Promising a phantom position has proven to increase productivity for all employees, so there's always the risk that if the position is offered, the majority who lost out will suddenly decide to slow down their productivity.
The truth of the matter is authoritarians, whether it's in the private or public sector; don't have any practical means of testing individual productivity in the complex world that's the division of labour. So by default, authoritarians simply give the position to the people that they like. This works wonderfully for the authoritarian, as not only does he get all of the productivity gains accompanied by promising such a position, he also receives emotional devotion. This makes the moral authoritarianism all the more potent. People will defend the emotional well-being of the authoritarian more than they would their own child. For the lack of better words, there's more than enough people to go around all too willing to kiss authoritative butt in the hope that one day the authoritarian will reward them with goodies.
Granted, a person that isn't a sociopathic individual could work towards a leadership position whether it's in politics or a corporation, but let's just say it takes "a special kind of person" to maximize the productivity of people at the lowest possible cost. High productivity at low cost, the defined success in leadership, is counter-intuitive in nature and can only be achieved through manipulation. In the game of manipulation, the sociopath will always win. Not to mention many people may have moral qualms in regards to the manipulation of other people.
On the flip side, our sociopathic leader will always make sure anyone who is a bit too opinionated remain relegated to the sidelines doing the most mind numbing work as possible. This serves two purposes, the first being someone has to do the mind numbing work, so why not a potential threat? The second being is it eventually eliminates the potential threat altogether. If you're a long distance runner, one great way to make sure you have little competition is to get other runners to eat cheese and gravy. The mind numbing job will eventually atrophy the mind of a dissenter. This will put the dissenter out of shape. This will eventually leave the dissenter unable to intellectually outwit the sociopath.
This moral authoritarianism does have an end game. Eventually there comes a point where these sociopathic parasites will run out of people to con. Eventually, there will be a day that people come wielding their pitchforks asking for their money back. Eventually, people will refuse to serve. . . That's when government force comes in to keep the status quo. . .
Hilary Clinton - The Sociopathic Laughter
Sociopathic Power Politics - Playing with Fear and Sympathy
Politicians use the vice-grip that is moral authoritarianism to practically implement their policies, however when dealing with people practicality is insufficient, there must be an emotional attachment. That emotional attachment is playing with both our fears and sympathy. These are two emotions that sociopaths are incapable of feeling. They see such emotions as a weakness and a justification for their own perceived supremacy. Make no mistake; sociopaths have immense pleasure in manipulating these two emotions in pursuit of their agendas.
Sociopaths use fear and politics to imprison our mind. They always try to convince us that there are existential threats out there in the world. Therefore we need them, their armies, and their police to protect us against such threats. We need people unquestionably willing to join the police and army in order to defend against these perceived threats. Throughout time, the threat is always a revolving door. One day it's Jews, another day it's drug cartels, next we have terrorists, then Muslims, gun owners, etc. In the end, the nature of the manufactured threat makes no difference; it's the excuse the state needs to beef up the military and police state.
So, one must ask, if the purpose of the military and police isn't to protect us, then what is their true purpose? Their purpose is to protect the sociopathic wealthy I've been writing about in these articles. That's right, the police and military are there to protect the rich and their interests, and they couldn't give a damn about you. It's a way for the wealthy to get all of the protection they need without having to pay for it - you pay for it. Last but not least, all of this firepower serves as a last resort for the day that people start wielding pitchforks that will inevitably come.
Welcome to the warfare state where the goal is to defend the rich!
The second emotion sociopaths play in the political arena is sympathy. In particular, they use the poor as pawns. "Don't you care about the poor?" they chant. I can tell you right now that if these rich sociopaths wanted to end poverty tomorrow, they certainly have the resources to do so, but instead they want to get others to pay for it. The people who pay are only one or two pay checks away from being poor themselves. The truth of the matter is they don't give a damn about the poor. All they care about is throwing just enough crumbs at the poor (and if we can use it with other people's money all the better) so that the poor remain docile and obedient. This creates a nice little compliant underclass that is willing to jump at their masters’ beck and call in order to be fed. Sociopaths have increased in their wisdom over the years. They now realize that it's impossible to have a rebellion when everyone has a full stomach.
Welcome to the welfare state where the goal is to make sure the poor shut up!
So, as you can see here, the way to fight sociopaths isn't by giving them a hug as the hippies would have you believe. Sociopaths don't even understand what a hug means as they're incapable of feeling love. It's time to put an end to that sociopathic hysterical laughter in the background. While sociopaths don't understand a hug; sociopaths certainly do understand the language of the guillotine. . .
-Donovan D. Westhaver
More by this Author
Today, we live in an ever growing sensitized world where people often seem to be confused as to what is basic human emotion. We're taught to be overly politically correct, because if we’re not we just may hurt...
A sociopath is a human being incapable of feeling empathy towards fellow human beings. This doesn't mean the sociopath is incapable of feeling emotion; indeed the sociopath may have a greater understanding of emotion...
The growing popularity of the law of attraction is unquestionable; however it's philosophies and results it has brought to the world leave much to be desired, and should be questioned.