Jump to content

Pathocracy: government of the psychopaths, by the psychopaths, for the psychopaths


Recommended Posts

I came across an article on Druthers.ca, an independent, people-powered newspaper.  I will quote an excerpt of the article that I thought was interesting, to see if I can generate a discussion. Basically it introduces a concept that is new to me, namely pathocracy. I am sure it's new to a lot of people, too. 

I have included the link to the original article at the bottom of the post.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Statist propaganda in the West tries to convince us that we live in a democracy, exemplifying Abraham Lincoln’s famous ideal of “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

But this is gaslighting. In truth, we live in a pathocracy, which, borrowing from Lincoln, might be described as “government of the psychopaths, by the psychopaths, for the psychopaths.”

Although “pathocracy” is still a foreign concept to many, it is by now a well-established and thoroughly documented phenomenon. The term was coined by Andrew Lobaczewski — a Polish psychologist whose life’s work was shaped by his experience growing up first under the thumb of the brutal Nazi occupation and then under the equally brutal Soviet regime — in his book, Political Ponerology.

Lobaczewski defines pathocracy as a system of government “wherein a small pathological minority takes control over a society of normal people.” Then, in a chapter of Political Ponerology devoted to the subject, he describes how pathocracies develop, how they consolidate power, and how they trick, cajole, intimidate and otherwise induce non-psychopaths into participating in their madness.

How can soldiers’ natural aversion to pulling the trigger on complete strangers be overcome? How can doctors who have sworn an oath to do no harm participate in the pandemic madness of recent years? How can regular, salt-of-the-earth, working-class policemen be induced to brutally beat peaceful protesters? These are the questions that keep both the pathocrats in power and those looking to escape the pathocracy up at night, albeit for very different reasons.

Thankfully, we do not need to ponder these questions in a vacuum. In fact, the conditions for creating an environment in which the average person can be induced to participate in evil acts has been studied, catalogued and discussed by psychologists for the better part of a century. Unsurprisingly, though, this research, ostensibly intended to better understand how people can guard against such manipulation, has instead been weaponized by the pathocrats and used to fine-tune the creation of systems for generating more obedient order-followers. In fact, this was part of the point of the well-known but almost completely misunderstood Milgram experiments (more on which below).

At this point in our exploration, we are finally beginning to grasp the full extent of the problem posed by psychopaths in positions of political, corporate and financial power.

The problem isn’t just that psychology has been weaponized against those of us who would engage in political dissent. And the problem isn’t simply that this system for suppressing and pathologizing dissent has been created by literal psychopaths and their sociopathic lackeys.

The problem is that the state itself is psychopathic and is actively warping the morals of otherwise mentally sound individuals, causing them to adopt psychopathic traits in return for material reward and positions of authority.

~~~~~~~~~

To see full article: https://druthers.ca/dissent-into-madness-escaping-the-madhouse/

If the link doesn't work, just go to Druthers.ca, then go to Read, then go to By subject, and then go to Philosophy.  Search for the article titled: Dissent into Madness, Escaping the Madhouse.
 

Edited by GroundskeeperWillie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your 'people's newspaper' was covered by a real newspaper, you know - the kind that arrives on your doorstep and is trusted - as a conspiracy anti-vax rag.  Seeing as you're a newbie that hasn't been here much you're now suspicious.

Congrats.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/when-hateful-words-arrive-at-the-door/article_468c1c90-2979-5a55-ab32-978c8ef1114d.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Your 'people's newspaper' was covered by a real newspaper, you know - the kind that arrives on your doorstep and is trusted - as a conspiracy anti-vax rag.  Seeing as you're a newbie that hasn't been here much you're now suspicious.
 

Why does that make me suspicious? Just because I am new and I agree with a certain paper?

I saw an article that I agreed with and I shared it.  There is nothing wrong with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

1. Why does that make me suspicious? Just because I am new and I agree with a certain paper?

2 I saw an article that I agreed with and I shared it.  There is nothing wrong with it.

1. People who flop onto this website and post from sh*tty websites are all of a kind.  I wish i could keep an open mind but you are actually part of a breed, to my mind.
2. I usually look up a source when I don't know what it is.  But I'm discriminating like that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

One’s source and assessment of truth can make one suspicious to others.   Are you anti-vax and believe in conspiracies about vaccines?

I don't think it matters what I believe in.  The topic of this thread isn't about me, or whether I am anti-vax and such.  I think you should stick to what is being discussed instead of speculating about my personal beliefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. People who flop onto this website and post from sh*tty websites are all of a kind.  I wish i could keep an open mind but you are actually part of a breed, to my mind.
2. I usually look up a source when I don't know what it is.  But I'm discriminating like that.

Well, I guess I need to work harder to earn people's trust.  Even though I am not like what you described, nevertheless I understand why you might see me that way.  

I came to this forum because I am a very opinionated, highly political person.  I love to talk about all things political with people.  Anyway, nice to meet you sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

1. Well, I guess I need to work harder to earn people's trust. 
2. Even though I am not like what you described, nevertheless I understand why you might see me that way.  
3. I came to this forum because I am a very opinionated, highly political person.  I love to talk about all things political with people.  Anyway, nice to meet you sir.

1. I wouldn't worry about trust at all.  Just do you, but if you want better info then see it out I say.
2. I am never sure of such categorizations.  I have close personal friends who try to sell me on sources I don't trust too.
3. Nice to meet you.  May I ask how old you are and when you got interested in politics ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I wouldn't worry about trust at all.  Just do you, but if you want better info then see it out I say.
2. I am never sure of such categorizations.  I have close personal friends who try to sell me on sources I don't trust too.
3. Nice to meet you.  May I ask how old you are and when you got interested in politics ?

Hi Michael,

I am quite old, middle-aged.  As for why I got interested in politics....I really can't tell you why, the only thing I know is that for as long as I can remember, I have always naturally gravitated towards all things political or controversial.  I have been this way ever since I signed up at the very first online forum in my life.

This place, I have to say, is really cool. I see a rich diversity of views.  I hope to learn from everybody here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Hi Michael,

I am quite old, middle-aged.  As for why I got interested in politics....I really can't tell you why, the only thing I know is that for as long as I can remember, I have always naturally gravitated towards all things political or controversial.  I have been this way ever since I signed up at the very first online forum in my life.

This place, I have to say, is really cool. I see a rich diversity of views.  I hope to learn from everybody here.

Did you support the FTA and vote for Mulroney or Turner ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

At what time?

Anyway, I don't understand why you pay so much attention to me.  Don't you have other people to talk to?

I already explained why you are suspicious.

And now a guy who says he's middle-aged and is always been interested in politics, says he never heard of the FTA. Then says he didn't have an opinion on it. Then tries to shake me off him.

It just proves my point that people who plop down here and post troll links aren't on the up and up.

Edited by Michael Hardner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I already explained why you are suspicious.

And now a guy who says he's middle-aged and is always been interested in politics, says he never heard of the FTA. Then says he didn't have an opinion on it. Then tries to shake me off him.

It just proves my point that people who plop down here and post troll links aren't on the up and up.

FTA? Oh, did you mean NAFTA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No.  The FTA.

 

I'm not particularly good at mnemonics so I don't know. It's just that it reminded me of the time when I was new here, and you were mean to me as well.

You seem in a bad mood today.

Good morning!

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

I'm not particularly good at mnemonics so I don't know. It's just that it reminded me of the time when I was new here, and you were mean to me as well.

You seem in a bad mood today.

Good morning!

;)

I'm shocked to find out that people consider me mean?

I very much like your posts, and although perspectiv irritates me, I do not have him on. Ignore because he's a thoughtful poster.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I already explained why you are suspicious.

And now a guy who says he's middle-aged and is always been interested in politics, says he never heard of the FTA. Then says he didn't have an opinion on it. Then tries to shake me off him.

It just proves my point that people who plop down here and post troll links aren't on the up and up.

I don't give a sh*t whether you think I am suspicious or whether you think my links are troll links.  Find someone else to obsess with.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,717
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Watson Winnefred
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...