Andrew M. Lobaczewski
ON EVIL: BATTLING MISCONCEPTIONS
A. Psychopathy: The Cause of Evil
B. Ponerology: A New Science

“Oversimplification of the causative picture as regards the genesis of evil, often to a single easily understood cause or one perpetrator, itself becomes a cause in this genesis. . . . Any attempt to explain the things that occurred during the first half of our [twentieth] century by means of categories generally accepted in historical thought leaves a nagging feeling of inadequacy. Only a ponerological approach can compensate for this deficit in our comprehension, as it does justice to the role of various pathological factors in the genesis of evil at every social level.” (Lobaczewski, 144, 109)

Our modern Western culture lacks an adequate framework to understand the causes and processes of what we commonly refer to as evil in our history. The Third Reich, the Bolshevik Revolution, Stalinism… Our body of literature, social sciences, and our common sense of morality only scratch the surface of a true comprehension of the nature of evil. Thus, the very people who are, in fact, the initiators of the greatest ponerogenic activity pass undetected. Our lack of understanding will inevitably lead to the very problems that the majority of humanity seeks to prevent.

In literature and film, evil is romanticized; portrayed as mysterious, yet beautiful; dark, yet conflicted. There is always a heart of gold beneath a cold-blooded exterior. The Hollywood psychopath, rarely depicted accurately, evokes both our disgust and our sympathy; war heroes slaughter their enemies ruthlessly, yet live loving lives as husbands and fathers. If the villain did not have a rough childhood, or does not show any signs of a struggle of conscience, he is seen as “two-dimensional” and “unrealistic”.

Leading social scientists and psychologists promote a similarly narrow view of evil, dealing only with its social and moral aspects. In other words, they study effects; not causes. One such researcher argues that “most evil is the product of rather ordinary people caught up in unusual circumstances that they are not equipped to cope with in the normal ways that have worked in the past to escape, avoid or challenge them, while they are being recruited, seduced, initiated into evil by persuasive authorities or compelling peer pressure.” According to this researcher, the line of distinction between a sadistic torturer at Abu Ghraib, and a non-violent peace activist is simply one of chance.

These somewhat naive views on evil are not entirely wrong. Movies can accurately portray psychotic, or even psychopathic, serial murderers; the common view of evil can accept that human frailties and ambitions often degenerate into bloodthirsty madness. However, both of these views demonstrate a complete ignorance of the causal role of psychopathology (especially essential psychopathy) in the genesis of evil, or ponerogenesis.

Film ignores an analysis of the psychopathic parent that creates the traumatized child; social sciences ignore the influence of psychopathy on the minds of normal humans and the specific processes that give rise to ignoring one’s conscience.

Moreso, the common view of evil still partly justifies the blood-stained solutions of past, present, and future politicians. In such a way is the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the firebombing of Dresden, to the present day occupation of Iraq and Palestine justified.

And without an understanding of the role of psychopathy, any attempt to objectively evaluate such symptoms of macrosocial evil, no matter how accurate, can be co-opted by spellbinders. In such a way, a partial truth can be used as justification and as a rallying point for further destruction.

A.Psychopathy: The Cause Of Evil

Inherited and acquired psychological disorders and ignorance of their existence and nature are the primal causes of evil. The magic number of 6% seems to represent the number of humans who either carry the genes responsible for biological evil or who acquire such disorders in the course of their lifetime. This small percent is responsible for the vast majority of human misery and crime, and for infecting others with their flawed view of the world.

The scope of evil does not respect any boundaries of race, doctrine, or ideology. All races carry the genes, and all schools of thought are susceptible to their influence. These pathological factors that influence behaviour form a complex web. It is only in such a web that the “environmental evil” wherein circumstances can influence a normal person to commit harmful acts can be understood.

Of 5000 psychotic, neurotic and healthy patients, Lobaczewski identified 384 (7.7%) who caused serious harm (physical and/or emotional) to others. Some of these had been penalized for their actions and some had been protected by Communist government of the time. Contrary to the common moralistic interpretation of evil actions (“evil consists of making evil choices”), and also contrary to legal systems which views psychopaths as sane and thus responsible for their actions, the vast majority (85%) of these 384 individuals showed psychopathological factors influencing their behaviour.

It is likely that, without these factors present, the harmful actions would not have taken place. These psychological factors limit the subject’s ability to control their actions. In this sense, a moralistic interpretation to psychopathic behavior is fundamentally flawed.

While a moral sense (lacking in psychopaths) can be seen as necessary to be held morally responsible, that is not to say that psychopaths should have free rein to destroy lives. Psychopathic individuals can have a number of effects on normal people: they can fascinate, traumatize, cause pathological personality development, or inspire vindictive emotions (a result of viewing evil as simply a “choice”).

An example of this variety can be seen in the host of groupies, pen pals, supporters, and love-struck fans that flocks towards dangerous serial killers like Richard Ramirez and Ted Bundy.

One fan of Ramirez said, “When I look at him, I see a real handsome guy who just messed up his life because he never had anyone to guide him.”

These effects and the confusion they engender can then lead to, and reinforce our collective ignorance of such individuals. We rarely hold responsible the individual who influences another to commit evil, but instead moralistically punish only the agent of an act. The true cause of ‘evil’ actions goes unpunished, much like an Army Private punished for the crimes of his superiors. In fact, the true source of ‘evil’ may be separated from a specific action by both vast stretches in time (i.e., in literature and tradition) and by large distances (i.e., by mass media).

“The practical value of our natural world view generally ends where psychopathology begins.” (Lobaczewski, 145)

B.PONEROLOGY: A NEW SCIENCE

No matter how eloquently and accurately authors (novelists, dramatists, poets, historians) describe the occurrence of evil, a disease cannot be cured through description alone. Our natural language cannot adequately explain the concepts surrounding such phenomena. Only a scientific understanding drawing from psychological, social, and moral concepts can approach the understanding necessary to prevent the emergence of mass madness seen so many times in the history of our planet.

Ponerology describes the genesis, existence, and spread of the macrosocial disease called evil. Its causes are traceable and can be repeatedly observed and analyzed. When humanity manages to incorporate this knowledge into its natural worldview, it will have defensive potential as yet unrealized

Susceptibility: The Natural World View

1. Reality-Deforming Tendencies

2. Life Conditions

3. Unconscious Processes

4. Good Times, Bad Times: The Hysteroidal Cycle

Many factors contribute to the development of our personality. Our natural world view and our behavior are conditioned by our society and family upbringing, and by our individual and collective genetic endowment: our instinctive substratum.

While the emotionally active instinctive substratum of animals is the main dictator of their behavior, ours is more receptive to the control of reasoning. Its emotional basis forms the foundation for our feelings and social bonds which allow us to perceive psychological states, human customs and morals. In short, it is designed to support social cooperation and the survival of the group, sometimes in contrast to the equally strong instinct of self-preservation.

Differences between individuals and between nations are thus similarly influenced, giving rise to the rich and varied cultures of the world. Significantly, similarities among cultures show certain universal characteristics which obviously derive from the genetic nature of our species.

Interracial differences in the instinctive substratum are much less striking than the difference between normal humans and carriers of certain defects of the instinctive substratum of the same race.

While objectivity is possible in tracking the causes of our personality, using the same logical and methodological principles as in other sciences, we have a natural tendency to affirm that we freely choose our own intentions and behaviors. We reject the external conditions that influence our actions and form our personalities.

Thus, our natural world view is not perfect. It does not always mirror objective reality, and we are often illlogical in our beliefs and decision-making as a result. Luckily, the better our understanding of human causation, the better we can liberate ourselves from the conditioning the hinders our comprehension and decision-making.

Reality-Deforming Tendencies

Emotional Reactions: As a result of our instinct and errors in our upbringing, our emotional reactions (some of which are explained below) are rarely appropriate to the situations that spark them. A common example would be taking offence to objective criticism, and making a rash decision based on a temporary emotional reaction.

Moralizing Interpretation: Humans naturally and instinctively fail to distinguish between moral evil and biological evil. We often endow our opinions with moral judgment, as if our way of thinking were best simply because it is our own. We then apply this mode of thinking to others whose behavior we see as improper.

Thus we deem such individuals “bad”, inferring that they have negative intentions, rather than attempting to understand the psychological conditions that are driving them and which convince them that they are doing what is right. Often these conditions include brain damage or hereditary psychopathologies. The common ‘moralizing’ approach can be summarized as follows: “Unless one is simply incapable of making moral choices, evil consists of making evil choices.”

Psychopaths have little to no real choice in how they act as they cannot empathize or sympathize; they cannot view other humans as anything other but objects to be used for their advantage – they “lack the hardware,” so to speak. We should offer token sympathy, because they literally have no choice in the matter. Their very genetic code predisposes them toward predatory behavior. They are, as Robert Hare terms them, an intraspecies predator.

A moralizing interpretation often leads to erroneous behavior, such as a desire for revenge, which itself opens the door for further ponerogenic factors. Often, exaggerated displays of such emotionally loaded interpretations (such as those of Bill O’Reilly or Glen Beck, for example) are themselves indications of pathological egotism. “Nothing poisons the soul and deprives us of our capacity to understand reality more objectively than this very obedience to that common human tendency to take a moralistic view of human behaviour.” (Lobaczewski, 149)

Critically Corrective Interpretation: As opposed to a pathological acceptance by one psychological deviant of the work of another, normal humans often apply a critically corrective interpretation to such material. Because of their richer psychological worldview, normal people will often trivialize glaring errors and project their own understanding onto the work of someone who lacks such abilities. This can cause an individual to accept material that is actually contrary to their morals or beliefs, e.g. to the work of Marx or even Adolph Hitler.

Self-Protection Reflex: Our near-reflex quickness at controlling anyone that poses as a threat to our group is encoded at the instinctual level. This reflex is accompanied by a moralizing interpretation to human behavior.

Normal Psychological Types: Among normal humans, the dynamism of the instinctive substratum differs. For some, reason easily overpowers the emotional instinct; for others, the instincts overpower the intellect. Some seem to have a richer and more developed substratum than others. These differences must be taken into account when attempting to achieve an objective look at reality.

Lack of Universality: The natural worldview only applies to the vast majority of humanity. There is, however, a statistically small segment of the human population who have quite a different worldview. These individuals are discussed in the Psychopaths: Almost Human section of this website. As such, the natural worldview has limited applicability. We manage to live our lives with only our emotional thinking and the pursuit of happiness, but these are insufficient tools when dealing with psychopathology.

Egotism of the Natural World View: Some people with a highly developed natural worldview of psychological, societal, moral aspects tend to overvalue their own worldview, seeing it as an objective basis for judging others. While this is the least pernicious form of egotism, being based in humanistic principles, the refusal to admit to the possibility of error can have a stifling effect on counteractive measures against macrosocial disease.

For example, a strong belief that all humans are born equal and created in God’s image can lead to an “egalitarian” acceptance of pathological individuals and their distorted world view. Similar dynamics occur with strong beliefs in freedom of speech, freedom to pursue happiness, the “goodness” of humankind, etc. An objective world view must be practical and rooted in biological realities. However, it must adequately explain what biology does not. It must take into account the “reading errors” of the natural worldview.

Life Conditions

Besides inner psychological processes, other conditions contribute to ponerogenesis. For example, intellectual deficits, whether as a result of age, education, or natural endowment, and moral failings contribute substantially to ponerogenesis. These can include ignorance of psychological differences, an inability to recognize manipulation, and the tendency to realize one’s own desires without consideration for the well-being of others.

Socioeconomic Conditions: Regardless of the quality of such conditions, psychopaths, as a rule, reach the conclusion that society is forceful and oppressive. However, if such conditions actually exist, these pathological feelings of unfairness can resonate with those who have actually been treated unfairly.

Psychopathic Trauma: Subordination to a psychopathic individual has severe effects on a normal person. It engenders both trauma and neurosis, depriving one of autonomy and capacity for common sense. Emotions become chilled and a sense of psychological reality is stifled. This leads to a feeling of helplessness and intense depression.

Unconscious Processes

“Unconscious psychological processes outstrip conscious reasoning, both in time and in scope, which makes many psychological phenomena possible.… Those people who use conversive operations too often for the purpose of finding convenient conclusions, or constructing some cunning paralogistic or paramoralistic statements, eventually begin to undertake such behavior for ever more trivial reasons, losing the capacity for conscious control over their thought process altogether. This necessarily leads to behavior errors which must be paid for by others as well as themselves.” (Lobaczewski, 152, 3)

i) Blocking out conclusions: “We speak of blocking out conclusions if the inferential process was proper in principle … but becomes stymied by a preceding directive from the subconscious which considers [the conclusion] inexpedient or disturbing.” (Lobaczewski, 152)

A normal person has all the necessary tools and data to solve a problem or to logically reach a conclusion, but if the solution holds ideas contradictory to firmly held beliefs it is ‘blocked’ from conscious awareness. This type of denial can be extremely harmful, leading to intense feelings of tension and bitterness.

For example, a wife may reject the conclusion that her husband is cheating on her, even when all the evidence logically points to this being the case (e.g., friends’ testimony, strange phone calls from an unknown woman, lipstick on the collar). When a supporter of the current war in Iraq is confronted with the fact that nearly a million Iraqis have been killed as a result of his support, this fact may be subconsciously blocked.

ii) Selection of premises: Rather than affecting the acceptance of a disturbing conclusion, this process blocks out the piece or pieces of data that lead to the formation of a conclusion. When determining the morality of the occupation of Palestine, many reject that the Palestinians were ethnically cleansed in the Nabka of 1948. Accepting this datum would lead to a correct, albeit disturbing, conclusion regarding the morality of Israeli military occupation.

iii) Substitution of premises: This is the most complex process and consists of substituting other data for those already rejected, making for a more comfortable conclusion. This process is often effected collectively, usually in verbal communication. In the case of Palestine, some groups have convinced themselves that there is no such thing as a Palestinian: Palestine was empty when the Jews found it, they say. This could also be called a “self-lie”, or a lie that we consciously tell ourselves, and then come to believe as true.

Conversive thinking is highly contagious and acts a dangerous infection entry for truly pathological material. People who have lost their capacity for logical thought (and thus the ability to distinguish between truth and lies) are thus more prone to accepting the paralogic and paramorals of psychopaths and characteropaths. For example, observe the behavior of the “Christian Right” and their uncritical acceptance of war propaganda.

The Hysteroidal Cycle

In the search for a good life, humanity first used the power of animals, then turned to exploiting their fellow humans. In such a way, the seeds of suffering and inequality can be found in our hedonistic pursuit of “happiness”. In this way good times give birth to bad times. The knowledge learned by the suffering in bad times leads to the creation of good times, and the cycle repeats.

When a society is hedonistic and the times are “good”, the perception of the truth about the real environment, and in particular, the understanding of what a healthy human personality is and how such personalities are nurtured, ceases first of all to be the highest social priority, then ceases to be generally understood, and finally ceases even to be remembered as a part of the inventory of human knowledge.

Understanding and accumulation of knowledge may seem to be a “done deal” (e.g., The “There’s nothing left to be discovered in physics” pronouncements at the end of the nineteenth century or “We are the end result and final goal of evolution”). The search for truth is then considered to be a pointless activity for the very reason that the times are good. This, unfortunately, is a confusion of the effect (the good times) with the cause (the dedicated effort to understand and the reality-matching social organizations created by that understanding which brought the good times into being). In-depth understanding may become “unfashionable” or even despised. For example, studious upper class Victorian youths were labeled “grinds”; today in America, such studious ones might be advised to “get a life.”

Having arrived at the very top of the wheel of fortune, many people forget that, without evolutionary transformation to another level, it is a wheel, and there’s nowhere to go but down. Here are the bare bones of the hysteroidal cycle with specific emphasis on the mental processes involved.

1. The search for truth reveals “inconvenient”, that is, morally embarrassing facts. For example, Christian slaveholders being reminded that holding slaves was not a very Christian activity; or otherwise unprejudiced Americans being informed that their tax dollars are being spent for racist goals, that is, to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians from the land coveted by Zionists. Hedonistic societies repress the fact that they profit on the suffering of others.

2. At first, when morally embarrassing facts are encountered, they are consciously avoided. For example, the subject is suddenly changed; or a discussion is tabled or concluded without going any further into the matter.

3. When the avoidance of morally embarrassing facts is done frequently enough, it ceases to be a conscious process and gets relegated to the subconscious; that is, it becomes a habit.

4. The habit of avoiding morally embarrassing facts is a contagious one. It becomes a socially accepted habit, the “in” thing to do. “The ‘very best people’ never discuss such things, and certainly not in public,” is a sentiment expressed innumerable times in the nineteenth century. Lobaczewski points out that Kaiser Wilhelm I had a brain trauma at birth, and numerous physical and psychological handicaps which were so completely concealed from the German people, that, for example, it is almost impossible to find a photograph of this emperor with his badly withered arm visible.

5. Reasoning to draw valid conclusions becomes impossible because of the gaps left by the suppressed “inconvenient” facts. The subconscious compensates by substituting morally less embarrassing “premises” so as to be able to continue to draw conclusions, although the conclusions now drawn are, necessarily, false. This is the chronic avoidance of the crux of the matter.

6. People grow perceptibly more egotistic, and the society as a whole more emotional and hysterical. There is a great deal of confusion about values and such societies grow to be seen as arrogant and hedonistic.

7. When the deviation from reality becomes great enough, the person or the society becomes pathological, and murder sprees or senseless world wars and bloody revolutions are in the offing.
In short, during good times, moral, intellectual and personality values devolve to the point where a society is ripe for manipulation by snake-charmers and con-men of Rasputin-like charisma. Individuals become emotionally volatile, egotistical, and intolerant of other cultures. The resulting suffering necessitate great mental and physical strength to fight for existence and human reason. Slowly, what has been lost is relearned. Difficult times give rise to the values necessary to conquer evil and produce better times.

C. THE GENESIS OF EVIL

1. Ponerogenic Associations

2. Ponerization

3. Pathocracy

The ultimate cause of evil lies in the interaction of two human factors: 1) normal human ignorance and weakness and 2) the existence and action of a statistically small (4-8% of the general population) but extremely active group of psychologically deviant individuals. The ignorance of the existence of such psychological differences is the first criterion of ponerogenesis. That is, such ignorance creates an opening whereby such individuals can act undetected.

The presence of such “disease” on the individual level is described in the Almost Human section of this website. However, depending on the type of activity of psychopathic and characteropathic individuals, evil can manifest on any societal level. The greater the scope of the psychopath’s influence, the greater harm done. Thus any group of humans can be infected or “ponerized” by their influence. From families, clubs, churches, businesses, and corporations, to entire nations. The most extreme form of such macrosocial evil is called “pathocracy”.

1. Ponerogenic Associations

“In any society in this world, psychopathic individuals and some of the other deviant types create a ponerogenically active network of common collusions, partially estranged from the community of normal people… Their sense of honor bids them to cheat and revile that ‘other’ human world and its values at every opportunity.” (Lobaczewski, 138)

“We could list various names ascribed to such organizations… gangs, criminal mobs, mafias… which cunningly avoid collision with the law while seeking to gain their own advantage. Such unions frequently aspire to political power in order to impose their expedient legislation upon societies in the name of a suitably prepared ideology, deriving advantages in the form of disproportionate prosperity and the satisfaction for their craving of power.” (Lobaczewski, 158, emphasis added)

“Gangs have always provided great opportunities for young psychopaths. Their impulsive, selfish, callous, egocentric, and aggressive tendencies easily blend in with – and may even se the tone for – many of the gang’s activities. Indeed, there cannot be many other activities that produce so many rewards for violent psychopaths, with such impunity.” (Hare, 176)

Living in a world whose morals and customs are meaningless to them and even seen as oppressive, psychopaths dream of a “happy” and “just” world where their depraved worldview is accepted as reality. They seek, by any means necessary, to achieve positions in government where their dreams can be brought to fruition. If injustice does exist in a society, their statements regarding the ‘unfairness’ of their situation can resonate with those who actually do experience such injustice. Thus, revolutionary doctrines can be accepted by both groups for diametrically opposed reasons.

Ponerogenic groups are those with a statistically high number of pathological individuals, to the point that the group as a whole exercises egotistical and pathological behavior. Deviants function as leaders and ideological spellbinders, and while normal people may act as members, they have typically accumulated various psychological deficiencies. Those not susceptible to such influence are excluded from the group. These groups can either infiltrate existing governments or exert their influence from “behind the scenes.” Bribery, blackmail, murder and similar terror tactics are used to achieve these ends.

Structure: The command structure of ponerogenic associations is similar to that of normal groups: members specialize and complement each other’s strengths. In this way different individuals with varying psychological defects will fill roles in which their particular ‘gift’ is applicable. “The earlier phase of a ponerogenic union’s activity is usually dominated by characteropathic, particularly paranoid individuals, who often play an inspirational or spellbinding role in the ponerization process. Recall here that the power of the paranoid characteropath lies in that they easily enslave less critical minds” (Lobaczewski, 162). Trauma victims, individuals with psychological deficiencies, and young people often fall into the category of ‘less critical minds’.

Ideological Mask: The group’s stated goals are often at variance with its true nature. Colorful literature and humanitarian values often mask its true motivations. Take, for example, the disparity between the CIA’s stated goals, such as “Creating special, multidisciplinary centers to address such high-priority issues such as nonproliferation, counterterrorism, counterintelligence, international organized crime and narcotics trafficking, environment, and arms control intelligence”, and its widespread use of terrorism, torture, overthrowing democratically elected governments, installing foreign dictators, drug trafficking, arms smuggling, etc.

Also, compare the public humanitarian front of the Anti-Defamation League with its sordid history of illegal domestic surveillance, character assassination, and collaboration with foreign spy organizations.

First Criterion of Ponerogenesis: “One phenomenon all ponerogenic groups and associations have in common is the fact that their members lose (or have already lost) the capacity to perceive pathological individuals as such, interpreting their behavior in fascinated, heroic, or melodramatic ways” (Lobaczewski, 158).

When a group has succumbed to pathological influence its members soon lose the ability to distinguish normal human behavior from pathological. This atrophy of critical faculties in relation to such individuals becomes an opening to their activities. It can also be used to identify potentially dangerous groups.

Characteropathy and Psychopathy: Groups dominated by characteropaths engage in fairly primitive activities, and are thus easily broken by normal society. Psychopathic leaders, however, are often more clever, and use characteropathic individuals as subservient tools.

When arrested, such individuals accept the paramoral ideals of their leaders, acting as the group’s scapegoat and accepting the majority of the blame. Psychopathic leaders, when in court, will correspondingly shift the blame to their underlings. A large-scale example of this dynamic is the scapegoating of low-ranking military officers for war crimes condoned and/or ordered by higher-ranking authorities.

Primary and Secondary Ponerogenic Unions: There are two types of ponerogenic associations. Primary ponerogenic associations are those that were originally formed and designed to benefit its founding members using illicit (evil) means. Lobaczewski describes them as unions “whose abnormal members were active from the very beginning, playing the role of crystallizing catalysts as early as the process of creation of the group occurred,” e.g. criminal gangs (160). Such groups’ antisocial activities and blatant disregard for moral values naturally disgust normal people, and thus their influence does not spread far before they lose their battle with society.

The secondary ponerogenic associations are groups founded with an independent and attractive social ideal, but which later succumb to moral degeneration. This degeneration leaves an opening for “infection and activation of the pathological factors within, and later to a ponerization of the group as a whole, or often its fraction” (Lobaczewski, 160).

Governments, ideologies, and religions are institutions founded by people whose lack of awareness of specific psychological realities and other moral failings leave them open to covert infection and subsequent take-over by those without conscience. The fact that these institutions have been in existence and have a long-standing tradition has allowed them to acquire a much greater membership and notoriety.

When such an organization, working towards some social or political goal, is already accepted by a large number of normal people (e.g. American Republicanism or Evangelical Christianity), ponerization of the group provides the widespread influence that primary ponerogenic unions lack.

After its takeover by psychopathic elements within (e.g. the Neoconservative takeover of American Republicanism), the ponerogenic group is protected by a “mask” of the group’s traditional values.

This will happen in spite of the fact that these values are obviously distorted and disregarded. For example, such a group will pass legislation and behave solely to benefit those in control, often becoming violent and starting wars of aggression. Normal members of such a group naively protect such deviant behavior, not realizing it is the work of deviants.

Its pathology remains hidden by those who do not wish to see it objectively. Justifications and prepared ideologies are promulgated; subconscious selection and substitution take place, and the pathology is effectively cloaked behind a mask of sanity.

Those who belong to ‘the party’ will label the opposition as pacifists, socialists, liberals or terrorists, or whichever label is most effective in order to invalidate their criticism. Unfortunately the government will only become more pathological in its behavior and egotistical toward other nations until the deviant psychological aspects are either purged or destroy themselves.

The same dynamic plays out in interpersonal relations. Take, for example, Ted Bundy, who had a reputation as a kind, intelligent, respectable man. When he was first accused of murdering several young women, his acquaintances staunchly defended his character.

This situation follows the same pattern as the macrosocial dynamic. Such individuals will often denigrate the victims and accusers of such a previously esteemed individual. This not only has a negative effect on the victim, but encourages further deviant behavior on behalf of the perpetrator.

Macrosocial Disease: Social disease may be called macrosocial under either of two conditions: 1) ponerogenic processes encompass a society’s entire ruling class, or 2) opposition from normal people is stifled, via the mass use of spellbinding, censorship, and physical compulsion. Two general stages of macrosocial disease seem to apply to all its forms and variations: hysteria and pathocracy.

2. Ponerization

The first step in the ponerization of a group often appears as a moral distortion of the group’s original ideology. The existence of simplistic concepts (e.g., whether moral or legal) blocks any ability for critical thought in relation to the existence of psychopaths or their possible influence on the initial warping of the group’s ideology. Such doctrinaire concepts are prevalent in the neoconservative ideology.

For example, “You’re either with us or against us (in the War on Terror)” and the completely arbitrary use of the labels “terrorist,” “terrorist sympathizer”, and “suspected terrorist.”

Just as it is normal in the life of any human to experience a decline in psychological or physiological resistance (thus leading to moral failings or bacteriological infection), groups experience such crises. The pressure leading to such crises may be caused by the influence of other groups, a heightened hysterical condition, or a general spiritual crisis in the environment.

The resulting weakness in proper reasoning and critical thinking skills leaves an opening for the activity of psychopaths and characteropaths. Their influence then results in a further decline in moral and intellectual functioning.

The absurdity of such a dynamic can be seen in the fact that Richard Cheney, an obvious psychopath, is allowed to hold the position of vice-president. Even when he shoots a hunting partner in the face, the media and public will studiously rationalize his coarse and psychopathic behavior. (See Dave McGowan’s analysis of the incident in question.)

When such individuals are treated as normal, more perceptive individuals will leave the group. When the group has become sufficiently pathological, members will either perceive its new direction in moral terms (e.g., “We must kill them all on the principle of justice and democracy”), or as a form of psychological terror. As more healthy people leave the group, taking on more counter-revolutionary positions, individuals with psychological anomalies join, removing their masks of sanity ever more often.

Without adequate knowledge, normal individuals who have been ejected from such a group will suffer immensely, cut off from their original ideological reason for joining. Infected with unhealthy emotions and pathological material, they can assume positions opposite to those which they formerly followed.

New members are psychologically screened. No one with too much independence or psychological normality is allowed in the group. (Such screening should have taken place to root out psychological deviants in the first place.) Detractors are treated with paramoral condemnation. In short, the patients have overtaken the asylum.

Stages of Ponerization: When it is first infected by psychological deviants, the group maintains most of its original character. But eventually, the more normal members are pushed into fringe functions and are excluded from organizational secrets; some of them thereupon leave the group.

“Individuals with inherited deviations then progressively take over the inspirational and leadership positions. The role of essential psychopaths gradually grows, although they like to remain ostensibly in the shadows… In ponerogenic unions on the largest social scale, the leadership role is generally played by a different kind of individual, one more easily digestible and representative. Examples include frontal characteropathy, or some more discreet complex of lesser traits.” (Lobaczewski, 162)

The initial stage of ponerization, where membership is increasingly pathological, requires specific psychological and factual knowledge in order to recognize. The second, more stable and overtly pathological stage, is readily apparent to most normal people, but is interpreted in moral or sociological terms (i.e., without knowledge of psychological differences).

Over time, as the group becomes more heavily ponerized, the spellbinders who originally led such a group are relegated to the task of repackaging the ideology for propaganda purposes. The leadership roles become saturated with more psychopathic individuals, while the “normal” group acquires more characteropathic individuals.

As is the case with the Neoconservative ponerogenic union’s ostensible “unitary executive” George W. Bush, group propaganda maintains the erroneous overestimation of the ‘leader’s’ real power. This leader “is dependent upon the interests of the union, especially the elite initiates, to an extent greater than he himself knows.

He wages a constant position-jockeying battle; he is an actor with a director. In macrosocial unions, this position is generally occupied by a more representative individual not deprived of certain critical faculties; initiating him into all those plans and criminal calculations would be counterproductive. In conjunction with part of the elite, a group of psychopathic individuals hiding behind the scenes steers the leader, the way Borman and his clique steered Hitler.

If the leader does not fulfill his assigned role, he generally knows that the clique representing the elite of the union is in a position to kill or otherwise remove him.” In such a manner, George W. Bush is steered and controlled by a group of psychopathic advisors: Richard Perle to name but one.

3. Pathocracy

The first phase of macrosocial disease, i.e. social hysterization, is the opening through which pathocracy manifests. Such a period of societal spiritual crisis is associated with the exhausting of the ideational, moral, and religious values heretofore nourishing the society in question.

Individuals and groups grow increasingly self-serving, and the links of moral duty and social networks loosen. People become concerned with trifling things, ignoring more important issues such as commitment to the future, or involvement in public matters.

The most characteristic feature of such a period is widespread hysteria, like that of the quarter century in Europe preceding WWI. “Happy” times of peace are necessarily dependant on social injustice, and children of the privileged class learn early to repress ideas that they and their families are benefiting from the injustice of others.

Such unconscious defense mechanisms cause these individuals to disparage the values of those whose work they exploit. These processes lead to an hysterical state of inhibited logic and reasoning. This rigidity of thought then gets passed on to the next generation to an even greater degree.

The hysterical patterns finally get passed from the ruling class to the less privileged classes. This characteristic contempt for factual criticism, for normal thought patterns and nations, obviates the need for media censorship. A pathologically hypersensitive censor lives within each citizen.

This has been repeatedly demonstrated by the American media in relation to the omissions and distortions of the Kean-Zelikow 911 Commission Report, the propaganda leading to the Iraq war, the death toll of Iraqi citizens, the reality in Palestine.

“When three “egos” govern – egoism, egotism, and egocentrism – the feeling of social links and responsibility toward others disappear, and the society in question splinters into groups ever more hostile to each other. When a hysterical environment stops differentiating the opinions of limited, not-quite-normal people from those of normal, reasonable persons, this opens the door for activation of the pathological factors of a various nature to enter in.” (Lobaczewski, 177)

This hysteroidal phase is often followed by a period of war, revolution, genocide, and the fall of empires: pathocracy.

Adauga un comentariu!

Apăsaţi aici pentru a anula un răspuns.

Nume (necesar)

E-mail (necesar dar nu va fi publicat)

Website

CAPTCHA Code *

It seems like people tend to research psychopathy and other personality disorders after they’ve been burned. I have decided to repost an entry from last year that examines some of the reasons why there is so little psychopathy awareness in the general public. Ideally, this information can reach the general public, so people can spot […]

“Pentru psihologii ca mine, lumea finantelor este foarte interesanta, chiar si numai in termeni pur clinici. Esti CEO si trebuie sa atingi un target colosal pentru a fi, la randul tau, platit generos. Ce tip de organizatie vei construi pentru a strange o asemenea suma? Devine si mai interesant cand compania ta a esuat intr-o […]

Dr. Tudorel Butoi Fascinatia de care se “bucura” din ce in ce mai mult personalitatea psihopatica a “serial killer-ului” in spatiul investigatiei stiintifice pe de o parte, cat si incurajatoarele incercari in materia “profiler” a unor talentati psihologi si criminalisti, pe de alta parte, ne fac sa trecem in revista, intr-o abordare sintetica, o serie […]

Parintele I. G. Coman Raul e una din cele mai vechi si mai generale probleme care framanta pe om aproape de la aparitia lui. Viata insasi este o forma a luptei duse impotriva raului, caci nu se poate spune ca omul si societatea n-au incercat, de-a lungul timpului, sa combata raul. Raul nu e o […]

A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes Andrew M. Lobaczewski with commentary and additional quoted material by Laura Knight-Jadczyk This article is a two-parter. I should notify the reader that the really good stuff is in the second part, so don’t skip it! Pathocracy is a disease of great social movements […]