Governed By Sociopaths - A New Tool In The Battle For A Freedom-Educated Populace

Here is an essay that considers the idea that there might be an economic pressure (strong incentive) towards sociopaths seeking employment in government:

Why Does the World Feel Wrong? --by Wil Groves linked at:
http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/groves/groves1.html

...I think this new explanatory tool is a powerful one, that libertarians could and should use to their immense advantage. I had heard a little of this idea from Marc Stevens, and had --at first-- not thought about it deeply enough. But the DSM-IV defines sociopaths in a rather narrow way: they are not the violent people that hollywood depicts them to be. In fact, many may well be libertarians (a normal percentage of the libertarian population may be very logical sociopaths --there is likely nothing that would prevent a random distribution). However, many, many more sociopaths seem to select government employment for very specific reasons.

And I think this isn't fully explored by the author (although the essay above is very well written): Sociopathy is sub-normal in emotional functioning, and --like virtually all allocations of neurons-- when one functional area is shorted, another is often advanced (as in Temple Grandin, and other autistics and "autistic savants"). Sociopaths are often fairly logical, they exhibit less fear than other people. They take more risks, and are often corporate leaders, as well as politicians.

...But there's a more specific point not covered by the author (although he did a very great job with the essay, and introducing the idea). Sociopaths may also seek positions of authority because, IF they are not in control, THEN they are at a significant disadvantage. Allow me to explain: Recently, a friend of mine loaned $8,000 to a sociopath who was pretending to be his friend. All the typical signs of sociopathy were there (but as R. Preston McAfee notes, the sociopath is typically only unmasked after his damage was done). When this friend of mine got the sociopath a job under his supervision, (so the sociopath could pay him back), the sociopath not only quit the job, but made up a story about being attacked by my friend. Thus, the sociopath obtained what was, in his mind, "a reason to disavow the debt". The sociopath instantly went to public fora online, spreading the story about how he had been assaulted, and therefore didn't need to pay back any of the money.

The people who heard this message made logical inquiries, and the sociopath's story rapidly fell apart under examination.

This is because unintelligent or unskilled sociopaths don't really understand how other peoples' consciences work. This is a huge disadvantage, unless it's compensated for! ...The sociopath in my story seemed to think things were screwy when people didn't feel a ton of sympathy for him, "even after he explained himself!". ...LOL

...But it's not so funny when you think about it in the context of government (and it's not funny if you're the guy who loaned $8,000 he's not going to get back).

The sociopath who is not in a position of power is the object of scorn and ridicule, because they cannot anticipate the emotional responses of the people around them. This would hold them back in life ...UNLESS they are in a position of power! (In short, I am pointing out that there is both a combined incentive to seek power and a severe disincentive in not seeking power in sociopaths. This "carrot and stick" could explain why political jobs and police jobs are sought by sociopaths across a range of intelligence levels. Obviously, the police are at the low end of the intelligence level, such that some of their comrades actually mean well, but simply cannot comprehend concepts such as "property rights". ...This allows them to swear an oath to the constitution's 2nd amendment, and arrest people for gun possession, etc...)

It also goes very far to explain the severe pressure put on police to "protect other police". In fact, without recognizing the tendency of MOST police toward sociopathy, honest and moral police men, such as John Douglas and members of LEAP are "lone voices in the wilderness" squashed both up and down the chain of command.

Ironically, sociopaths tend to be more logical than most people. So they have learned to play on the consciences of those who "care about the poor people" (resulting in welfare programs that do nothing to help the poor, and everything to empower politicians and reward their political patronage with make-work jobs). ...Virtually every government program is similar (useless, dramatically beneficial to the patronage of politicians). This manipulation of conscience by those who lack conscience is obvious and shallow to people like you and I who are smart enough to put it all together. ...But it is death to the victims of democide who cannot "put it together" and continue to vote for the "well meaning politicians" who "have to be good at compromising".

Would most people fall for the sociopaths' acting, if they could see them outside of their flowery speeches? No, I don't think so. (And neither does the guy who shot this video.)

And this is why there is now a "war on cameras". If the sociopaths succeed in eliminating our ability to reveal what they are, then I believe that democide is in our future.

The majority of police, whether sociopathic themselves, or simply stupid, will enforce any law, no matter how evil it is. That's why we must never surrender our firearms or our right to proper jury trials. If we do so, we become completely defenseless against those without consciences (and with the law and the police on their side).

For additional information on jury trials, please visit http://www.jurorsforjustice.com and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4KoXbsPX7I to watch jury rights activists educating the general public about their rights as jury members.

The Brutality Democrats and Republicans Voted For: Why Prohibition Can't Exist Alongside America

As Radley Balko notes, 100-150 of these style of raids occur every day. The state conducts these raids on people it deems to be drug dealers, users, (or anyone else they don't like, or accidentally target, as in the case of Cory Maye). After all, there is no method of holding prohibition police (DEA, BATFE, FDA) accountable, other than the jury box, and now that juries have been completely eviscerated by the US "legal system" (by "voir dire" 1850-present, judicial instruction 1895-present, "contempt of court" threats to remain silent regarding defenses that question the validity of the law 1960s-present, licensing of lawyers 1832-present), this is what voting Democrat and Republicans buys.

Again: if you vote Democrat and Republican, you are responsible for the police terrorism of this innocent family, and the pointless murder of their pets. You are also responsible for the thousands of innocent people murdered --people not guilty of violating anyone else's rights.

And what would be so bad if this man had been allowed to smoke his pot, in his own home, the way his neighbors are allowed to get drunk? Would it be as bad as his children being turned against the police for life? Would it be as bad as the murder of his pets, and violation of his property rights? Would it be as bad as the loss of American freedom? Would it be as bad as the lucrative black market created by prohibition?

Prohibitionists are shallow, unintelligent conformists who vote for violence that has no legitimate justification. They should be universally held in contempt and socially ostracized, their business and friendship boycotted by decent people.