Blundering fool Chancellor Rachel Reeves has just dropped her budget on Britain. It is completely inadequate to the task of repairing the UK’s failing economy and state.
This sceptered – or sceptic – isle is a testament to deindustrialisation, a front-runner for the leading contender to revert to a de-developed future. Probably a form of technofeudalism, where a tiny rich elite lord it over a host of downtrodden, impoverished serfs.
Is this the future? Britain can show leadership into the abyss.
It is uniquely placed to do so. Its antiquated governing structures, authoritarianism, and preference for public schooled psychopaths in positions of power is a heady brew of self destructive force, a bit like giving a monkey a hand grenade.
Pathocracy, or rule by psychopaths, is a viable term for the UK.
Non-Physically Violent Psychopathy
The Psychopath/Sociopathy/Narcissim spectrum
I came to believe that psychopathy is a spectrum: we all have little in us and it can be “nurtured” given the right pathocratic society. How many of us have had a lovely work colleague – promoted – transmogrified into horrific boss? It is rampant, particularly amongst the 1%, and mostly unacknowledged in the UK.
Psychopaths:
- Lack a conscience
- Are glib, pathological liars
- Have no fear of negative consequences of their actions
- Think only in the short-term about themselves
- Are able to camouflage themselves well
- See others as targets to be exploited
- Have only a limited experience of emotion: anger, rage and fear (yes, they do feel fear)
- Come across as charming
- Are very manipulative and exploitative
- Cause immense harm to people constantly
- Know they are “different” and view themselves as tigers or sharks: apex predators on people
Some people define non-physically-violent psychopaths as “sociopaths” to claim a difference between categories. I do not: all psychopaths are violent, but some choose to do extensive harm to people via non-physical abuse. It still is enormously harmful and traumatic for the victim. In fact psychological torture can be more harmful, long term, than a beating.
In the “definitive works” they are estimated to make up around 2% of the population. 4% males, 1% females. 1 in 50.
I have interacted personally with several fully psychopathic females. It is quite possible, similarly to other neurodiverse states, similarly to autism, that psychopathic women are under-diagnosed as they slip below society’s radar.
Read more here: https://ponerology.substack.com/p/psychopaths-sociopaths-and-antisocials
Political Ponerology
I have long studied psychopaths in action. My brutal engagements with them forced me to take action to protect myself, others and to outwit them so their harm could be counteracted. In the early 2000s I read avidly books on the subject by Dr Hare and particularly works like Snakes in Suits and The Psychopath Next Door, which are informative. However the study of psychopathic personalities is limited mainly to criminals who are incarcerated long term. That’s why they talk to Dr. Hare: they haven’t got much else to fill their days.
This skews the results dramatically: there are virtually no studies of successful psychopaths who do not overtly break the law. They reach the pinnacle of society and are lauded. Just to give one example, even a cursory look at the career of one tousle-haired former British Prime Minister, should be enough to convince anybody that he is absolutely openly psychopathic. Yet he is extremely successful by conventional definition.
This brings me to the groundbreaking work of Andrew Lobaczewski: he was part of a team of psychiatrists who analysed pathocracy secretly under the Soviet Union. He coined the term Ponerology (“the study of evil”) and co-wrote the book Political Ponerology: which is the study of political evil. It examines how psychopaths come to power in psychopath-friendly societies.
The work was created in secret and destroyed several times, and recreated from memory when Lobaczewski was exiled in the west, so it is a bit of a mess. Nevertheless it is a major work defining how political pathocracy evolves and brings on psychopathic leaderships.
In recent years there has been a renewed interest in Lobaczewski’s work, particularly here.
If there are only 2% of psychopaths present at any one time in a society, there obviously aren’t enough to take it over: Lobaczewski explains how social institutions and society can groom and promote these people to become a self-perpetuating echelon or stratum. British Public (that is, private) Schools are the idea place to create psychopaths out of the rough clay of hurt children ripped from their families and subjected to extreme mental and physical cruelty. Many victims have written about this process: Alex Renton: the abuse survivor still shining light on ‘vicious’ elite schools https://www.theguardian.com/education/2022/jul/27/alex-renton-private-school-abuse-radio-series-in-dark-corners
Politics in Action
If psychopaths form a significant number of British legislators and the administrative echelon that supports them: judges, chief educators, civil servants and top business people, what chance has the UK to arrest its slide into being a Ukraine on steroids?
It seems none. The existing political parties generally have psychopath-friendly organisational structures. The new YourParty shows no recognition that psychopathy exists functionally.
The outlook for Blighty is pretty grim. Except for the psychopaths, obviously.
References:
https://ponerology.substack.com/
the book Political Ponerology