Official Culture Reprise IV: Moving Away from the Psychopath’s Dream (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

“If societies and their wise people are able to accept an objective understanding of social and sociopathological phenomena, overcoming the emotionalism and egotism for this purpose, they shall find a means of action based on an understanding of the essence of the phenomena (of evil). It will then become evident that a proper vaccine or treatment can be found for each of the diseases scourging the earth in the form of major or minor social epidemics.”

– Andrew Lobaczewski; Political Ponerology

The male psychopath generally favours power structures such as corporations and governments, and takes a more overt role. The female psychopath operates under a different dynamic, and prefers public institutions and family settings, sexual services and caring professions, but no less effective in quarrying her prey. Both see power and control as vital to their existence. It is the presence of authoritarianism that demands the disappearance of a sense of responsibility – whether by Church, State or corporation – which ensures the rise of pathocratic principles and the decline of the ties that bind community relations.

Monotheistic religions and systems of centralised government appear to be the best carriers of the disease of inverted totalitarianism. In the United Kingdom and other European countries the traditions of democracy and the very notion of centralised government, monarchy and its economic structure is bound tightly to the belief that they are all somehow essential to the smooth operation of human relations and the avoidance of anarchy and chaos. This is more a case of habitual conformity and herd mentality than any real evidence that such way of life ultimately works. As psychologist William Reich wrote: “The fact that political ideologies are tangible realities is not a proof of their vitally necessary character. The bubonic plague was an extraordinarily powerful social reality, but no one would have regarded it as vitally necessary.”

Professor Michael Huemer explains in The problem of political authority the simple probability in our current times which makes the abuse of power so inevitable:

“First, given the existence of a powerful government, the people who are most likely to wind up in control of that government are those who (a) have the greatest drive for power, (b) have the skills needed for seizing it (for example, the ability to intimidate or manipulate others), and (c) are unperturbed by moral compunctions about doing what is required to seize power. These individuals are not in the game for the money. They are in it for the pleasure of exercising power.” [1]

And those who have the “greatest drive for power” are likely to be psychopaths, where love of money is the lubrication toward greater extremes. Moreover, the very concept of the State has always been a watershed in the fortunes of political ponerology.