You are an artist, please take my viewpoint to heart.
"Did I make a correct summary?"
"Do A, B, C move back and forth the between groups?"
Please consider reading some work done in medical and social science concerning the effort to identify the causes of mental sickness.
I can offer:
Prescription for Rebellion
Anatomy of Human Destructiveness
The Sane Society
A person born without certain brain parts whereby those missing brain parts are active in normal brains when sympathy would be the normal reaction to specific perceptions is a condition of life that can be called any name such as narcissism. The name used does not change the fact of existence.
A clinical narcissist cannot merely go back and forth from being a clinical narcissist to being a normal person like turning on or of a switch. A clinical narcissist can imitate or counterfeit a normal person by following observable behavioral patterns, and I hope that you can see how this could help answer your question. I did my homework on this question, so my answer is not merely my opinion.
I don't think so. I think an extrovert is born as one, and in addition to being born that way an extrovert will either find external conditions to be favoring or reinforcing extroverted behavior or external conditions will not be favoring or reinforcing extroverted behavior, so there is a combination of internal physical make up and external conditions involved in producing each person's power to either get alone with everyone else or exploiting everyone else according to that process, and that does not account for the internal or external spiritual connection which can be a separate topic to make this more simple or it can be a topic combined with this topic which makes the viewpoint more complex.
Sheep, human sheep, or followers, exist, and that cannot be denied, as evidenced by extreme examples such as hundreds or even thousands of human beings marching to their deaths because they are told to do so by their leaders.
I won't do that, but I'm not so much an extrovert so much as someone who was born innocent, had some trouble growing up (not much), became seriously introverted, had some head injuries, and am now climbing my way back into reality, as it is, and what I find, so far, is a serious need to stop following orders without question.
What explains the mass following of lethal orders without question including massive torture and massive death at the hand of a few "personalities"?
Everyone is not guilty, not in my opinion, not based upon the information I have found so far in my study.
No, but there are well trained introverts who learn to compete in an structure controlled by extroverts or sociopaths and the difference is worth understanding.
A structure controlled by extroverts who are not sociopaths will reward behavior that is competitive without resort to deceit, threats of violence, and violence, because sociopaths are not controlling things, so those who compete by offering higher quality competitive examples, and lower cost competitive examples, are rewarded in such a structure, and the structure can be called Liberty, for lack of a better word, because such a structure managed to avoid resort to crime.
Enter into the structure a control by a sociopath and what happens?
Either the sociopath, who employes any means to gain power, not limited in the employment of deceit, not limited in the employment of threats of violence, and not limited in the employment of violence to gain power, or the sociopath encounters limits.
If the sociopath does not encounter limits then that is one situation, no reward, no positive reinforcement, and no punishment, no negative reinforcement, the sociopath is neither helped or impeded by that employment of those criminal means of engaging everyone else in that network or that structure.
On the other hand, as we have now, there can be a structure whereby a sociopath is rewarded, positively reinforced, and able to gain power, where the victims provide the means by which the victims suffer, and in such a structure as that, controlled by criminals, rewarding crime, by making the victims pay to be victimized, what happens?
What happens when criminals take over the power of government?
Right away, intuitively, instinctively, and reasonably, the sociopaths, the legal criminals, know that they must monopolize, or own, or control exclusively, all the means by which the victims gain power, and the most important realization that occurs right away is the power to know better.
The victims can't be allowed to gain the power to know better so immediately the sociopaths gain control over every form of accurate currency, which includes money and language.
Money is merely one type of language.
What is the definition of government?
What is the best money?
If you can't answer either question then you may want to find out why you can't answer the question because to me, you are a ready victim, you are a worker type, or introvert, or a person born with moral principle, and as such you have been targeted, brainwashed, and you are now cannon fodder, a slave, you are your own worst enemy, as your mind is conditioned to accept the condition of your mind, which is a counterfeit version of your actual mind. Your greatest strength, which is moral integrity, is now used as your greatest weakness by those who make this structure real. Sociopaths invent this structure, call it might makes right, call it Legal Crime, call it Despotism, call it Slavery, call it whatever word works for you, but realize that it is Man Made, or Sociopath Made, and then, if you can, try to clue other people in on it, and see what happens.
The Sociopaths took over language, and it didn't happen by accident.
The Sociopaths took over government, and it didn't happen by accident.
The Sociopaths took over money, and it didn't happen by accident.
You, and all those around you, are made to think that it is all an accident, therefore there are no solutions, this is our fate, march on into hell on earth when ordered to do so and do not question those orders.
"Are all workers benign? i.e., recently a little 10 year old girl was kept in a closet and weighed about 40 lbs when she was finally discovered; her own family did this to her."
Not all sociopaths make it to the top, that is not a reasonable perspective. The point here is to point out that the structure rewards a specific type of behavior by which the best liars, the best at threatening, and the best at being violent and not getting caught at it, are rewarded the most, and once in "The Club" there must be an "honor among thieves" to keep some kind of order among the most powerful who must have some method by which sociopaths manage to cooperate, to divide the victims among them, to divide the spoils of Legal Crime among their number, and to weed out, by some process, the weaker among them, because failing to have that "governing" process bloats their number to an unfordable number, as too many Legal Criminals and not enough Victims results in fewer, and fewer, things to be stolen, and therefore the rule of "diminishing returns" will force that requirement to cull the herd, so to speak.
Everyone can't join in on the something for nothing plan.
Who would be left to make anything of value, who would be left to make anything worth stealing if everyone acted like a sociopath?
What happens when rats are herded into an too small area that triggers the rat self preservation instinct?
The rats eat each other until there are few enough rats in the small area.
Non-sociopaths are not like rats, but sociopaths are like rats, so they have to have a means by which to deal with too many moral people working to well at joining the crime made legal business.
Try running for congress, see how far you get if you speak the truth.
What kind of "government" have "we the people" had since 1788?
Independence Day is approaching, what exactly will "we" be celebrating?
"Certainly many who love Him have riches while some have poverty."
I have heard it said that Jesus violently drove the Money Changers out of the temple. The Money Changers, or Sociopaths, are back in the Temple, and I don't think that moral people are to blame, other than, in your way of saying what I think is the same thing, other than the blame placed on moral people who refuse to seek a greater spiritual connection.
Your viewpoint points to a spiritual connection to God.
My viewpoint points to a spiritual connecting medium between one another.
The goal appears to be the same thing, as the goal is to gain a connection between moral people and in so doing the connection to the sociopaths is made less, and less, effective at making moral people weaker while less and less power flows to the sociopaths, as more and more people seek, and find, that elusive spiritual connection.
Friend from foe work.
Peace, not war.
What about the actual sociopaths who can now write themselves a check for as much Legal Purchasing Power as everyone else combined?
Each of us, who are moral people, who are current victims of Legal Crime, and potentially greater victims of Legal Crime, aught to know better than to give any credit, at all, to that specific Legal Purchasing Power, which isn't "conspiracy theory", and which is Dollar Denominated, actual green ink on actual paper, and actual digits in actual bank accounts.
The Sociopaths have that much power because the victims give that much power to those specific sociopaths who control that specific Legal Money Monopoly.
"My point should have been directed to the fact that perhaps we have stopped focusing on God and instead are focused primarily on the material which has led to a deficiency in spiritual development which results in the opposite: spiritual decline."
That to me is an example of the Literature, or the Art, spoken of by Solzhenitsyn. My competitive angle of view sees the same thing, but my view does not stress the God connection. Moral people have been fooled into thinking that the one legal money is power. So long as that Fraud continues to work so long with that one legal money be so powerful. As soon as people realize that they are victims to that fraud, the house of cards collapses, and that specific money is no longer powerful. The sociopaths know this, they are not stupid, they merely have no spiritual connection, and no way to get one, and no desire for one, they gain power at the expense of other people, that is their way of life, and their products are designed to accomplish that end. Their governments are designed to accomplish that end. Their money is designed to accomplish that end. And, in fact, their governments and their money destroy their governments and their money that way, so we the victims either find our replacements for that "Business as Usual" before it Collapses on the schedule dictated by the Sociopaths, or we follow that course, staying that course, to that end, or we don't.
We are the source of power, not them, they merely find ways to make us "provide the means by which we suffer" or they don't.
Now they have that racket going, and now that "empire" business is on the way down and out here in America, so why are we following it down and out, why not opt out, why not choose a higher quality and lower cost (to us) alternative?
We are all too stupid?
Count me out of that "we", please.
"Do you believe the Bible was written to manipulate the masses?"
I am going to borrow from two people I trust, because these two people have so far not proven otherwise, and I'm going to say that Bear and Jeff have done their homework and that The Bible was not written to manipulate the masses, rather, the Bible was written to offer any individual the opportunity to make a spiritual connection to the Life Force, or to God, or to The Truth, and so it is up to the individual to make that connection through that offer in The Bible as intended by the writers, but I'm going to add that much depends upon those who interpret The Bible as exemplified by such things that have become known as The Inquisition, The Crusades, and Colonization (dealing with "Natives" in "The New World"s).
True things can be counterfeited effectively for nefarious, devilish, goals, that are not Godly in any sense of the true word, but in every sense of the counterfeit word.
"the principle could save my sanity in the face of probable inequity"
What is the opposite (or counterfeit) version of inequity?
We are not all equal, but we sure can strive for equity, it seems to me.
The counterfeit versions of socialism or communism are unreachable goals (unreachable by design so as to throttle down the power of the targeted victims) such as enforced equality.
"Why am I not taking a drive every night to see what I can do to help?" Trusting in required, it seems to me. How can you trust that you are helping someone if you don't commit to the connections you make to the people you intend to help? You can't marry everyone. You can't be mother to everyone, so how can you trust that your offer of help does help? Think this through, please, and tell me how your calculations pan out. Take any example. You find a bum under a bridge and throw them some clothes, and they you drive off.
What if that bum was on the edge of rock bottom, just before they finally start to make use of their life instead of allowing it to go to waste, but your clothes offering allows them one more years worth of bumming?
What is the right thing to do? Stop, pick up the bum, get them in the shower, feed them at home, adopt him, and work to set him on a better path?
How do you know that the bum isn't a sociopath that just last year was climbing his way up the fascist ladder into Legal Crime, only to cross the wrong person, or take the wrong drug at a "social gathering of elites" finding himself back at the bottom, recuperating, before preparing to start climbing again, on the backs of a steady flow of ready victims, and there you are, ready to "help"?
I don't have the answers, but it isn't out of apathy, or ignorance, for my part the idea is Liberty, which can allow for much less power being wasted killing and torturing people, and much more power used productively in producing more productive power, making true charity much more likely because it takes power to be charitable. You can't give away that which you don't have, and if you give away too much, whose going to be there, charitably, when you need charity, because you gave away too much of your power?
How do you know that next year you are forced to wear those extra cloths in your closet, or next year you have someone asking you for those cloths, pleading for that hand out, where they know that your gift will help them greatly, so who then is left to argue the point?
You have extra, and someone is asking you for that extra because a connection to you by them is made at that time for that purpose.
Here you go, imagine that, I have the stuff you need, at this time, in this place, here you go, and good luck.
Not - I have something extra and how can I use what I have to get what I want from someone else, gaining a sense of feeling better myself, because I made someone else better by giving them my extra stuff.
What is true charity? I think it may be something that is out of our hands until such time as we actually have to suffer so that someone else benefits. How is that done without planning for it in advance? If it is planned in advance then are we not gaining some goal, some profit, some reward, like Oprah giving away cars?
How uncharitable is it to do anything other than making sure that your children are the best that they can be because you did all the right things to reach that goal?
I don't know. I'm not tuned in very well. I have my axes grinding too much, but I do keep a reserve for my children if they need me.
Bums ask me for money, I give them change, "here go buy a bottle of whiskey", and my wife glares at me.
My power is spent doing the right thing as I see it, and charity is a can of worms to me. Equity makes sense, a lot of sense to me.
How about this:
My mother is near death and she wants to give part of her life's earnings to her grand daughter, a house say, and we as parents say, no, not now, our daughter is just out of High School ("learning" economics among other lies), and looking for work, or looking for a way to earn a good life (not steal one), and so we are reluctant to transfer that much power to our daughter in that way, we all agree, my mother, my wife, and myself, that our daughter has to learn to be independent, and we can be there if she needs us, when she needs us, so long as we can be there to help her when she truly needs us.
I don't know about this charity stuff.
"I am too busy to be concerned and troubled enough to help them."
I just don't know if charity is the right thing to do, in any case, until I see it right in front of me, no fake charity, no sending "money" to some organization, and there is no way that I have enough power to adopt anyone, that is ridiculous to me. I am not even close to the best father of 2 of my own children, it is out of the realm of reality to consider being a better father to more children.
"I may find myself between a rock and a hard place."
This makes me think of a realization that reinforces over time, and so far I do not see counter arguments that are valid, when played out in my mind.
Many people claim that all politics are local and if people take care of local politics then the States and the Federal government will take care of itself. I don't think so.
In the first place I don't think that politics can be separated from economics. Politics is merely psychological economics. It is all a power struggle, in mind, in physical reality, and in spirit.
I think the right thing to do is to divorce ourselves from the Legal Criminals at the National level, before the World Reserve Currency Power moves to China. Now is the time to do this, before we are under the thumb of an imported POWER. Now is the time to turn this around.
Regain control over the National government, remake it into a Federation, and then concentrate on State level Monopolies or Legal Crime Organizations, then County, then City.
I think people have that backwards.
All politics in Liberty is local, in our minds, sure, then the family, then the street, then the block, then the city, then the county, on and on, but when dealing with Legal Crime, we the victims, if we want to be former victims, we have to chop off the head, figuratively, because all we have to do is disconnect from the Legal Crime Business, but to do so we have to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater, we need to maintain our equitable connections, or if we have none, we need to make them.
That applies, I think, to charity in this way:
The bum can be employed by Walmart or asked to leave, as there are plenty of cigarette butts to pick up in exchange for some clothes and a meal. No deal, then print up a sign that says to anyone, complete with a picture of the bum, that this bum was given this deal, and this bum declined the offer of equity.
Where is the army of bums hired to clean up all the litter?
No such thing in Legal Crime because that would be equitable, powerful, and good.
I have to get things done before returning to this welcome competitive challenge of viewpoints.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: