Is there a psychopath conspiracy?

Happy New Year! I don't post a lot here, but now I wanted to ask here about thoughts on this topic. What do you think of the notion of a psychopathic conspiracy? Do real psychopaths exist, and if so, would they conspire? (You may know that "conspiracy" comes from the language of Latin where "con spirare" means "breathe together" and simply is a term for collaboration or acting in concert.)

A conspiracy is a co-operation, often thought of as motivated by aggressive ends and conducted in secret. Conspiracies happen on all scales and in all kinds of social contexts. One example of a non-aggressive, but secret, conspiracy may be a family who gets up early to surprise a family member with breakfast in bed on his or her birthday. [From ATS' encyclopedia wiki "tinWiki"]

Civilization, as we know it, is largely the creation of psychopaths. All civilizations, our own included, have been based on slavery and “warfare.” Incidentally, the latter term is a euphemism for mass murder. [From Twilight of the Psychopaths, by Dr. Kevin Barrett, The Canadian]

Personally I do think psychopaths exist, and I also think they conspire. All who have common interests do, whether consciously or merely "intuitively", pull in the same direction. The reason this issue is of any interest at all is of course that psychopaths, for what little I know about this, by definition are dangerous without any limit (except the limit of their abilities, and psychopaths are neither crazy/psychotic nor stupid.) I have, by the way tried to collect my impressions of all this over in the psychopathy article (feel free to edit and improve that, though) at ATS' very own encyclopedia wiki.

Assuming psychopaths are walking among us, to put it like that, the task which we the normal human beings are then presented with is: what to do about it? So I would be interested in any thoughts you might have on what if anything could be done about it. But my main question is simply, do psychopaths really exist, and if so, do they conspire? I'm looking forward to hearing how this sort of thing seems to you.

Optimist

Interesting idea.

However, I think that based upon the assumption that they lack empathy I doubt they could conspire.

While it may be argued that perhaps terrorists are psychopaths, they are not. They are simply misguided in their beliefs.

I'm not a psychologist but I really do think That psychopaths tend to act alone.

Also, does the definition of a conspiracy, as we on ATS consider it, not imply more than one person to be involved?

I have issues with the whole notion of a conspiracy of one. Whether it be making a surprise or whatever.

To me conspriacy is a collective noun.

I patiently wait to be shot down in flames.

LOL

more_serotonin_pls,

Thank you for the reply. I agree absolutely that a conspiracy is something that is done by several individuals -- I would say that is indeed what the word means, "something done by more than one person". (The thing about a birthday surprise is supposed to mean that the rest of the family surprise the one who has a birthday, it just wasn't phrased too well. I'll try and improve the phrasing of that in the wiki article.)

Anyway, what you say that their lack of empathy is something that, in itself, means psychopaths cannot conspire, that is a really interesting input. I think I know where you're "coming from" because of what I see as the typical "movie version" notion of what a psychopath is. My thought is however that such a notion of what a psychopath is, is not really accurate. I mean, psychopaths are far from all lurking in showers with butcher knives, if I can put it a bit exaggerated like that. I sure am not a psychologist either, but I think I've read that psychopaths are said to collaborate (be "friends") as long as it helps their personal agenda, but when the relationship no longer helps their personal agenda, the "friend(s)" are discarded like broken implements, so to say.

As for terrorists, I think I agree with that they at least don't *have* to be psychopaths. I think humans are very easy to manipulate and depend very much on cultural notions and "leaders", and so I can in fact imagine that someone who is really a normal person can be manipulated into doing such aggressive and atrocious acts. I do however imagine that those who are organizing terrorism are -- most likely -- psychopaths who are seeking death and fear just for the sake of it. That's just what I'm thinking right now as I type, however, I haven't really thought about that too much, I must admit. Of course, terrorism is really a very obvious topic when talking about psychopaths, so thanks for bringing that up.

Optimist


edit: corrected one misspelling..

[edit on 5-1-2008 by Optimist]

I see what you say about the 'paths conspiring when it meets their mutual ends, and in a way that makes perfect sense. I am under no illusions that the 'movie' stereotype of a 'path (abbreviating for ease of typing) is incorrect, I still can't quite getmy head around them getting their heads together to meet and end or hit an objective.

I've taught kids who have psychotic episodes and that is apparatnyl when they start acting in a way that is a 'lot out of the ordinary' and if someone is that messed up, for want of a better phrase - it is 5:30am - are they really going to see that someone wants the same as them, or just be extremely paranoid?

I think you've brought up a really interesting topic here which hopefully more folk will be able to add some light to.

Have a flag and a star. You've got my mind really working at such an unbuddaly hour (sorry, playing variable deities tonight).

Thanks for the mental work out.

I realize this doesn't really help your original idea, but I can see substituting the word "sociopath" and then agreeing completely that they could and have conspired. WWII was initiated by such a group.

I am not sure that a clinical definition of a psychopath would include much cooperation. The "friendship factor", from what I have read, is almost always one of domination, with the weaker "friend" being of much less mental strength.

Just my $0.05 worth. (Lucy from Peanuts fame comes to mind. )

reply to post by NGC2736


Another interesting idea. How would you define a sociopath though? That would affect the aims they were trying to achieve and how it relates to Optimist's position though, I think.

I hope this thread picks up some speed - I love the potential.

reply to post by more_serotonin_pls


Agreed, defining these things is the sticking point. What would be sociopathic behavior in one group might not be considered so in another. However, from the point of a conspiracy being needed for them to act, then their aims would have to be in complete disregard for the mores and customs of the greater group that they shared space with.

A group that would conspire to start a war while being part of a peaceful society, and disregarding the desires and wishes of those around them, as well as the consequences for others, would seem to qualify. Under that definition, many leaders throughout history could be termed as sociopaths.

Wikipedia says:
Sociopathy is a loosely-defined term that may be used to refer to:
Psychopathy
Antisocial personality disorder

The dictionary says a sociopath is an amoral person with anti-social attitudes
and behavior and a lack of conscience.

Columbine Killers and that Murray guy come to mind.

They certainly conspire.

I think if you look for cases of criminals, you eventually find a group or two of psychopaths. You only have all of criminal law history to sift through.

Great article Optimist in tinwiki, you do great work there. Good subject.

I think the more appropriate question would how many conspiracies are undertaken by psychopaths. If lack of empathy is one of the main characteristics with sadism and maybe even a little megalomania( I looked for it on tin but it wasn't there, maybe an article for later) thrown in for good measure, I believe that would be the ideal combination for conspiracy. It would be perfect. The problem is how many of the psychopaths actually know they are psychopaths.

reply to post by Optimist



Nah they got beat out by the sociopaths.

reply to post by more_serotonin_pls


more_serotonin_pls,

Thank you for the star and flag. I definitely understand what you mean about psychotic people; however, your pupils who had the psychotic episodes were -- according to my impression of all this -- in no way, shape or form psychopaths. Psychopaths never become psychotic (the similarity of the words is quite confusing).


reply to post by NGC2736


more_serotonin_pls and NGC2736,

As it seems to me now, some differentiate between the terms "psychopath" and "sociopath", and some use the terms interchangeably. They are both considered to belong to what is called Cluster B personality disorders, as is also Antisocial Personality Disorder and Narcissistic Personality Disorder. (Not sure about "sociopathy", but "psychopathy" is, I believe, not really a psychiatric term or diagnosis and does not appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM).

As for the thing about weaker "friends", NGC2736, that is an interesting aspect that you brought up there, because I believe there are two different things going on as far as psychopaths' relationships with others: one is collaboration with other psychopaths (like I was thinking of when starting this thread), another thing is how psychopaths like to generally oppress people, which means they seek out people who can be dominated through manipulation (flattery, bribes, and also scaring), I think this is referred to as building a "court" (like a king or such would do, in that sense). Imagine some sort of cult leader, for example. However, the conspiracy would, in terms of a cult, be by the leaders (one may imagine), who then together oppress the cult members.

Optimist

reply to post by GAOTU789


Thank you for the compliment. I absolutely agree that megalomania seems to be part of psychopathy. I believe these people's lack of sense of perception of reality means they actually consider themselves gods. Sort of like someone locked in a sound proof room with no windows their entire life might think that room were all of existence.

As for what you say about the topic of whether or not psychopaths know what they are, I believe that is a super interesting topic in this context. I do suspect that very sophisticated psychopaths have managed to craft intellectual systems that are based on honest and accurate perceptions of their nature and all its implications. One may even imagine that they can relate such understanding to others, like in books or some sort of art, or even some kind of group like these secret societies and that sort of thing. Then I also believe that there may be psychopaths who have not had the courage to face consciously what they are; but even such people can, as I imagine it, contribute to a "psychopath agenda" by going only on subconscious drives.

On a side note, where psychopathic culture is developed, I believe it is also possible that normal people get caught up in that and try to think and act in terms of psychopathy. So in such cases it would not only be the case that psychopaths know what they are, but that even normal people falsely "know" that they, the normal people, too, are psychopaths. That is tragic, and even thinking about that actually disturbs me, I have to say. I feel that those normal people have then been abandoned by us. I feel we, normal people, have a responsibility to keep our cultures under the control of normal people. As it looks to me, failing that responsibility means -- given that I believe there really exist psychopaths -- to abandon our fellow human beings (and animals, too, for that matter) to become prey to evil. I also believe that evil is in reality psychopathy, which obviously means that succumbing to psychos is to succumb to evil, and, happily, ridding our societies of the influence of psychos is to rid our societies of the influence of evil (that is, of true evil, of course not of all irritating things and obnoxious, rude or thoughtless people and so on).

Optimist

reply to post by Legalizer


Legalizer,

Thank you for the reply. That's a good point, of course. In addition to criminals, it is also the case that far from all psychopaths are in fact criminals. Being clever at studying how humans function socially, and being very good at manipulation, many figure out ways to avoid getting caught. They can either make sure neither the authorities nor the public find out about their acts, or they can themselves weasel their way into positions of authority and basically get to decide themselves what is and is not criminal.

Since it is a basic trait of psychpaths that they are brilliant social manipulators, I imagine that those who are known criminals either had difficult social conditions starting out so they didn't have access to learn much about how society works and how to manipulate knowledgeable people and authorities, or they became criminals because they are not that intelligent or perhaps took too many chances.

Optimist

A psycopath sub culture. Now thats an interesting concept. You know it could be said that corporate culture is a pyscopathic one. It is set up for you not to care much, if it all about your workmates. For you to suceed and climb the ladder, you usually have to show some disdain for others. Although it could be that corporte culture is set up by pyscopaths for their pleasure and enjoyment of themselves. Kind of like watching rats in a maze to see if they find there way to the cheese or to the electric shock.

I agree also that all criminals aren't pyscopaths and all psycopaths aren't criminals though the larger percentage of hard core criminals would fall into the category. Most of them really don't have any concern for human feelings or whether they cause pain and suffering to others in pursuit of there own desires.

I really like your idea of evil being synonomous with psycopathy. It does make sense on a basic level. Although I would add that I don't believe that all psycopaths are inherently evil.

Also wouldn't politics be a psycopaths dream job? The entire political theater is rife with oppurtunities for them to hone their skills at manipulation and control. It gives thefeeling of power over others. I would think it would be a natural magnet for them. Especially the more intelligent ones.

I have worked in corrections (jail) for 5 years, and have seen some truly psycopathic people. I can list examples if you want. I have also helped teach classes to new recruits, and have seen some people with psychopathic tendecies there to. I think that any positon of power is enticing to some one with those type of tendencies.

But in this kind of work you need to be able to distance yourself from your feelings or it will eat you up inside, so I can see why some people would view police as being somewhat psychopathic.

reply to post by GAOTU789


GAOTU789,

What you say about corporate culture is interesting. Dr. Kevin Barret agrees in this quote (have only skimmed that article, it looks super excellent though):

We have the knowledge necessary to dismantle the institutions in which psychopaths especially flourish — militaries, intelligence agencies, large corporations, and secret societies. We simply need to disseminate this knowledge, and the will to use it, as widely as possible. [From Twilight of the Psychopaths, by Dr. Kevin Barrett, The Canadian]

I think you're right that psychopaths don't have concern for suffering of others, in the sense that it doesn't bother them, but I believe that they do have "concern" in the sense that they *enjoy* the suffering of others.

As for whether all psychopaths are inherently evil, I assume that matter relates to the riddle of how psychopaths become psychopaths. If one assumes that they are basically a different species and that psychopathy is their nature, then one should perhaps also say that they are in fact inherently evil. Some people seem to believe that psychopaths can be born, as opposed to made, and it is even said that they appear like -- not sick -- but like a distinct sub-species of humanity. Personally I'm not sure, obviously, but I don't feel 100% certain it's not the case that somewhere inside their mind hides their true, human personalities, and that psychopathy is some sort of malfunction "on top" of their true personality, like corrosion forming on exposed iron. Then again, if that "corrosion" happens because their true, human nature is in some way unfit to survive in the world, then one may say that they are born destined to become psychopaths, and that they in some kind of sense therefore are indirectly inherently evil.(?) Not sure if I was able to explain myself there, though. :-)

As for what you say about politics, I certainly believe you are right that politics would be like a magnet to psychopaths, as would the media be also. There is a Robert Lindner quote which seems quite good and which seems to relate generally to this:

It is a characteristic of all movements and crusades that the psychopathic element rises to the top.

Optimist

reply to post by Irishman


Irishman,

This is quite interesting input, thank you for posting that. The world's foremost expert on psychpathy (as I understand it), Robert Hare, works for the corrections system of Canada to screen convicts with his Psychopathy Check List with regard to risk of what they call recidivism (I hope what I'm saying here is correct, now).

I wanted to also nit pick a little bit, if you don't mind, and say that at least I myself think there is no such thing as being somewhat psychopathic, I mean I think one either is or is not a psychopath -- but of course I understand what you mean. "Psychopath like" or something like that is a good alternative term. I said this would be nit-picking. :-) Also, they say psychopaths are in practice not possible to cure (which is also, I guess, basically what I was talking about now, that one basically either is or is not a psychopath).

Optimist

reply to post by Optimist


I will have to take some time and read that article Optimist. This evening, most likely, and comment on it then.

As to your explanation, I believe you explained yourself fine. At least I understood you. I am not sure about the psycopath being a sub species of human in all cases. As with anything, some will be born that way,Preprogrammed if you will, to be callous, uncaring and evil. Like all things, such as writers or boxers or musicians, some are born with the talent to be these things where as others must study and practice and learn the "art" that you are interested in. Psycopaths are the same, in my opinion. Not all are born to be deviant but come to it through many different paths. Social conditions, past experiences such as abuse or neglect, admiring some one of psycopathic intents could all lead a "normal" person down the path of deviancy.

Personally I'm not sure, obviously, but I don't feel 100% certain it's not the case that somewhere inside their mind hides their true, human personalities, and that psychopathy is some sort of malfunction "on top" of their true personality, like corrosion forming on exposed iron.

I think this statement hits pretty close to the mark for most, but not all, psycopaths.

ROFL Optimist, after reading many of these posts, many of which are ringers to inspire heated debate, torch lighting and rake carrying....
I think most true psychopaths would be too narcissistic in their own twisted minds to join up. But, you never know.

reply to post by jpm1602


We would never do such a thing!!!

On a more serious note; is being a sociopath/psychopath a survival tool? Could some people be at a greater genetic disposition to use this tool than others? Is there a gene that would account for this?

I have no answers for these questions, but they are interesting to consider, nonetheless.