Owl convo re: understanding psychopathic elites

Funny story about the empathy one.
My little brother has been dipping his toe into conspiracy theories lately.
But his big litmus test is “Can I conceive of myself doing such things in those situations.”
He recently pointed out “We never talk about how all the Kennedys got killed at once.”
I says to him “What’s to talk about? Sometimes you want to kill your political enemies and their entire family.”
But he has no mental model for genuine psychopathy, so he can’t go there (yet).
To him, that’s the stuff of fiction and ancient history.
And by ancient I mean WW2 and previous.

they key for me was learning that under psychopath morality, anything they can do to you is justified, because if you can’t stop it it’s your fault
this also explains corporate behavior pretty well
(in the sense of, how large corporations act, but also, to some degree, how people act in a corporate environment)


It’s understandable that it’s terrifying to encounter such people actually engaged in this morality in person, concretely.
Yeah, I understand what you’re saying. It’s the new libertarianism where anything a corporation can do that the government can’t stop with regulation, is good by definition.
It’s hard to build a mental model for an entire class of people like this ruling the world.
Because you immediately want to jump to the cartoonish evil version that it would have started out as.
But you gotta figure, these people have been doing optics for a long time.
It ends up looking a lot more like adjusting interest rates here and there by a couple percent, and then for apparently no reason America pulls out of Afghanistan all of a sudden.
Hmm, you know we just analyzed the trouble of having too many Alphas.
What does it look like when you add Jewish ethnocentrism to this mix?
I expect an over-representation of chiefs and an under-representation of indians among non-Orthodox Jews.
They are, after all, basically a race of fervent political activists.

i think sailor’s point about all the usual familial conflict being sublimated to the outgroup hits on something key here

Sublimation is an interesting term for it too, being all Freudian and shit.

and there’s also a difference between the intra-ethnic “i’m on top because i’m the best” and the inter-ethnic “i’m on top because they are lesser”
see every time in history one group of people has conquered another group of people

This would predict that positive ethnocentrism correlates with individualistic behavior.
Whereas negative ethnocentrism correlates with group behavior.
This would explain why internet Nazis hyperfocus on disgust porn and outrage porn.
But, despite their attempts to drive group-oriented behavior, they’re all infighting individualists.
Kike on a stick!
I think this understanding is backwards: positive ethnocentrism drives group
-oriented behavior
…and negative ethnocentrism drives individualistic behavior.
“I’m on top because I’m an ubermensch among beasts.”
Vs. “We’re on top because we have great qualities.”
American blacks are a good example because they’re high in negative but low in positive.
Hence thug lyfe.
Now that I think about it, this is also expressed in great literature like My Hero Academia.


Individualistic Overhaul (mask guy) is obsessed with filth and purity, which is why he always wears latex gloves and a mask.
His thing is that the world is filthy and needs to be remade.
Group-oriented Deku (green kid) is obsessed with protecting people because senpai did.
His thing is that he keeps breaking his body because it can’t support his idealism, but he wins there because the innocent girl he’s protecting is regenerating him as his body is breaking down from overuse.
Not a bad metaphor, considering it’s Japanese anime. Much more subtle in expression than usual.
They’re only saying half of it out loud.
Overhaul is Kike on a Stick guy.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Owl convo re: understanding psychopathic elites

  1. Heaviside says:

    “On 10 September 1971, the Joint Chief of Staff held a discussion of proposals by Deputy Secretary of Defense David Packard to reform nuclear command, control, and communications arrangements. According to the meeting record, published today for the first time by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, during a discussion of emergency procedures in event of a major crisis, JCS Chairman Thomas Moorer explained that Packard “believes as I do that [a nuclear conflict] might evolve to what amounts to a protracted nuclear war.” Air Force Chief of Staff Thomas Ryan brought the discussion to another level by asserting, virtually out of Dr. Strangelove, that “We could lose two hundred million people and still have more than we had at the time of the Civil War.” The other chiefs did not challenge Ryan’s numbers (which were inaccurate) and left his comment alone by continuing the discussion of emergency plans.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s