Boris Johnson :A Very Political Narcissist? Will He Remain A Prime Ministerial One?
It is a general election in the United Kingdom today.
Boris holds the leads in the polls, but will this transform into actual votes. His own constituency is under threat of tactical voting.
He has been Prime Minister for a few months and won the leadership to lead the Conservative party.
If Boris wins the general election, he gets his hands on more power, but could the reins be in the hands of a narcissist? Let’s place him under the TudorScope and find out….
Early Beginnings
Johnson was born to British parents, Stanley and Charlotte, on 19 June 1964 in Manhattan’s Upper East Side in New York City. His birth was registered with both the U.S authorities and the city’s British Consulate, thereby granting him both American and British citizenship.
Johnson’s maternal grandfather was the lawyer Sir James Fawcett. Johnson’s paternal great-grandfather was Circassian-Turkish journalist, who was a secular Muslim; his father’s other ancestry includes English and French, including descent from King George II of Great Britain. Johnson’s mother was Charlotte Fawcett; an artist from a family of liberal intellectuals, she had married Stanley in 1963, prior to their move to the U.S. She is the granddaughter of Elias Avery Lowe, a palaeographer, who was a Russian Jewish immigrant to the U.S., and Helen Tracy Lowe-Porter, a translator of Thomas Mann. Johnson’s maternal great-grandfather was a Lithuanian Jew and Orthodox Jewish rabbi.
Johnson’s parents lived opposite the Chelsea Hotel, although in September 1964 they returned to Britain so that Charlotte could study at the University of Oxford. She lived with her son in Summertown, Oxford, and gave birth to a daughter, Rachel, in 1965. In July 1965, the family moved to Crouch End in North London; in February 1966, they relocated to Washington D.C., where Stanley had gained employment with the World Bank. A third child, Leo, was born in September 1967. Stanley then gained employment with a policy panel on population control, in June moving the family to Norwalk, Connecticut.
In 1969, the family settled into Stanley’s family farm at Nethercote, in the west of England. There, Johnson gained his first experiences with fox hunting. Stanley was regularly absent from Nethercote, leaving Johnson to be raised largely by his mother and au pairs.
He and his siblings were encouraged to engage in high-brow activities from a young age,with high achievement being greatly valued; Johnson’s earliest recorded ambition was to be “world king”. Having few or no friends other than their siblings, the children became very close.
In late 1969 the family relocated to Maida Vale, West London, where Stanley began post-doctoral research at the London School of Economics. In 1970, Charlotte and the children briefly returned to Nethercote, where Johnson was schooled at the Winsford Village School, before returning to London to settle in Primrose Hill, there being educated at Primrose Hill Primary School. In late 1971 another son, Joseph, was born to the family.
After Stanley secured employment at the European Commission, he moved his family in April 1973 to Uccle, Brussels, where Johnson became fluent in French. Charlotte had a nervous breakdown and was hospitalised with clinical depression, and Johnson and his siblings were sent to Ashdown House preparatory boarding school in East Sussex in 1975.There he developed a love of rugby and excelled at Ancient Greek and Latin; he was appalled at the teachers’ use of corporal punishment. Meanwhile, Stanley and Charlotte’s relationship broke down in December 1978 and they divorced in 1980.Charlotte moved into a flat in Notting Hill, where her children spent much of their time with her.
Johnson was awarded a King’s Scholarship to study at Eton College, the elite independent boarding school in Eton, Berkshire. Arriving in the autumn term of 1977, Johnson began using the given name Boris rather than Alex, and developed “the eccentric English persona” for which he would become known. He abandoned his mother’s Catholicism and became an Anglican, joining the Church of England. Although school reports complained about his idleness, complacency, and lateness, he was popular and well known at Eton. His friends were largely from the wealthy upper-middle and upper classes.
Johnson won a scholarship to read Literae Humaniores, a four-year course based in the study of Classics, at Balliol College, Oxford. Arriving at the university in late 1983, he was one of a generation of Oxford undergraduates who dominated British politics and media in the early 21st century, among them senior Conservative Party members David Cameron, William Hague, Michael Gove, Jeremy Hunt, and Nick Boles.
Accordingly, Mr Johnson’s formative years were set amongst frequent changes of home and country, a privileged upbringing in terms of home and schooling, an absent father, divorced parents, caring provided by au pairs, an unwell mother, the setting of high achievements which were expected to be attained and the early stated ambition of world-king. Some noteworthy ingredients there.
Elasticated Truth
Mr Johnson has had an interesting relationship with the truth throughout his journalistic and political career. Johnson himself once stated that his mistakes are too numerous to list in full, so for the sake of brevity a handful have been identified.
1. The Times Sacking
Boris Johnson was sacked from his job as a graduate trainee, at The Times newspaper over allegations he fabricated a quote from his godfather, the historian Colin Lucas, for a front-page article about the discovery of Edward II’s Rose Palace.
“The trouble was that somewhere in my copy I managed to attribute to Colin the view that Edward II and Piers Gaveston would have been cavorting together in the Rose Palace,” Johnson claimed.
Alas, Gaveston was executed 13 years before the palace was built. “It was very nasty,” Mr Johnson added, before attempting to downplay it as nothing more than a schoolboy blunder. Johnson, when interviewed by The Independent newspaper stated
“I think my biggest cock-up, though, was when I first joined The Times and discovered that the site of Edward II’s Rose Palace had been found on the banks of the Thames. It was a world exclusive, but I needed to find out more about Edward II – all I knew about him was that he had a catamite, Piers Gaveston, and that he was murdered in a castle.
I was desperate to get hold of a historian who could help me, but the only one I knew was my godfather Colin Lucas, a very distinguished man who is now vice-chancellor of Oxford University. He was actually an expert on the French Revolution, not medieval England, but I rang him and he obligingly gave me some quotes about Edward II. The trouble was that somewhere in my copy I managed to attribute to Colin the view that Edward II and Piers Gaveston would have been cavorting together in the Rose Palace. Unfortunately, some linkside don at a provincial university spotted that by the time the Rose Palace was built, Piers Gaveston would long have been murdered. It was very nasty. Colin hadn’t quite said that, and now his academic reputation was on the line.
It was extremely difficult, and I had absolutely no idea what to do. I was 23, overcome with guilt and shame that this error – this howler of mine attributed to Colin – had crept on to the front page of The Times, which was holy territory for me. So I made matters worse. I wrote a further story saying that the mystery had deepened about the date of the castle.”
Note how telling a lie was downplayed to “cock-up” and a “howler”
This “howler” saw Johnson sacked from his second-job (he resigned from his first after just a week)
Lie, Deflection
2. The Daily Telegraph
After leaving the Times, Mr Johnson moved to The Daily Telegraph, working as the publication’s Brussels correspondent between 1989 and 1994.
His articles, like those in several other Eurosceptic newspapers, contained many of the claims widely described as “Euromyths”, including plans to introduce same-size “eurocoffins”, establish a “banana police force” to regulate the shape of the curved yellow fruit, and ban prawn cocktail crisps.
When questioned about them in parliament, he denied suggestions they were a figment of his imagination.
“There is a great deal of effort being made to deprecate those who think we should leave the EU and everything we say is somehow mythical”, he replied.
Lie, Grandiosity, Blameshifting
3. Insulting The People of Liverpool
Mr Johnson became editor of the Spectator in 1999 after telling owner Conrad Black, who was later convicted of fraud, that he would not pursue a political career. This promise was broken in 2001 when he won election as Conservative MP for Henley in Oxfordshire.
Three years later he was forced to apologise for an article in the magazine which blamed drunken Liverpool fans for the 1989 Hillsborough disaster and suggested that the people of the city were wallowing in their victim status.
“Anyone, journalist or politician, should say sorry to the people of Liverpool – as I do – for misrepresenting what happened at Hillsborough,” he said.
Lie, Smearing, False Contrition, Lack of Emotional Empathy
4. Lying About Extra-Marital Affairs
Michael Howard gave Boris Johnson two new jobs after becoming leader of the Conservatives in 2003 – party vice-chairman and shadow arts minister.
He was sacked from both positions in November 2004 after assuring Mr Howard that tabloid reports of his affair with Spectator columnist Petronella Wyatt were false and an “inverted pyramid of piffle”. When the story was found to be true, he refused to resign, thus he had to be sacked.
Lie, Infidelity, Haughtiness, Sense of Entitlement
5. Mayoral Lies
Mr Johnson’s fondness for fallacy continued as London Mayor, having been elected to this position in 2008. Having promised in his 2008 manifesto to ensure there would be manned ticket offices at every train station, he agreed to widespread closures to pay for a 24-hour tube.
He promised to eradicate rough sleeping by 2012, only for it to double during his leadership. He was also accused of telling “barefaced lies” after he stated that police numbers would increase in London despite government cuts.
Lie, Lack of Emotional Empathy, Lack of Accountability
6. The Bullshit Bus
Launching the Vote Leave bus tour, Mr Johnson returned to the scene of his earlier falsehoods by repeating his old allegations that the EU was setting rules on the shape of bananas.
He also backed the infamous claim on the side of the bus that the UK was sending £350m a week to the EU, followed by “let’s fund our NHS instead”.
The UK Statistics Authority issued an official statement in May 2016 describing the claim as “misleading”, but Mr Johnson repeated it in an article in the Telegraph in September 2017.
Lie, Sense of Entitlement, Haughtiness, Lack of Accountability
7. Not So Much Turkish Delight
In January 2019, Boris Johnson claimed he did not mention Turkey during the referendum to leave the EU after it was suggested he falsely claimed 80 million Turks would come to Britain unless the UK left the EU.
In fact, he co-signed a letter stating that “the only way to avoid having common borders with Turkey is to vote Leave and take back control”.
Mr Johnson, whose great-grandfather was the Ottoman politican Ali Kemal, was also quoted as saying “I am very pro-Turkish but what I certainly can’t imagine is a situation in which 77 million of my fellow Turks and those of Turkish origin can come here without any checks at all. That is mad – that won’t work.”
Mr Johnson’s Turkish cousin commented: “He doesn’t strike me as being very honest about his views.” You don’t say.
Lie, Hypocrisy, Lack of Accountability
This selection is very much the tip of the iceberg and a stroll through the corridors of the internet will provide a significant array of similar examples which show a flagrant disregard for the truth, the ability to perform a volte face where politically expedient and exhibiting a huge sense of entitlement to issue such untruths and then to either restate them, dismiss them or down play them which supports a lack of accountability, haughtiness and grandiosity.
Bumbling Boris
Notwithstanding the untruths, the broken promises and infidelities (more about those later) Mr Johnson is undeniably able to command considerable popularity and is a charismatic individual. Simon Jenkins, of The Guardian newspaper wrote
“Johnson is the darling of the polls. He mesmerises punch-drunk Tories and disillusioned Labour voters alike. He emerges from his biographical record as incompetent, lazy, dissolute and a liar, yet the public’s response is that he is “our kind of liar”. He was sacked by the Times for story fabrication and was a wildly biased reporter while in Brussels. His default mode has always been that of standup comedian: funny, unpredictable, mildly dangerous. “
Mr Jenkins perceptively continues
“The Johnson personality is clearly not to be underrated. As democracy becomes less a matter of interests and resources, it falls back on secondary responses, on making people relaxed and comfortable about the world about them. Voters seem drawn to someone who does not take life too seriously, is casual about presentation and possesses eccentric unpredictability. People like laughing at politics, and Johnson appears a fellow human. He is preferable to the spouters of robotic cliches, such as Theresa May.
Charm is discounted by political science in favour of integrity, diligence, consistency – and charisma. That is because charm is like love, its values not analysable or susceptible to science. Yet it was deployed with aplomb by Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.”
Whether it was turning up for the aftermath of the London riots in 2011 with a broom (magical thinking – I can clean this all up on my own), hanging from a zipwire stuck and waving a flag (fuel seeking), his flag-hogging antics and whiff-waff speech at the closing ceremony of the Beijing Olympics, Mr Johnson deploys his charisma and Bumbling Boris act in order to appear like some hapless and well-intentioned, albeit clumsy overgrown schoolboy. This is a manipulation – it deflects from his many failings, it shows his grandiosity and arrogance and his lack of accountability. ‘Aw shucks, what can I say (grin)’.
Take a look at this list of vanity projects from when he was Mayor of London.
His Thames cable car, his Stratford helter-skelter (“London’s Eiffel Tower”), his rear-entry buses with rear-entry locked, his water cannon that may not fire, his unnecessary super-sewer and wildly over-engineered Crossrail, all wasted staggering sums.
A baffling £53m vanished on Johnson’s fantasy garden bridge, while Hammersmith bridge rotted up-river. The “Boris bike” scheme – in truth Livingstone’s – was supposed to cost nothing, but cost taxpayers nearly £200m in eight years. Here he is with Arnie, lapping up the applause (and bewilderment) of the crowd. Of course we know what he is lapping up really.
Do not mistake this Bumbling Boris as a quaint affectation, this is the careful and structured use of a façade to mask a calculated, cunning and Machiavellian mind at work. By appearing like some over-seized clown he diverts from what he is doing, masks the misfortune and clouds the cock-ups.
Take for example when he accused Muslim women of looking like letterboxes because they wore burkas (Haughty, Lack of Emotional Empathy, Sense of Entitlement, Insult) in 2018, he shirked questions on whether he would apologise for comparing Muslim women wearing the burka to letterboxes and bank robbers – by offering reporters camped outside his home a cup of tea. He emerged from his Oxfordshire house on Sunday armed with a tray of mugs for exhausted journalists waiting to confront him over his divisive burka comments. He declined to comment as reporters quizzed him on the controversial remarks, instead offering them a cup of tea.
Mr Johnson said: “I have nothing to say about this matter except to offer you some tea.”
He plays the clown but more importantly he gets away with it. (Lack of Accountability, Deflection).
At the closing ceremony in Beijing he was attacked for his behaviour. A commentator stated
‘At such formal occasion, he should have buttoned his jacket,’ he said.
‘If you dress informally or not properly, it can be seen as disrespect to the host.
A blogger complained Boris Johnson did not take the occasion seriously and should not have put his hand in his pocket
‘When he was stepping to the stage and down, he put his hand in the pocket of his jacket.
‘This shows he was extremely casual, he did not seem to take this occasion seriously.
‘After he took over the Olympic flag, he simply passed it to the Chinese standard-bearer.
‘He was the only person who took the flag with one hand.
‘This is very disrespectful to the Olympic flag.
‘After he took the flag, he shook hands with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) chief Jacques Rogge and did not pay any attention to the two leaders from Beijing.
The blogger said it was ‘rude and arrogant’ that Johnson seemed to ignore the mayor of Beijing when he made an effort to try to speak to Johnson.
(Arrogance, Sense of Entitlement, Lack of Emotional Empathy)
Note how he has insulted others both individually and collectively in the past and the furore surrounding this, yet he does not learn from this and ensure he keeps his mouth shut (see The Empathy Cake ) but repeats the behaviour. Repeating what is in effect abusive behaviour is a key indicator because it shows Lack of Emotional Empathy, Lack of Accountability and Sense of Entitlement.
Johnson has extensive charisma and he uses this to manipulate, a smoke screen so that appears affable, harmless and fun, when underneath this cultivated exterior their lurks a calculated, driven predator for power in all of its forms.
Here are some thoughts from noted commentators with regard to this façade that Mr Johnson has created
Biographer Sonia Purnell described his public persona as “brand Boris”, noting that he developed it while at Oxford University.
Max Hastings referred to this public image as a “façade resembling that of P. G. Wodehouse’s Gussie Fink-Nottle, allied to wit, charm, brilliance and startling flashes of instability”, while political scientist Andrew Crines stated that Johnson displayed “the character of a likable and trustworthy individual with strong intellectual capital”.
Private Eye editor Ian Hislop has defined him as “Beano Boris” due to his perceived comical nature, saying: “He’s our Berlusconi … He’s the only feel-good politician we have, everyone else is too busy being responsible.”[
To the journalist Dave Hill, Johnson was “a unique figure in British politics, an unprecedented blend of comedian, conman, faux subversive showman and populist media confection”.
The façade management does not end there however:-
Johnson purposely cultivates a “semi-shambolic look”, for instance by specifically ruffling his hair in a certain way for when he makes public appearances. Purnell described him as “a manic self-promoter” who filled his life with “fun and jokes”. Described by Crines as “a joker”, Johnson has stated that “humour is a utensil that you can use to sugar the pill and to get important points across.”
Purnell noted that colleagues regularly expressed the view that Johnson used people to advance his own interests, with Gimson noting that Johnson was “one of the great flatterers of our times. Purnell noted that he deflected serious questions using “a little humour and a good deal of bravado”. According to Gimson, Johnson was “a humane man” who “could also be staggeringly inconsiderate of others” when pursuing his own interests. Gimson also noted that Johnson has “an excessive desire to be liked”.
(Façade Management, Manipulate By Charm, Grandiosity, Poor Boundary Recognition, Fuel Requirement, Sense of Entitlement, lack of Emotional Empathy)
Bonking Boris
Mr Johnson wed first wife Allegra Mostyn-Owen in 1987 after they met at Oxford, but split when he had an affair with Marina Wheeler.
She married him in 1993, but first caught him out over his relationship with society writer Petronella Wyatt. He had a four-year affair with Miss Wyatt while he was editor of The Spectator and she was one of his columnists.Petronella later told how she had an abortion and suffered a miscarriage.
Mr Johnson described reports of their affair as an “inverted pyramid of piffle”.
Furious Miss Wheller threw him out of their home in Highgate, North London, but later took him back. His affairs did not end there. The affair with Miss Wyatt overlapped with his romance with Anna Fazackerley, a journalist on the Times Educational Supplement.
The pair were said to have had sex while he was a junior shadow education minister in 2005. On one occasion Mr Johnson got off a flight home from China to hook up with Ms Fazackerley in Paris.
Johnson’s love life faced further chaos when he fathered a lovechild with arts consultant Helen Macintyre in 2009.
His suffering wife Kicked him out again – only to take him back once more. Full details of the affair emerged in court after Ms Macintyre lost a three-year legal battle to stop the Press naming Boris as the father of her daughter Stephanie.
The Appeal Court in London also heard in 2013 that Ms Macintyre’s daughter was alleged to be the second child conceived as a result of Boris’s extra-marital affairs.
One ex described his romancing style as “persistent”. Persistent – does that ring any bells with readers? Want some more bells, how about this quote from the same ex,
She said: “He made himself so endearing and amusing. I didn’t know of his reputation and to look at him you would never imagine he was a womaniser.
“But I do recall that he became very persistent in his attentions and, you know, eventually one thing led to another.
“He relies entirely on his personality, especially his wit and that bumbling character that he’s developed and, well, it does seem to be still working, doesn’t it?
“Any sensible girl should stay away from him. You’ll get the cheery persistence, then the conquest, but when he’s bored he won’t care about you in the slightest.
I can hear your murmurs of familiarity now.
In September 2018, Miss Wheeler had clearly had enough as separation occurred as it was confirmed they had separated months ago and had begun divorce proceedings. Mr Johnson was not too trouble however as he had girlfriend Carrie Symonds who soon found herself on the Johnson rollercoaster. Last month,
Police were called to the home of Mr Johnson and his partner Carrie Symonds after receiving reports of a domestic incident involving screaming and banging. A neighbour dialled 999 after hearing a loud and prolonged altercation shortly after midnight.
At one point Ms Symonds, the former Conservative party head of press, could be heard telling Mr Johnson to “get off me” and “get out of my flat”, according to the Guardian newspaper. Ms Symonds was overheard saying that Mr Johnson had ruined a settee with red wine and shouted “You just don’t care for anything because you’re spoilt. You have no care for money or anything.” Accurate but she doesn’t know anywhere even nearing half the picture.
A string of relationships, infidelity, swift moves to the next love interest and tempestuous activity.
(Infidelity, Poor Boundary Recognition, Manipulation, Ignition of Fury, Fuel Gathering, Sense of Entitlement, Lack of Emotional Empathy).
And there is much, much more besides on Mr Johnson.
This is an individual who shows repeated and all indicators of narcissism – his arrogance, magical thinking and grandiosity, poor boundary recognition extensively manipulative behaviour, excessive charm, flippancy, glibness, sense of entitlement, lack of emotional empathy, calculated behaviours, extensive fuel matrix and huge fuel needs.
He is successful, entertaining, power hungry (his political activity merits a huge article in itself) and dangerous.
Boris Johnson is a Very Political Narcissist.
Will he be a Very Prime Ministerial Narcissist? We shall soon find out.
462 thoughts on “Boris Johnson :A Very Political Narcissist? Will He Remain A Prime Ministerial One?”
Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Ta ta ta ta ta taaaaaahhhh, heeeeeeere’s Boris!
Can he do it HG?
After Liz Truss resigned yesterday I’ve been debating with various people. Most seem to think Boris won’t run. Their argument is why would he? He has been PM, got kicked out, and can earn 150 K a time on the speech circuit. Why would he?
I disagree. I think he has been pulling strings all along. Not so much with an intention of coming back, more due to a need for revenge.
I think now that this opportunity has presented itself Boris will find it irresistible. To have been PM, to be ousted, then have your party crawling back to you to right the ship, a very broken ship it is too. To go but then, to come back! To have that in the history books would surely play to his sense of superiority and allow a lovely new facade of ‘Benevolent Boris’, a grown up politician who loves his party so much he will forgive all and learn from his past mistakes. It has to be absolutely irresistible to him surely?
I know the politics videos are less popular than HW but this is fascinating. What will the Greater narcissist do here? Would love to hear your thoughts on it HG.
I can see him walking back into Downing Street whistling Eminem’s ‘Without Me’ Haha!
I’m impressed! It was an excellent description! Almost like a reflection 🙂 I feel Boris Johnson in every cell of my body right now 🙂
A terrible man. Professionally – unacceptable at all, I cannot imagine the possibility of cooperation.
But… I read the whole thing with a smile on my face. He had to be a cute child – the “sweet bully” type, who is forgiven for everything 🙂 Yeah, it’s obvious how he seduces women. I would definitely be in danger 🙂
In my childhood, everything was serious, rigorous, strict, aloof, heavy, drenched in death and guilt.
The first man to bring a smile to my face, when I was 6 years old, was my stepfather…
Make me smile and show me the lightness of being – and you have me 🙂
HG,
I know I was one of many who asked for an article on Boris and hugely appreciated the youtube video. I do understand the vast majority are interested celebs rather than politicians. I have no idea why my interest lies in understanding the mindset of our political leaders far more, even though I have no interest in politics? Maybe because I don’t really watch much TV perhaps. Anyhow, you didn’t need to know all that.
One of the questions I’d love to know the answer to, Do you think there is a possibility Boris could remain Tory leader beyond the Autumn?
I understand this depends on numerous factors, not least the war so I guess, more than will it happen, I’m asking is he actively doing things in an attempt to stay?
As he is a greater and I know he doesn’t care about anyone but himself, but why is he so different to other greaters? yes he’s developed a persona of bumbling boris which we know is his facade, but he’s clearly hated by many where as Obama was well liked? Why such a stark contrast?
No, because there is a already a leadership election underway with the result being announced on 5 September.
Okay thanks HG. I didn’t know whether it was possible for him to do anything which could alter the course. I’m not as educated as you. Thanks for the answer
I’m still not impressed with the, erm, “selection” of those being “elected” for the UK Prime Minister role. I can only vote otherwise next time round but the masses of people are not aware. A red flag was RS does not have any “working class friends” = no understanding of people who work on the ‘shop floor’.
I think I might place a bet on it just in case you’re wrong though. I mean you’re never wrong of course HG so I’m just being a dumb empath caught up in emotional thinking
Glad I placed my bet when it was 100:1 for him to be PM at next election hahahah
Even if I don’t get to cash in, at least I’ve demonstrated I’m learning by understanding he would be scheming something like this.
Remember, you heard it here first! hahahahah go bojo!
HG, I have a similar question to Alexissmith.
Why could a Greater narcissist only be capable to remain prime minister for 2 1/2 years?
Is he perharps a nomadic personality who gets bored on a dime?
At the highest level staying the course, even for a Greater is particularly challenging.
Aha, understand, and he had three tireing challenges I guess. Brexit, the pandemic and Ukraine.
Rishi looks the best for being the next Prime Minister. Solid, steadfast, strong and intelligent. Boris while good in some respects was more of a party animal, a good time Harry, a joker not really leadership quality. Interesting to see how the vote goes.
Best,
DB
“As he is a greater and I know he doesn’t care about anyone but himself, but why is he so different to other greaters? yes he’s developed a persona of bumbling boris which we know is his facade, but he’s clearly hated by many where as Obama was well liked? Why such a stark contrast?”
Good questions Alexissmith!
I hope we get answers.
Since this Blundering Jobsworth fked up all year, is it really necessary to start conversations about this Blutthering Jidiot before the end of 2020?
It most definitely is Asp. I’m very keen to understand what has been going on because I can’t quite get my head around the complete as you put it, ‘fuxk ups’. I just don’t understand how someone so intelligent csn achieve this level of chaos. I mean it’s clear he doesn’t give two shits but other than that i can’t comprehend any of the decision making at all.
It’s a bit like football (soccer), everyone has a view on it ans we all think we can do it better but I reckon Lee the lesser could not have made as much of an arse of it as Boris has.
Alexis2016
Once it’s clear two shits cannot be given, can there really be much expectation of decision making? Maybe it’s me, but the two seem at odds haha.
HG, will you be writing about all the government fuckups re covid at all? It would make a very interesting read and attract additional readers I’m sure.
It is an interesting topic and I have additional information which demonstrates the chaotic decision making.
Eeek! I know you know. Aghhh I’ve been a real good girl Santa Tudor. I’ll do anything xxxx
I know you would, the graffiti on the inside of trap one on the second floor toilets confirms that about you.
Hahahah oh well always getting smeared by some N whose jealous of me no doubt. I didn’t really do what they said. You know it’s not true don’t you? Please believe me HG, I didn’t do it
Hi again Old Thread!
Thought a bit of you while watching a long speech by new Labour leader Keir Starmer yesterday. Ok so I skipped bits!
After almost a year of No Contact with narcissist plus reading up, I say with conviction that I don’t think Keir is a narcissist (someone asked somewhere down the thread, btw where is Desiree these days?). Maybe even a contagion empath? At least a normal. That’s a natural face showing a whole range of emotions but without exaggerating.
@VI“Look at the bright side. He wouldn’t be any crazier than the current one.”
OH YES HE COULD>>>>>HAHAHAHAHA
Alexis2016
Boris? And here I thought you only had a drink problem.
HG, does Dominic Cummings know where the bodies are buried or something? Is that why they are protecting him? or is it because Boris sees it as challenge fuel from the public/media and he is simply asserting control?
Cummings delivered on Brexit and a significant Tory win (the largest for some time) in the last election. He is the Go To Svengali and therefore is of considerable use to BJ. It is nothing to do with where the bodies are buried, BJ never buries them, he just ignores them and carries on (witness Arcuria, the love child, the 350 million for the NHS). Cummings is very useful to BJ. Of course when BJ is challenged about DC´s behaviour, that is Challenge Fuel and BJ needs to assert control. He chooses to do so by a direct assertion through deflection. If he threw DC under the bus then he would assert control indirectly.
Oh my god! wow! thank you, thank you, thank you.
Made me laugh that you wrote, ‘BJ never buries them, he just ignores them and carries on’.
But on the serious side, that is an interesting point that he ignores them and carries on. Interesting for two reasons, one, I am learning to do this too. It takes practice and clearly I’m not in a position to make the same ‘fuck-ups’ BJ would do, but I find it helpful to get my ET under control when small things have happened etc just ignore them and move on like an N would. Not only does it help me internally, but it is actually incredibly effective when interacting with others.
The other reason it’s interesting is because many Ns would attempt to cover their tracks, I guess it would be more common for a certain type of greater. I think the lower greater doesn’t care so much of the facade, nor would the upper depending on circumstance. i don’t see him as agressive particularly but perhaps I have not observed enough. I need to go back to the fuel matrix. But would that make BJ and Upper perhaps? I imagine Starmer is a middle or upper. I would imagine he would take more care in covering things up a little, so if Upper, I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t get caught with his pants down.
Do you think Penny will win? I know many who hope so.
Clearly matters have moved on since you first posted this comment Contagious. PM I think would have stood a chance if she made the last two as I suspect she is popular amongst the Tory membership. However, as we now know, she did not make the final cut and it is looking like Truss will succeed on the basis of her popularity amongst the Tory membership. Sunak is way too detached from the reality of people’s lives to garner the support he needs.
HG, RE: your last sentence, quite a number of people have said similar.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62496858
In this particular clip, at 23 seconds as he says “…..I’m prepared to lose this contest” there is the tell-tale blink of the ‘adjustment’.
In the interview with Nick, I noticed his eyes glazing over (approx 2 seconds) when he is receiving a challenge – again, the tell-tale sign of ‘adjustment’ occurring.
I think this guy is quite evolved (ie can “manage” his facade) but also quite transparent when he is sat down in this interview. It’s his eyes that give the game away, even if his body and facial expressions do not change.
In my opinion, this interview would have been good for analysis by the ever so delectable expert in the field of human behaviour analogy (give this guy a mauling!). 🙂
HG, are any of the five in the labour leader contest not an N?
Not analysed them.
I hate it when you say that!
Tough. It is accurate.
But I love it when you’re so authoritative!
I know. I do it just for you.
Only me? Am I the only one HG?
Of course.
I knew it! Just me! I’ll have to work hard to keep those other harpies from trying to steal you away!
HG Tudor says:
January 16, 2020 at 11:50
I know. I do it just for you.
Loading…
alexissmith2016 says:
January 16, 2020 at 11:51
Only me? Am I the only one HG?
Loading…
HG Tudor says:
January 16, 2020 at 15:05
Of course.
[Meanwhile, in her subterranean lair, Pamela gnashes her teeth and blasts Celine Dion from the speakers.]
Ha ha, very good.
Attempted Hoover?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7827585/EU-chief-writes-scathing-love-letter-Britain-Brexit.html
“Desirée says:
December 18, 2019 at 20:37
You are confusing Emotional Thinking with Righteous Indignation. The reactions would be no different if the person in question was not a Narcissist, hence you are mistaken. It is not ET, it does not cloud logic.”
Desirée, indignation is an emotion, whether it is righteous is a subjective matter, if you feel your indignation is righteous then it is. What you say confirms my point that your dislike of Merkel stems from disagreement with her political views and actions more than the fact that she is driven by self-interest. You and Princess dismiss her political actions on the base that she is a narcissist, it would be logical to dismiss them on the base of factual arguments, which is a political discussion and not a discussion of NPD.
“Desirée says:
December 18, 2019 at 20:37
Clearly indicating that you where in fact rather invested in her “as the only female leader” to set a good example. You said you hoped (and we all know what HG thinks about hope) that she would be different, therefore your position with regards to her is not neutral at all.”
Desirée , I am in favor of female-male equality and of inclusiveness and helping those in need. I don’t have to like a particular female leader or agree to her views to appreciate her presence on the world stage and the contribution of that presence to the female – male balance. And the actions of a narcissist can serve those in need even if the drive behind it is self-interest. My positivity is about my own values, not about Merkel as a politician.
Emma. You are wrong about what exactly is in the recipe of my assessment of Merkel as you say here: `You and Princess dismiss her political actions on the base that she is a narcissist, it would be logical to dismiss them on the base of factual arguments, which is a political discussion and not a discussion of NPD.` Emma, I assess her based on all the pain and misery and insult and disdain and injury she has caused to her own citizenry for many years at this point, and speaking of misery, also of those that she had wallowing in filth and fear in some of those camps, none in her own luxurious back yard, of course. hahaha. And adding to what I discern about her, over many years, the information about Narcissism that I have been studying recently, has cemented what I have seen regarding her, and has not contradicted what I have seen regarding her actions.
Because, I did not know what a Narcississt was until around 10 months ago. While, A. Merkel has been around for quite a while now, on the world stage, yes? I assess her as a social climber on an `elite `scale that is shameless, cruel, calculating, manipulative, covert, all while knowingly and specifically mis-using the fact that she is a woman, and thereby given the benefit of the doubt to be empathic and even motherly, to meet her own self-fulfilling goals of the national dilution of Germany, and on behalf of all nations that have that goal of national dilution, either openly or secretly: She led the way. Wearing a `skirt.` She was off. She ran with it all. And with pride. And, anyway, by the way, ones personality, including NPD, does effect ones actions, you know. You and no one else can do the surgery and separate the two, as one only sometimes can do with `siamese` twins. And also knowing that someone has a particular disorder can even be predictive.
For example, I do not know if you read HG Tudor`s assessment of the POTUS Donald Trump. I highly recommend it. But, it was on point more than anything I have heard from all the plethora of renown and touted political pundits in the past 5 years, over here in the United States, where I live, and HG`s assessment proved to be predictive as well, which is also extremely valuable, indeed. HG should be presented an Award for that Assessment, if he has has not. That assessment of NPD and the POTUS, was and is assessment brilliance, and does elucidate how Donald Trump goes about his politics. And how he is perceived rightly and also wrongly by others, as well. You can not separate the 2. In fact the more knowledge one has about a subject, the better. And, very importantly, without knowing the 2, one can make more errors in assessing a person and their actions, and make even more erroneous predictions about the actions of said person.
Anyway, as far as what you think of A. Merkel, please understand that I have neither the need nor the desire to change your take on her, by the way. You, of course, are free to view her as you see fit, in my opinion. And I do not know why you are discussing her so much, since you say you have no emotional attachment to her. Your actions and your words differ. But, I do not have much more to say about her.
Nevertheless, Emma, if you believe that I, in particular, am wrong about her, that belief does not bother me, at all. And, I do try to stay out of the convincing business as much as I possibly can these past few years, because I am witnessing first-hand this era of extreme polarization. Thus, It would be a colossal waste of my time to try to convince any staunch believers these days, regarding anything at all, in general, Emma. So, maybe we can discus some other matters on some of the other articles now, before A. Merkel ends up knocking on my door, or something.
Emma: I just saw another one of your posts to me, and where you quoted me to make your argument against what I said. You cheat. You pick out what you want and leave out my statements and info. that does not go along with what you are saying (and the info. that you leave out is right next to what you sever for your usage, which makes it even worse. You can not even use the alibi, that you did not see the info) when you make your cherry-picked quotes about my post. It is hilarious that you do this to me, when I am especially well aware of what you leave out. So you must be doing this sort of thing for others that read your posts.
But I am also aware, as you are, that anyone reading your reply would be surprised if they were actually to read my post where you quote me, and they would then see what you deliberately leave out, written right next to your selected quote, to make your arguments. And you are aware that if they do not check for themselves, you will sound fair and balanced, even though you are not being that way. However, If I were to break down line by line where you cheat, it would take too much time. I am tired. I just want you to know that your way of arguing will not cut the mustard with even the most lenient of readers, if they would take one look at the entire post that you quote from. Your style of argument works only with those that are influenced by the sound of confidence that you exude when you make your statements, and thereby they do not verify what you say, that another person is saying. And maybe the people in your sphere are such that just believe what they hear from you about what others are stating, but you cheat.
But, many of us have gone beyond that stage, and we do go and look and read the primary source material or posts ourselves and quoted material, when possible. To insure that what is quoted is in context, and is fully correct, and that other info. is not being hidden and suppressed, so that we are not being deceived. But, many will just believe that when a quote is used, it is being used in good faith and form. But, you are not doing that when you quote me. I hope we all remember to check information ourselves, when someone uses quotes to make their deceptive arguments, against what a person has said. Because we have been deceived just too much by those that sound confident, but cheat. `Trust, but verify` is a diplomatic way of saying that people will deceive, if they feel they can get away with it.
Princess, a quote is by definition a selected part of a post, it is not recommended to quote a post in full in a thread. If you feel I have taken what you said out of context please be specific. I have been genuine with you, accusing me of deceit without specifying is uncalled for.
“PrincessSuperEmpath says:
December 19, 2019 at 19:10
Anyway, as far as what you think of A. Merkel, please understand that I have neither the need nor the desire to change your take on her”
Princess, I am neither in agreement nor in disagreement with Merkel’s policy. Her refugee policy has backfired, Germany is polarized. The question is whether a different policy may have had a better outcome. UK and US are taking the opposite position regarding emigration and refugees and both countries are equally, if not more polarized and are equally far removed from finding a solution.
The point is that the issue is very complex and multifaceted, there is not an easy fix that will have a beneficial outcome for everyone. If Merkel’s stance had been motivated by true compassion, her policy could still have backfired, but at least it would have been motivated by good intent. Even if one’s course of action causes undesirable results, good intent does count for something. It is just too bad that the intentions does not seemed to have been based in compassion in the case of Merkel.
I feel that the cause of the problems we are facing is not addressed by any political wing, policy or politician: the way we treat each other and the planet is fundamentally selfish and detrimental, if we really want to solve the current issues, we have to change our ways. The difficulty is that you cannot make that into a political message that will sell. Every politician is wheeling and dealing and compromising with uncertain results, it is the intent behind it that matters.
Emma: No matter what a woman does on the world stage, you still appreciate her presence there? My goodness. I am speechless about your statement. But, it is good for me to know that many think this way. My goodness.
“PrincessSuperEmpath says:
December 19, 2019 at 19:14
Emma: No matter what a woman does on the world stage, you still appreciate her presence there? My goodness. I am speechless about your statement. But, it is good for me to know that many think this way. My goodness.”
No.
I appreciate gender equality. Men and women are equally capable (both to err and to do right) yet women as a group are excluded from leadership based on gender as a result of a culturally ingrained bias. The merit of an individual female is on a different level in the discussion.
To give an analogy, gender bias is like the belief that apples are lesser fruit than bananas and should not be included in the fruit basket. When someone argues: “no, actually apples are just as tasty, nutritious and healthy fruit as bananas and it is good that they are equally included in the fruit basket”, your response is like saying: “So, you mean to say that no matter what the state of an apple is you appreciate its presence in the basked and you will accept and eat it? I am speechless! Oh well, good to know that there are actually people who’s thinking is this absurd.”
Confusing the different levels of a discussion is fairly common. One of my teachers, bless him, used the give the following example of this kind of confusion: I fit in my coat, my coat fits in my bag, therefore I fit in my bag. The coat-reasoning sounds logical but it is not.
Emma
Indeed, indignation is emotion. Emotion does not equal Emotional Thinking. I do not dismiss her actions on the fact that she is a narcissist, I noticed that her actions where not motived by kindness and compassion, that she is indeed incapable of these emotions and that is reason for concern. You assume that Merkels immigration policy is a good thing to happen to the refugees and once again hope that even though Merkel does not care if they live or die, that something good will surely come of this. Hence you fail to understand that her actions are now exacerbating the exact problem you are hoping it would prevent.
Emma says:
December 16, 2019 at 15:22
Oh damn it!
I was really hoping Merkel was the exception
This indicates emotional investment, especially given that Merkel was the first person you thought about with regards to her hopefully being an exception and cared enough to ask HG for his opinion on her.
Even after HG made it clear that she is a narcissist, you were not willing to accept this fact and still tried to assign compassion to her and give her the benefit of the doubt:
Emma says:
December 16, 2019 at 21:49
Desiree, if Merkel is a narcissist as HG says, her compassion for the refugees will indeed be motivated by self interest. I wonder how aware she is of her own motives.
That was why I made Merkels true motives and worldview very clear in my response to you. I appreciate your input and your opinion regarding this matter. What I will say is that it’s not advisable to try and gain the high ground by stating others are emotional while simultaneously claiming neutrality for yourself when this is not the case. This makes it look as if you are disappointed and attached to your preformed notion on Merkel and do not wish to see the truth of what she is.
“Desirée says:
December 19, 2019 at 20:03
You assume that Merkels immigration policy is a good thing to happen to the refugees and once again hope that even though Merkel does not care if they live or die, that something good will surely come of this.”
Desirée, that is your assumption, not mine.
I am neither in agreement nor in disagreement with Merkel’s policy. Her refugee policy has backfired, Germany is polarized. The question is whether a different policy may have had a better outcome. UK and US are taking the opposite position regarding emigration and refugees and both countries are equally, if not more polarized and are equally far removed from finding a solution.
The point is that the issue is very complex and multifaceted, there is not an easy fix that will have a beneficial outcome for everyone. If Merkel’s stance had been motivated by true compassion, her policy could still have backfired, but at least it would have been motivated by good intent. Even if one’s course of action causes undesirable results, good intent does count for something. It is just too bad that the intentions does not seemed to have been based in compassion in the case of Merkel.
I feel that the cause of the problems we are facing is not addressed by any political wing, policy or politician: the way we treat each other and the planet is fundamentally selfish and detrimental, if we really want to solve the current issues, we have to change our ways. The difficulty is that you cannot make that into a political message that will sell. Every politician is wheeling and dealing and compromising with uncertain results, it is the intent behind it that makes a difference.
I have a theory.
Boris will now attempt to abolish the monarchy.
That could be true.
CHT
Well, only a few days to wait. Seeds have already been sown.
Dearest HG: Do you know what does it means when British media and politicians use the word or 2 words cliff edge, or cliff-edge, regarding this British election. Whom or what was or is the cliff edge, and regarding what? I never heard the expression cliff edge in U.S. politics. I do not know what they are saying. Thank you.
I go not quite from here after all. (PSE, cliff edge = teetering, could go either way).
oh huh, why is Yoda in my fingers
PSE, the ‘to go either way” may be ‘knife edge’ not ‘cliff edge’. There i some subtle diff between cliff and knife edge. They need to be read in relevant context to ascertain meaning. Depending on context, cliff edge could mean that the subject of the term does not desire to teeter over the cliff, but stay on solid ground. Knife edge also carries some connotation of sharpness, dangerous balancing.
Ok, I looked for some more sample context for cliff edge usage in Britain, up above. I hope this helps. I want to be sure that I know what it means.
Anglo Saxon your syntax is.
Is it, yes. A young apprentice am I no longer such also.
Violetta
Genious!
Ok. I keep hearing cliff edge in British media, this week, in various discussions. I am not sure what it means. So, here are 2 samples of the phrase being used, although they are not the original instances when I first heard the phrase this week: Here is one question asked by the British media to a member of the E.U. : (1) Are we looking at another cliff edge at the end of next year, because of Boris` victory? (2) And, Here is an article titled: `Johnson Resets No-Deal Brexit Threat With Extension Cliff-Edge.` What does cliff edge mean in Britain?
Can’t help you further with this one PSE as I don’t know enough about the UK election and Brexit history to understand what the first cliff edge refers to (ie when it is stated “…looking at another cliff edge…” I don’t not know what cliff edge is being referred to in the past). I understand the metaphor in abstract and could apply it like “The candidate is balanced on a cliff edge. Will xyz, cause him to fall ” (made up for e.g), but in your eg you would need to be familiar with the wider issues and the history of commentary on them to intuitively understand the reference. I’m sure someone from UK or elsewhere with more knowledge of the the history of the commentary and who also understands how the metaphor operates in idiomatic English will be able to give you an answer.
there is also “cliff hanger”, which means there is uncertainty about what a result/outcome will be. Okay Happy xmas.
PSE
It means that sections of the MSM have become aware of how dangerous Boris is. The bumbling buffoon has turned out to be something entirely different.
They sense the danger in this and that’s why its ‘cliff edge’s
Boris will use that disgusting excuse for a woman, Pritti Patel, she of the permanent smirk, against The Travellers, the Gypsies. This will be the first strike. In tandom, he will then attempt to ersatz strangle those on Universal Credit.
He will introduce tax breaks for the rich.
NHS has failed. Education has failed. Welfare has failed. People are dying. Largely women are now being raped with gay abandon. Domestic Violence is utterly out of control.
It’s going to get a whole lot worse. If people think it’s bad now, they ain’t seen nothing yet.
Oh it does amuse me about the irony of Pritti Patel. Patel is a Hindu name. Travellers originated from the Punjab. Where she is ethnically from. Mark my words, there will be an absolutly unbelievable set of murders happen which will then be an excuse to bring back the death penalty.
Renarde, is the Cliff Edge, if Brexit were to be completed? Are you saying that certain people, like the Travellers will be kicked out of the country with Brexit? What bait and switch did Boris do. How is he different from what some thought? In the U.S., crime goes down when Conservatives are in power and goes up when Liberals are in power. Perhaps an inconvenient truth to some. Is that not the case over there? I do not know what the MSM is. I also have to look up Universal Credit. I still can not use Cliff Edge in a sentence, like those 2 instances that I found and gave as examples, and that means I still do not know exactly what it means, when it is used over there. It is good to hear all viewpoints. I do not think I have heard your viewpoint before, and I wonder if those with your viewpoint are more silent overall. And I can not really decipher it all, so forgive me for that, but as you know, there are major and subtle differences in culture, and I am new at looking into what happens in Britain, so closely. And, I have looked more and I understand more, because of HG Tudor. But, I need to understand, because Britain is a powerful country and Britain and the U.S. often spill upon one another.
Regarding the question of whether all politicians who made it to the main stage are narcissists, how about Angela Merkel? I don’t think she is a narcissist and like to believe that she is the exception to the rule, What do you think HG?
On a slightly off topic note: today I came across an article in a magazine on architecture, the title of which was: The Biggest and Baddest Facades. There is just no way to explain how hilarious this is to someone who is not familiar with narcissism and HG’s work.
Apparently there is a facade convention next week where there will be an award for the biggest and baddest facade construction. Nominees anyone?
Narcissist.
Oh damn it!
I was really hoping Merkel was the exception since she seemed so empathic towards the needs of refugees and seemed courageous in standing up against extreme right tendencies.
Really too bad, but thanks all the same for the clarification HG.
I help all of you here and I am a narcissistic psychopath.
HG, Isn’t Nelson Mandela an empath? He has achieved so much for the people of South Africa and has been an amazing inspirational figure to many people around he world.
When it comes to Normals, I am thinking George W Bush is a highly narcissistic Normal while Gerald Ford was an empathic Normal. I think that Carter might be an Empath or an empathic Normal.
Was Theresa May a narcissist?
MP, I’ve not studied any but based on my very limited knowledge at a guess is say NM, GB and TM are Ns.
I don’t know anything about the others at all.
Thank you AlexisS. That makes me sad about Nelson Mandela but I don’t know a lot about him except the way he was depicted in the movies and some articles that I have read which were very favorable to him. This makes me want to read more about him and South Africa’s history.
George Bush does seem like a narcissist to me. He had a history of alcoholism but he was able to fix that addiction. He seemed faithful to his wife also so that makes me hesitate to think that he is a narcissist. But I have often wondered about that infamous reaction that he had when he was told for the first time about the 9/11 where he had this weird pose and non reaction. His defenders say that it was because he didn’t want to scare the kids around him which makes it sound like it was an empathic decision that he made. Or was it because he didn’t have emotional empathy that it took him a while before he was able to figure out the appropriate reaction? I don’t know. But I can totally understand why you think that he is a narcissist and it is very plausible.
I don’t know enough about Theresa May but from an outsider she seemed like a nice and proper woman.
Gerald Ford was known for being nice and he may have been an empath. But he only became president to replace Nixon because he was Nixon’s VP. So Ford was not elected and he didn’t go through the terrible election process that seems to favor narcissists.
AlexisSmith, I have been looking at Theresa May’s pictures and I’m guessing she’s probably an Upper MR.
HG: By their fruits, ye shall know them.
Speaking of which, treating myself to Sex and the Narcissist and Sitting Target for Christmas. Figure they’re a good place to start.
Hg approves
Violetta
Premium reading you chose. Two of the best.
Violetta,
Sitting Target is my favorite, everyone needs to start there.
Yes, it is not about the actions in them self but the intent behind it isn’t it.
Recently someone I considered a close friend died, in the process of her health deteriorating I have come to realize that her behavior was what you have described as the overwhelming angel HG.
We go a long way back and as an older colleague and friend she was always there for me in difficult times and I really appreciated that but the length she would go to, to help others was beyond anything normal and felt very uncomfortable at times. It would irritate me and then I would feel guilty for not been grateful for her, as I thought well meaning, help.
When her health started to deteriorate last year I naturally wanted to be there for her as she had been there for me in the past but I soon discovered that there was nothing mutual about our friendship. I was really taken aback by the great suspicion and aggression with which she reacted to my offers of help. Her body and memory starting to fail, and it became impossible for her to keep up any longer the façade of the one who is always in service of others , and what was behind it came to the surface: the all-consuming, obsessive need for control.
Several times she was prematurely discharged from nursing homes because she totally refused to comply with treatment protocol saying the medical staff was incompetent and did not understand her condition as she had tried to explain to them, triangulating physicians, therapists and nurses against each one and other. Finally the refusal of treatment ended up causing her death. It has been mind blowing to witness that for the narcissist the need for control even trumps the need to overcome decease. I feel I have lost a friend in more than one way.
With this friend I have seen up close the slipping of the mask and have seen that her service to others was not motivated by kindness and empathy but the hidden need for control. Seeing through the façade from afar is more difficult though.
Knowing that you are not motivated by empathy and kindness HG, and seeing your interactions and the help you offer here is most valuable in learning to distinguish between true acts of kindness and acts that have the appearance of kindness but are motivated by something else. It is training the internal radar as it were to learn to distinguish one from the other. The only drawback is that lately I have been identifying way too many narcissist in the personal and professional circle. It starts to feel like using an x-ray scanner which exposes the internal machinations of human behavior. It feels lonely at times as I realize these connections are one sided and are not what I thought they were, but it helps to avoid getting entangled.
Thank you for your thoughtful observations Emma. For an empathic person, it will seem like a lonely path but as you identify, that is preferable to ensnarement.
Emma—very thoughtful post and very relatable. I am seeing more and more and more as well. X-ray scanner is a good comparison. It amazes me that HG has put his thumb on this behavior and is able to expand on it with so many manifestations. I like Martha Stewart’s blog for sure but it’s more pleasure reading. There is a lot to learn here.
Thank you Lorelei.
MP, I could be wrong as I truly haven’t studied them at all. NM had many affairs and was known as a womaniser. I suspect he was fueled massively in his war against apartheid. He was also known to be violent. Sadly just because someone appears to do good we can’t rely only on that, Mother Theresa has been confirmed as an N somewhere on this site
GB, he may well have had affairs which we don’t know about.
TM again I’ve not really studied her she just looks like one hahaha. But she did show a lot of entitlement to remain as PM for so long when the entire country wanted her to step down.
Interesting re GF although I know nothing of him at all based on a quick photo analysis I’d say N to the nth degree personally. But that is just a photo.
Hi Alexis,
I’m more convinced that you’re right. Sex addiction is a big red flag and also violence. I was just as sad about Mandela as I was about Mother Teresa as they were both so amazingly inspirational to me. I remember being shocked when I first found out from a book that I have read that both Martin Luther King Jr.and JFK were sex addicts which now I know means that they were narcissists. I just don’t want to ask about Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill right now, I think I want a little break. But eventually I might have the courage to ask. On a positive note, I was very happy that I asked HG if Pope John Paul 2 was an empath and he said that he was an empath indeed and I think I will hold on to that positivity. We also still have Malala whom I know is an empath who maybe will be a world leader someday. We cannot ever lose hope.
I am also more and more convinced that George Bush is a narcissist.
About Theresa May’s entitlement, that is something that I used to not understand about poloticians. For example Mitt Romney who has been such an upstanding person and then all of a sudden he loses and then witness Trump become president and now he acts as if Trump robbed the presidency from him. Mitt Romney is acting like a toddler now like Trump took away his toy from him and so he’s whining all the time. I know the feeling of winning vs losing as I have experienced both from school competitions and I know that losing sucks big time and I hate it so much. But for them to feel that they were robbed of something that never belonged to them in the first place is another thing and that is their entitlement. So now I am thinking that yes Theresa May is indeed a narcissist and maybe even Mitt Romney just because of that entitlement.
I just did an image search of Gerald Ford and your right, big time narcy vibes with the way his eyes don’t match his smile. I don’t really know that much about him either, I wasn’t born yet when he was president but when I just got here in the US he died and I was watching the news with my American dad who was a very staunch and opinionated Democrat and everyone in the news say that GF was a nice guy. I asked my dad what he thought and wondered if he would have a criticism for GF like he had with most Republicans and he just said that he was a nice guy. Although my dad also probably refrained from criticizing GF because he just died and it didn’t feel right for him. Unlike me where I just want to learn as much as I could so I just analyze everyone that I can analyze.
No such thing as sex addiction.
Yes I love it too when HG confirms people are empaths, feels like we should celebrate.
What makes you not want to find out re WC and AL?
I’m not sure how long you’ve known about Narcs. I do recall being devastated in the early days when I worked our people whom I’d know for years were in fact Ns, one in particular upset me a fair bit because I had thought he was just a really lovely person until it became Apparent he was one of them.
But even though I found it upsetting I pushed on through as I’d always much rather lnow the truth no matter how bad it may be.
Okay I won’t pass my thoughts on WC or AL.
Tony Blair on the other hand, I suspect he is a greater. I’m sure he lead Gordon Brown into the frying pan and that it was all thought out very carefully.
HG, has there ever been a time in parliament say in the last 100 years when there is an MP who is a greater as well as the leader of the opposition also being a greater?
Cameron a mid.
Hi AlexisS,
I am afraid of finding out about Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill because I find them very inspirational in terms of aspiring for higher things and challenging myself to be a better person. And also mostly because I have two little kids whom I know for sure are not narcissists. I just want to believe that narcissists are not the only ones who can be great leaders and that my empathic kids can achieve whatever they want in life, even if that is to be a successful politician or leader someday. It almost makes me feel that you have to be a narcissist to make a huge difference in this world.
But I am curious about what you think about Lincoln and Churchill. Lincoln was known for being an ‘honest Abe’ but he had so many narcissistic traits as well. He was extremely competitive in almost everything and was a very skillful rhetorician. But aside from that I don’t know any other substancial red flag. I have often wondered about his wife and why she became crazy. Before writing this comment I did a quick search on his wife and her behaviors had a lot of symptoms of narcissism although some people now believe that she was probably bipolar and there was one analysis that she may have had pernicious anemia. Her last surviving son had her committed to an asylum for insanity. It was said that although she was responsible for grooming Abe into becoming the leader that he was, she was also very draining to him. She has never reconciled with her son after getting out of the asylum. I wonder if her son was an ACON.
I also did a quick search on Churchill and there are a lot of written articles showing that he didn’t have empathy for human suffering so I think that he was indeed a narcissist or a psychopath. Most likely a Greater I guess.
I don’t know anything of lincoln and very little of WC (shame on me lol) I am very hyperfocussed on what my interests are and my interest in politicians not politics has developed from here because I’m interested in their personalities.
It was helpful to me what you wrote re AL and based on your comments alone I would certainly be suspicious of him being an N.
WC again I know little but 100% N, no doubt of that and I would be inclined to agree with you that he is a greater but I certainly don’t have the evidence to back that up, that’s based on nothing more than the general feeling he invokes in me when watching documentaries etc.
I understand your concern re your E children. I wouldn’t worry about that at all Es can be incredibly successful (Shield Maiden being an excellent example) without being in a position of power. Literally the last thing in the world I would want for any E child would to become involved in politics. Why would you want to send them into a vipers nest when it would only make them miserable? As they have you as a loving parent I’m sure they will do well no matter what. But politics is not an arena I would want to see any decent person enter at all. It is very sad that is how it is, but it is.
Re AL, I certainly know of some Ns who create the illusion that they are open and transparent but it is nothing more than a facade to better hide what lurks beneath.
Your kids will find their own path and be fabulous at whatever they do I’m sure.
Thank you AlexisS. You’re right about positions of power and it being a vipers’ best to empaths. I didn’t see those as ‘positions of power’ but you are absolute right, that is exactly what political positions are and that is why they are full of narcissists who need to be in control and desires power. I just saw political positions as positions that give opportunities to make good changes in the lives of many. I don’t have any visions for what my kids will be someday. All that I really want is for them to be happy and feeling fulfilled. I just felt that if they ended up wanting to be a political leader someday, I hope that their empathy will not hold them back in following their hearts’ desire. But so far my five year old said he wants to be an engineer and a president of a train museum while my three year old just wants to be a princess 👸.
You will probably not know about this because you live in Europe (the UK I believe?), but before Trump was chosen as the candidate for the Republicans, there was this empathic candidate Ben Carson. In my opinion he is an empath just by his facial expressions and how he live his life and his interaction with his wife. Then the first or one of the first primary election was held and he became so upset because he was leading in that state but he lost because Ted Cruz (a narcissist) lied to the voters in many voting precincts that Ben Carson withdrew his candidacy and advices his supporters to vote for Ted Cruz instead. Ben Carson was so incredibly upset and bothered by it (the way empaths get some angry about injustice done to them) I felt more bad with the way it was affecting him. Then on the next debate another narcissist (Trump) calles out Ted Cruz’s behavior in a much more aggressive way than Ben Carson had and that was the beginning of the friendship (or entanglement) of Ben Carson and Donald Trump where after Ben Carson really withdrew, he actively supported Trump.
I have been reading about Abraham Lincoln and his wife and I have a new theory that Lincoln May have been a Super Empath (because he was very resilient) or maybe just an Empath (because he didn’t disengage from Mary Todd Lincoln) (I’m still not very good at making the distinction between an SE and an E) and I think that his wife was actually a narcissist. After Christmas I will post quotes here about the things about Lincoln’s wife so I an excited to think that the man who has made such an influence in the US was actually an empath. 😊
Thanks MP. It was HG who said it was like a vipers’ nest, he would know better than me but from my own observations I would be inclined to agree strongly.
I think politicians will do good if it suits them and not if it doesn’t.
It sounds like you have adorable children and I’m sure they’ll do very well.
Even if I lived in the US I probably wouldn’t know MP. I don’t follow politics too much so I very much appreciate the background, it was helpful for me.
I hope for you that BC and AL are Es but I have to say, I know little of them really but even statistically speaking it is significantly more likely that they are not.
Although AL did not disengage, from MT, he may well have been the single most causal factor in her mental decline. I agree either an SE or an E wouldn’t just leave someone because they were mentally unwell but nor necessarily would an N, not if it fuelled them to remain or they wanted to maintain the facade. My sister an UMRN has stuck by her LMRN husband even though he has serious MH problems co-morbid with his narcissism which would have been a significant drain on anyone, but it doesn’t seem to be for her. Although she does use pity plays occasionally in relation to this. Not very often though.
I will certainly look forward to anything new you post in relation to this. I would very much like to learn and will perhaps do some reading of my own when time permits. But I plan to read more about WC in the first instance, so I’ll let you know my thoughts when I get there.
I would certainly like to think that there is a successful politician who is an E or SE. I’m sure there must be some or one.
Thank you AlexisS. I’m looking forward to what you think about WC. I don’t know that much about him as well but I was inspired by a lot of the things that he said. My favorite one is, “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
I do remember when I took my first semester of business psychology he was used as an example in our textbook as a famous person with manic depressive disorder. It had pictures of him laughing in a very manic way side by side with a picture of him looking incredibly gloom. I don’t know anything else about him except that he was born with a silver spoon, was an amazing rhetorician and was a very accomplished Prime Minister or Britain during WW2. But I have not read a book that was written about him. I have only read about him as he was mentioned in the books that I was reading. I have inherited a book from my dad about Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill’s friendship but I have not read it yet. I would love to read it someday. I believe that FDR was a somatic or elite narcissist based on the movie about him Hyde Park on Hudson starring Bill Murray as FDR.
I have originally thought the same thing that it was Lincoln who caused or aggravated his wife’s mental illness but I have read articles that include what other people have said about her which make me believe that she was a narcissist. And Lincoln didn’t do pity play, he had dealt with her in a very low profile way although there were times that he did react angrily in a way that puzzled people. For example it was said that when they were about to get married Lincoln look like he was going to war and not to a wedding and had said that he has to marry her. Their first child was born where if the child was full term, the pregnancy would have happened before they got married. So was her pregnancy the reason for their marriage? Was is a way to bind Lincoln to her? Prior to that he also broke up with her but they got back together. Also unlike Lincoln where people pretty much have the same opinion about him as a person which shows consistency in Lincoln’s part in terms of his character, Mary Todd is described very differently by different people. Their either think that she’s mean and crazy or really sweet and kind. I have more to write and stories about her on my next comment after Christmas.
HG does have a great way of describing things and putting visuals in concepts. It was also only from HG that I have heard that there is no such thing as sex addiction; only fuel addiction. It totally makes so much sense and it makes it easier for us to identify and not put an excuse on the behaviors that are red flags for narcissism.
I hope that you have a very wonderful Christmas and thank you for talking to me about these political figures even though it’s not your usual interest. 💕🎄
MP
Off topic, but I’ve been thinking about your puppy. Is everyone adjusting well to the new addition? They don’t know what to make of all the excitement and new people at Christmas, so you may or may not experience a little acting out but it will pass.
Thank you NA. The kids are just as happy as can be with the new addition. They take turns in cuddling her. She has grown a lot now. She’s almost as tall as our cat but much chubbier. She was giving me a hard time this morning while I was planting bulbs by digging up some of what I have already planted. Then she plops instantly to the ground while looking at me after I firmly call her name knowing that she didn’t please me. So funny. She is a sweet and playful little fur ball. Somebody gave her an ugly Christmas sweater after they baby sat her for us when we went on a trip. I will put it on her and take a picture for my next gravatar. 😊🎄
Yes it is interesting how we can see glimpses of them in certain situations MP. I have limited interest in the obvious (lessers and victim) Ns, it’s the UMR and greaters whom I enjoy observing the most. Post knowledge (and once I found HG) I started out by observing the lessers as I found it helpful to initially understand their crude and obvious behaviours as it actually helps to see the rawness of an N’s personality to then understand the more sophisticated of their kind and how these simple behaviors are hidden beneath their glossy exterior.
I still find it incredibly surreal to live in this world where we see things as they actually are and not through the world view we all once held.
“ I still find it incredibly surreal to live in this world where we see things as they actually are and not through the world view we all once held.”
So true. It does feel surreal. It has changed the way I see everything and it makes me want to reread the historical books that I have read before I have had my Narcsite goggles just to see what I may have missed regarding the characters in the book.
MP. I agree with your assessment of TM being MR, not sure whether she would make it as a UMR though as from the little I do know of her, she’s not so great at the cognitive empathy and I don’t imagine her to have huge numbers of friends more of a negative based fuel matrix of haters which for me would place her as lower ranking than an UMR. She is concerned with the facade though as the naughtiest thing she claims to have done was run thorugh a farmers field with some friends as a child. She could be an UMR cerebral I suppose. I think those I know personally have largely been UMR elite. So perhaps she could be UMR cerebral?
Hmm maybe I just don’t have a good grasp yet of what an MMR could be. I just automatically think that someone very successful would automatically be either an UL, UMR or a Greater. And I just assumed that since she became a PM that she’s an Upper. I have a family member pegged as an UMR Cerebral and he is a bad ass indeed. I originally thought that he is a Greater but decided that he fits the UMR better. She might indeed be a MMR or maybe an UMR Cerebral and maybe female narcs are just not as bad ass as the male narcissists because maybe the difference in hormones affect the way their narcissism manifests?
Yes I really wouldn’t like to say what she is other than a mid cerebral of some description.
I met TM last summer (by accident) she was tremendously dull. Wouldn’t an UMR have at least a bit of charm about them?
Notme, yes I would have expected an UMR to have some charm so I don’t think she is. But I don’t interact so frequently with cerebral to understand them so I was also considering whether she could be a cerebral as those I have come across lack charm even though some truly thing they do have it.
Oh such a fearless martyr are ye!
Hello Pamela, you can’t stay away can you?
Have you ever noticed that when one seagull appears, another follows?
No, Pamela, the fearless Martyr is you. For daring to put yourself out here repeatedly and embarassingly in a selfless attempt to further our understanding.
Nope.
Those sexy legs….mmmm.
Desiree
Hm I don’t think I remember you. Did we fight at some point cause you were easily forgotten.
I hope you’ve let go of the bitters.
Your mention of Bitters confuses me Pamela. Did you not prefer Twinkies and failed your dissertation in expressionist feminist dance theory.
Do you mind ceasing your crapping up HG’s site with your clearly narcisstic display of petty jealousy and ignorant bitterness?
Thank you so much.
Hahaha, talking to yourself whilst gazing in the mirror again I see, CHT
I do dislike when something comes flying onto HGs site and will not cease crapping it up with it’s clearly narcisstic display of petty jealousy and ignorant bitterness. Alas, the shit-shower continues.
HG commented she is probably the only woman to sue Weinstein and lose. That made me laugh.
Lorelei: Martha Stewart is a Narcissist. Is she aware? She did overplay her hand and therefore was settled in prison for a stint. Blind Spots. Does that mean she is not a Greater? I do not know. She may have played games with Narcissists that were higher than she. And they made a lesson out of her and an example, for other Narcissists to check themselves before they wreck themselves. She did not want to play the game correctly, and take on other Narcississt`s children under her wing as proteges, etc, and she did not want to give donation money to many of other Narcissists` Charities,etc. and she did not want to follow many other rules of their set, especially rules that took money out of her own wallet. She did not want to scratch others` backs even though they scratched hers, for her to grow so large. She felt she did the dirt all on her own to build her empire, Magical Thinking, and thus she felt all money and opportunity and privilege and support that came her way was her due, and she owed no one. False Pride, Grandiosity. Greed. Contempt. Disdain. And she is a major thief of recipes,etc. And then she will say her Aunt or someone, etc. created the recipe. So as to not give credit. I would not allow her near one of my recipes with a ten foot pole, and I do not have a recipe. So she will never have to fabricate another relative, because of me, at least. She does have good hair. And many men that meet her, adore her. So she does have charm, but for men, mostly. Let us not even start with what her employees have said about her over the decades. Observe but do not absorb, Lorelei.
Merkel? She sold her entire country out for her Primary Aims of E.U. and One World Govt, and all that. Citizenry over there can not even speak freely over there any longer. They can actually be arrested for speaking against certain situations that they have to put up with. She has become an example of what happens when the general populace is completely disrespected by their rulers. What in the word is the good that Merkel has supposedly done for the German citizenry. If I am speaking form a viewpoint of certain propaganda against her, please let me know. She is one of the reasons that many people wanted Brexit. So that what happened to Germany citizenry does not happen to them. I do not know if you live in Germany, but if you do, you would probably have to say that she is just Great.
Viioletta, I do not believe for a hot second that Merkel has behaved the way she has, because of Germany`s past and because she did not want to look mean. In fact, those 2 ideas and more, that many people would believe, were used by her as her trump cards: that because she was a woman (and all women are empathetic, right? lol), and because she could pretend that she was doing all this to enhance Germany`s image, and because Germany has wealth and power in Europe, all placed her in the perfect position, at a perfect time, to be the perfect person to do what she did, and she was off! She would not and could not be stopped. She was a force of nature. A wonder woman. In a bad way. She seized the day, against her on citizenry for her own goals and for a great position of honor among her cohorts in other Nations that carefully studied her lead, so that they could perform the same actions against their own citizenry. She probably has been presented some secret medal in some quiet ceremony for what she did to Germany. She is smart. Germans are known to be largely very smart, and even if this a stereotype, this stereotype is also true. She sacrificed her citizenry as an offering and as an example and as a laboratory of study on how to create the blueprint to do such a thing for other nations, and what laws worked to keep her own citizenry, and thereby their citizenry, in check and quiet about it all. And she is mean. Because she treats her own citizenry in a mean way. She does not fool me in the least. I can see her coming from miles away.
Princess, I am not from Germany but live in a country close to it, I have no investment in Merkel one way or the other. As a citizen of the EU I feel sympathetic to the plight of keeping the EU together as Merkel and others have been working for, plus she has managed to hold her ground as the only female in an machismo dominated stage, I was wishfully hoping she would be motivated by morals and ideals but alas.
As to your assertion that Germany is a dictatorship and there is no free press or freedom of speech, I am guessing you have never been to Germany, I have regularly and I know people from Germany, things are not like that.
Princess, of course she’s mean as cat’s piss, but she didn’t want to LOOK it.
“See how nice and tolerant I am? Now why can’t the rest of you be as wonderful as me?”
Emma: I have not been to Germany, but, I am rarely off message when I speak about something. And keeping the EU together benefits some people and hurts other people, even in Germany. Many are not sympathetic to keep it together to their own hurt that they are suffering. That is crazy if they did. Many like Europe, but many are having major problems being governed by the dictates of the E.U. policies, and they do not like it all. Who will speak for them that are being hurt by it all? Where is the sympathy for them?
But, I am not definitely into the woman thing. I am the wrong person for that pity play. Women can be deadlier than the male, as well. And women are often propped up by men to bring a softer presentation to a hard matter, especially if that strategy seems to be a smart one. I look beyond the skirt or the pants, or the female pants suits, whatever the case. I observe all these politicians. I observe, but not absorb. And, I did not say that Germany was a dictatorship and had no free press at all. You exaggerate what I said, for some reason. But, I have not heard the rosy position you are saying either, from your many visits and from your friends.
So, I will stick to what I am saying, and I still say that free speech has been dampened in many European countries, including Germany, whether or not the people that you visit say so, or not. And despite the fact that you live so close. And there are many people over there that you do not visit and that you have not spoken to, and so I can not see you speaking for all of them, when they do not agree with your rosy picture. And I have heard many of them speak as well, and they do NOT go for all the changes that have happened in Germany in the past decade. And it is going to take more than one post to turn around what I have been seeing and reading and hearing for so many years now, and from many people, from Germany, about what is happening in Germany.
And the Brits are on the move. Britain seems to be on their way out. And they are off! Away from The E.U. and especially away from being governed by their dictates. And away from making those huge monthly money payments to sustain the E.U. And wealthy Britain never did take on the currency of the E.U., from what I understand. Money is also power. And maybe Germany will now carry even more of the bulk of the expensive weight for the E.U. now that the Brits are jumping ship. And now, the increased burden of the E.U. may fall upon Germany in many other ways as well, because of powerful Britain just saying, NO, and many German people are really not going to like that extra burden either, whether or not they tell you when you visit.
Maybe the great world traveler and humanitarian and singer Bono can visit and give me a personal report. I remember one year that he was literally, physically kicked in his backside by some people at some camp that he visited, during one of his first hand humanitarian visits, and his people had to rush him out before he sustained sever injury. But, the word is that he still hasn`t found what he`s looking for, either. So, maybe he will not do. As far as the E.U. is concerned, brace yourself then, there is going to be trouble. And Merkel has to be surrounded by a lot of security, you know of course. Many German people feel she sold them out and are very angry with her, even though she is a woman. Many are angry at that woman.
Emma
” she seemed so empathic towards the needs of refugees”
Angela Merkel participated in a Q&A where a german mother spoke to her. The woman’s teenage son had been attacked in the streets by immigrants, robbed, stabbed and then left to die. I was in tears when the Lady described the story regarding her son to Frau Merkel and of course the mother herself was sobbing over the loss of her young son, asking how Merkel can guarantee that our children will be safe.
I was utterly appaled when the cameras panned back to Merkel, whose frowning visage was as icy and unmoved as ever. She gave her usual default answer about how we “cannot blame the many for the faults of the few”, which is a lie, the crime statistics speak for themselves. While I come from a conservative family and have agreed with many of Merkel’s politics in the past, I have never wanted to push someone off a building as much as I did her that day.
This marked a turning point with regards to my views on immigration politics. It kicked me out of my “oh my god, we must help those in need!” Empath Autopilot.
It then occured to me how rather strange it is that a lot of German Politicians have suddenly become quite collectively compassionate with regards to the refugee crisis. And yet, their compassion never seems to expand towards Germans, you know, the people whose protection they are actually responsible for.
She is pushing this pro-immigrant agenda for her own gains exclusively, exploiting empathic people’s desire to help and care for the wounded in the process.
“I have never wanted to push someone off a building as much as I did her that day.”
Thank the non-existent God that you are responding to A. Merklel’s behaviors on this blog vs.
reacting at the forum you attended…otherwise, all of HG’s AAF monies would be donated to bailing out and securing a legal team for the homicidal, yet lovely as always, empath named Desiree. Hehehe!
That is a very interesting comment Desirée. That sounds very similar to the immigration issues we have here in the US. I am an immigrant and my closest friends are immigrants so I am not anti-immigration. But the influx of people crossing the borders without proper vetting has become such a sensitive topic that a lot of people cannot have a healthy and honest discussion of. People are afraid of being labeled and disliked so there is very little intellectual honesty.
Most Americans are descended from immigrants. I know my ancestors had to fill out a metric fuck-ton of paperwork, so I think the real issue is the vetting.
They are letting “juveniles” in with receding hairlines, like the “young man” who rammed people with his car at a building at Ohio State University, then got out and stabbed some more. No way that guy was the age he claimed to be.
Merkel let refugees in because she didn’t want people to think she was mean. All about her.
Merkel let people in because Germany has had a bad image since WWII. Unfortunately, some of the people she let in detest the same groups who were persecuted in WWII, including religious, ethnic, and sexual orientation.
Unfortunately, some of the people she let in also detest Christians, as seen by attacks at Kristkindls and other festive occasions.
But hey, at least Merkel didn’t look mean
Violetta I agree with your comment. I had to look up the one you mentioned with the receding hairline. He was a Somali refugee and ISIS called him a soldier but the reports say that he was self-radicalized here. I have to say I sometimes doubt the credibility of their findings if they were just made to cover up or hide their failures. It would have been politically catastrophic if it turns out that their vetting process was so bad that they have allowed in a terrorist.
I also agree with your thoughts on Merkel and Germany. She is most likely an unaware Upper Mid-Ranger. It’s more important for her to control how people see it view her than what is best for her people.
Desiree, if Merkel is a narcissist as HG says, her compassion for the refugees will indeed be motivated by self interest. I wonder how aware she is of her own motives. I think Johnson knows he is lying and conning, he is aware of his manipulations but Merkel appears to believe she is a good person doing the right thing.
Emma
She is a narcissist. Therefore she does not feel compassion for the refugees and does not care about their needs. She also does not care about the needs of the Germans either. Nor does she care or feel shame about Germany being perceived in a negative way due to its history.
What she did with regards to the refugee crisis was meant to serve her needs and her needs only. Mama Merkel gets celebrated like the second coming and fills her pockets in the process. Vying for the Peace Nobel Prize, giving sanctimonious speeches at Harvard, swatting off any serious concerns with regards to her “selfless” open door policy.
I do like it when my fingers get saved.
Princess, you wrote:
“I do not know if you live in Germany, but if you do, you would probably have to say that she is just Great.”
It is in a dictatorship that citizens are not allowed to criticize the political leader.
As to Europe, it is one of the best continents in the world to live in when it comes to political stability, economic prosperity and social care but Europe’s problems are obvious and many of its citizens are suffering. I see that around me every day and there is nothing rosy about it. The discussion is not so much about the problems as they are in plain sight, the discussion is about the solutions; the differences lie in the ideas on how to solve the glaring issue’s and move forward.
I have many many brilliant and wonderful ideas on how to solve the problems for Europe and for all the other countries in the world, if only I had a magic wand.
Seriously though, I don’t envy those in power, narcissist or not, it is a though job. The problems are very complex involving many factors and there are no easy or quick fixes.
As to Merkel, I am sensing a lot of ET regarding Merkel from you and others in the thread here, I guess my position is more neutral. As said, I have no emotional investment in her one way or the other but now I know she is a narcissist, she has definitely peaked my interest.
Emma: There is a such a thing as good and healthy and sound emotions, you know. That is a far cry from Emotional Thinking, like you say you are sensing from those that do not approve of the activities of A. Merkel. So, just because more people than perhaps you expected disagree with you on a topic, such as the Topic of whether or not A. Merkel, is a Narcississt, and many of us assess her as to be a Narcississt, does not mean we are full of emotional thinking. Throwing out the emotional thinking card is not like a grenade that you can present that will give you a winning hand, whenver you feel the need to use it. We can back up what actions she has pushed and promoted that we do not agree with. And, anyway, having healthy emotions are not something to be ashamed of, at all. In fact, the opposite is true. As the wise saying goes, `even a sea monster cares for her young.` Having no emotional investment is your right, but we have the right to what we consider to be our healthy emotions, based on reason, and sound judgment, as well, on any topic or activity. And being emotionally invested while using ones reason, is not negative, if that notion is being tossed around these days. If the entire world becomes more Narcissistic at large, and full of more and more people that are not emotionally invested in what is going on in this world (which is the case), things are going to become worse and worse, and not better in any way imaginable. And it will take something like a magic wand, as you say, something astonishing, to straighten thing out on this planet.
Emma
“As to Merkel, I am sensing a lot of ET regarding Merkel from you and others in the thread here, I guess my position is more neutral.”
You are confusing Emotional Thinking with Righteous Indignation. The reactions would be no different if the person in question was not a Narcissist, hence you are mistaken. It is not ET, it does not cloud logic.
You also stated in a previous post of this thread:
“she has managed to hold her ground as the only female in an machismo dominated stage, I was wishfully hoping she would be motivated by morals and ideals but alas.”
Clearly indicating that you where in fact rather invested in her “as the only female leader” to set a good example. You said you hoped (and we all know what HG thinks about hope) that she would be different, therefore your position with regards to her is not neutral at all.
Emma: I would classify Merkel as a Greater Elite Narcississt. I almost feel as if we are talking about 2 different Merkels. It is amazing how we see her so differently. HG, can will you put Angela Merkel on your list for the Tudorscope, if she is not already on there? Or, if you have never stated your assessment of her on here? She is a slam dunk GEN to me. Also, Madeleine Albright, since we are speaking of women.
She is on the list.
“PrincessSuperEmpath says:
December 18, 2019 at 20:34
Emma: There is a such a thing as good and healthy and sound emotions, you know. That is a far cry from Emotional Thinking,”
What I mean by ET is thinking and acting based on emotions rather than logic. Whether the driving emotions are healthy or unhealthy, just or unjust is a different matter, that is something subjective and up to the person experiencing the emotions. It is not my place to say whether your emotions are wright or wrong Princess, all emotions that arise have a reason to do so.
“PrincessSuperEmpath says:
December 18, 2019 at 20:34
So, just because more people than perhaps you expected disagree with you on a topic, such as the Topic of whether or not A. Merkel, is a Narcississt,”
Princess, I am not in disagreement about the fact that Merkel is a narcissist. HG says she is and I am taking his word for it, he knows his narcissists so I feel it is save to fare on his judgment in this.
I have the impression that your dislike of Merkel comes from disagreement with her political views and actions more than the fact that she is driven by self-interest. As HG rightly pointed out, the actions of a narcissist can be beneficial for others even though the drive behind it is self-interest. Whether Merkel’s deeds are beneficial or detrimental and for whom is a political discussion. It is perfectly fine to have that discussion. For me personally however, I am here primarily to discuss NPD.
Huh?
Did you change accounts FYC, HG?
AND the other broad, you make no sense.
I see the ego masterbaters are still engaged in self stimulation. Many adults have activities like this to ‘stim’ and soothe some inner anxiety.
I hope you feel better about yourselves. You need to feel superior but I see you as children in pain.
Good day.
Pamela
1.) Failure to comment under the correct thread, as usual.
2.) “the other broad”- you mean hand, but then again you’ve already shown your hand.
3.) “masterbaters”…understandable typo, given that you’re typing this with one hand only.
1. Don’t care about you.
2. Don’t care about your spelling psychosis.
3. Sure as hell do not know or care about you.
4. I’m praying for your family since you are on here all the time. I hope you’re not a mother.
5. I love making typos to trigger people.
Thank you again
Skedaddle now and show us all how smart you are since you need it, dear.
Well, we all know how unintelligent you are Pamela. Your legal defeats are a natter if record in that regard. You’re probably the only woman to sue Weinstein and lose.
In 2019, we found out that Harvey Weinstein and Tony Robbins were pedophiles. I wonder what we’ll find out in 2020.
Maybe there are pedophiles who quote here alot to hide their narcissistic and antisocial criminal predisposition.
I’m excited. Go Buzzfeed!!!!!
I hope the worst for all of you.
Hi Alexissmith, Replying to you re Jacinda Ardern, no reply under your name. What makes me think she is not an N?
I’ve watched her public interviews re various events in NZ, responses to an earthquake a few years ago, shooting incident last year I think, more recently a volcanic eruption where several tourists were killed. Her empathy for an individual’s pain appears to be emotional empathy. It would be great to have someone else’s opinion though, because I have bouts of high ET atm due to my process of coming to terms with a suspected N ex and am unwilling to completely trust my perceptions. H.G. has her on his list, but it will be some time, understandably, probably a long time before he has a look. It is the absence of N traits as well. In all her public appearances she has never displayed, there has never been a hint, of entitlement, pity play, grandiosity, magical thinking, outrageous lies, manipulative narc bombs. I appreciate that like any other outsider, I have no access to what goes on in her personal life. She is married with a young child, maybe just a baby, but that is not an indicator, on its own, of either empath or Narc.
From the point of view that sees Ns as having the guilt free tenacity to successfully navigate high level politics (due to need for power and control, ability to lie continuously without guilt etc), it could be argued that being the PM of a country such as NZ does not really compare – hence politics there may attract others besides Ns, or normals/emapaths are able to build more meaningful careers politically due to a culture that is less narcissistic.
That’s interesting AnneB. Btw I rarely get WordPress notifications so it is only when I actually remember to go back on a particular article that I find replies. So apologies if I ever miss any. I do hope you’re right about her. I have been giving it some thought re non Ns who could make it in the world of politics and they would have to either be.narcissric but not an N or an SE although a CD can withstand an awful lot of abuse.
I’d definitely be interested to learn more about the successes of non Ns.
I have to say where I have no personal interaction with an individual I struggle. I did pretty okay on BLL but I had to watch and think a lot and largely I don’t have enough time to do that. When I’m interacting with them, it’s all 4D and I find it much much easier to determine in terms of N,E,normal etc but need to keep studying on the schools although the haze is clearing.
Anywya lol, I do hope you’re right and i shall look forward to the answer.
AlexisS, hi again! Yes I get what your saying. Without personal interaction, it can only be a best guess on the basis of what is publicly available. The exception, for me, is H.Gs analyses because of his gifts of perception and expertise. I appreciate your responding to me re Jacinda though, thank you, as it feels good to think about and write about her, she is breath of fresh air in the world of power politics.
I did some googling of Jacinda A. IMO there is some very inspiring stuff there and almost certainly, to me,she is not an N , her empathy just does not look or feel fake and she is consistent. You mentioned Super E, that could be right on the money! That or a normal. JA doesn’t come across as a CoD withstanding abuse.
She appears to have a decent amount of positive support about her . Her handling of the aftermath of NZ’s worst ever mass shooting in Jan this year (an Australian, extreme Right Winger killed over 30 NZ Muslim citizens whilst they were at worship in Mosques in Christchurch) attracted world wide positive response (though short lived).
She appears to have been “smeared”now and then by journalists/pol commentators for her empathetic approach to leadership, not directly for her ability to act in capacity as P.M., but suggesting that said approach is, as has been discussed here, incompatible with high end political leadership. The smears seem more like attempted underhand character assassination than based on anything concrete she has or hasn’t done.
Alexiss, don’t worry about timely replies or even any reply. We are all on our own timetables, wordpress can be a pain, it is the digital world not IRL. I appreciate the exchange we have had so far. Happy Xmas and New year to you incase we don’t cross cyber paths prior.
Awww thanks AnneB. If she’s not an N I would suspect SE or narcissistic but not an N simply because Hg said a normal would not make it. So there are few choices left and I’m guessing you would need some strong N traits to carry you through the many and varied hurdles of being a politician.
I have a very lovely female empathic friend and fellow Priestess. She is very pro Corbyn. The man cannot do any wrong in her eyes. I talked to my partner and another close male friend and whined about him.
Vote for the policies not the man. Wise words but yet my female friend is refusing to acknowledge just how unpopular he is and that’s why he lost. When the scale of the loss became apparent is also became apparent that Labour were skewered on the twin prongs of Corbyn and Brexit I then attempted to explain how dangerous Boris could be and yet again met with a ‘let’s hope for the best’.
It’s this kind of emotional thinking that we are all up against. I sometimes wonder if a reasonable section of the population have a collective ‘Stockholm Syndrome’.
My female friend has hooked up with a particularly vile lesser. Victim I’d say. I’ve stayed my hand on this but she has now started posting about the abuse she is receiving but isnt coming out and saying its abuse. And more importantly, none of her friends are either. I’ve not. But I daresay my reasons for not are not the same as her friends. Oh and he is pretending to have aspergers.
I will message her when I can find the right words.
“Vote for the policies not the man.”
By their fruits, ye shall know them.
Indeed, Violetta.
Translation: I’m sorry, but it’s still everybody else’s fault:
“Defiant Jeremy Corbyn claims Labour ‘won the argument’ but just ‘failed to convert it into a majority’ at election as he doubles down on blaming the media for defeat in ‘apology’ letter”:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7793249/Defiant-Jeremy-Corbyn-says-hes-proud-Labours-disastrous-election-campaign.html#article-7793249
Violetta: Sometimes these Politicians just do not know how many regular people are feeling and what is concerning people, rather than what many people should be feeling and what should be concerning people, according to how the politicians believe they have groomed the majority of the people. Magical Thinking. Blind Spots. And such politician promote a false sense of security to their adherents. However, sometimes the grooming is not taking, and such politicians are unaware of what many of the silent people are thinking, because such politicians are too wrapped up in what the vocal regular people are thinking and saying. They are having a Golden party together and not noticing that there is tumult brewing outside their privy walls. And like HG Tudor says, some just are not listening to some of their advisors, when they create their political platform and their message.
They speak on platforms that pleases themselves, NOW, and not on platforms regarding how other people, live, without the breathing room, nor the space nor the cushion of privilege, and whom do not own international companies, nor an abundance of stocks and property, and so, do not give a flying hoot, about international trade, nor many of the bad products they are forced to buy, because of these trade pacts. And many of the silent people resent the jobs that they lose, because of these trade pacts and they resent the freedom of speech that they lose because of these trade pacts, and the smaller and smaller piece of the pie, that they are being presented, also, etc. etc., and they think about and are alarmed about how such platforms will impact the rest of their lives in a negative way, as composed to the lives of the few wealthy and abundantly thriving people.
Also, a good message, may not be the `right` message, at any given time, from some of these Politicians. Like when Hillary Clinton was running for President, she believed the woman President issue was bigger than it was. And she harped on it. Sure, some people find it interesting, but very few lose sleep over it. She ignored some of her advisors as well, including the more cleverer Narcississt, her own husband, Bill, it is said. More pressing issues were on the mind of the silent people. LIke jobs. Like home ownership. Student debt. Like the homelessness of many people that are brought over here, but not supported by the groups that bring them over here, and are essentially left at the doorway, so to speak, of so many average people, that are then having to slice up more and more pieces of the same portion of their allotted pie to sustain so many people coming over and brought over to this country, and passed off, and many regular people are finally revolting, and often silently.
It is not just hate, and it is not just racism, and it is not just ignorance: it is also just mathematics: You can only divide up and take away so much from hard working people, before the anger sets in, and a revolt starts brewing. To denigrate how many regular people feel and see things, only as just hate and ignorance and racism, etc,. is just blame-shifting. If I brought one pie for five people, ok. And then later on, I brought the same size pie for 10 people, hmmm. And then, next, I brought the same size pie for …how long can this go on??? Those that want to revolt have to remain silent, because it is not politically correct to say one has had enough, and one does not want to take smaller and smaller pieces of the same allotment of the pie, with absolutely no end in sight. So it is a silent revolt that catches many of the High and Mighty vocal proponents, and a number of their less privileged, but big picture, followers, (a number that is declining), by surprise. And the pitcher is less that half empty for everyone else, privilege wise and vision wise, and so they are seething just beneath the surface. For now.
Because, many of the silent regular people have looked over the mountainside, and they took a very long look at the big picture, and, in their view, there was little over there for them to embrace, especially with the pattern that they have seen impacting their own lives, decade by decade. And so, if some international conglomerates and some uber wealthy people were to lose a couple of nickels because of Brexit, many regular people will enjoy a moment of schadenfreude, at the least, and pure unadulterated joy, at the most. And if wars comes from Brexit, many people secretly want a fight anyway, including some women. So that argument will not work on them. And that is why Boris won the election. And that is why Donald won the election. Pi has always been an important number in mathematics. No matter how one slices it. And with both Boris and Donald, we have Pie Politics, the importance of which was misunderstood by their political opponents.
Princess:
If you want to see a charismatic narc take down a dreary one, watch Farage’s epic takedown of Rompuy on YT. It encapsulates the reasoning of people who wondered why folks in Brussels got to decide how to dispose of taxes from people in Britain.
I’ll stop here, since HG didn’t want this to turn into a Brexit dispute, but I think it’s fascinating as an exercise in colliding narcs.
Thanks Violetta. I will take a look. I just want to say that I never discuss these people and what they do according to their personalities and need for power, etc, , in case I sound like I am bumbling on here. I told HG Tudor many, many months ago that it is unfortunately very dangerous to talk about such both off line and on other sites, and I only feel safe enough only on here at Narcsite to present some of my thoughts, which could be controversial, and I am so glad that I finally have a place to have my say, publicly, at least once, for the first time in my life, as one of the more silent people walking about, before free speech and socially controversial speech is no longer allowed anywhere. I mostly just watch and never discuss. I picked up more courage, from the example of HG Tudor. It feels very much like a catharsis for me to personally say something about these people and their arena, for at last once in my life. I have finally thrown my voice into the ring.
Violetta: I am listening to clips on Farage. Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! hahaha. HG Tudor says it depends on what type of Narcissist is also a consideration. This guy is my type of Narcississt, that sure knows how to go for the jugular. lol!!!! Where has he been all my life? Haha: Here is just one minute and 27 seconds of him:https://youtu.be/bypLwI5AQvY?list=WL
UK politics can be so much more fun than our drab US version. Look on YT for footage of Parliament. It’s almost an art form.
Someone has actually got a picture of Ted Bundy on here. Really !!!!
From: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7791119/Humiliated-Labour-leader-Jeremy-Corbyn-refuses-accept-blame-partys-crushing-defeat.html
Jeremy Corbyn was pictured leaving by the back exit between bins at Islington Town Hall today after refusing to accept the blame for Labour’s election catastrophe yesterday – despite a poll identifying his leadership as the biggest factor in the party’s worst defeat since 1935.
After his utter humiliation at the polls, Mr Corbyn resisted pressure to quit immediately, saying he would cling on for several months to allow his party to ‘reflect’ on the reasons for the defeat.
In an astonishing interview he declined to say sorry to the dozens of MPs across the North and Midlands who lost their seats as a result of Labour’s failure to appeal to working-class voters.
One of yours, alright, HG.
Question: how do you have a Labour Party that fails to appeal to the working class?
Indeed Violetta. He singularly fails to listen. Of those who shifted from Labour to Conservative, 17% said it was because of Brexit, 43% said it was because of their dislike of Corbyn. He is notoriously intransigent because he always believes he is right and failed to listen to various advisors within his own party.
That worked out well for him didn’t it?
For American readers, “leaving by the back exit between bins” means he went through the garbage cans or dumpsters out back.
Positively emblematic.
Imagine that someone bakes a cake using a hasty recipe of unknown ingredients. Then the cake falls flat in the middle, tastes terrible, and the side effects of eating it are mostly unknown.
The sensible thing to do would be to throw the cake away. Then the original recipe could be more carefully considered and altered before another replacement cake recipe was discovered.
Why would you force people to eat the failed cake? Even worse, why would you get the bumbling incoherent Swedish chef from The Muppets to force people to eat the failed cake?
This is how I see Brexit. It’s a bad recipe and the awful cake that came out of it needs to be thrown away.
Also, I actually like the Swedish chef, and it’s not really fair to compare him to Boris.
That amused me, WN.
What’s your opinion on Brexit, HG?
Internationally, an act of self-harm.
How so?
I will answer you but I am not turning this into a Brexit discussion, just so you are aware.Many people overlooked one key factor about the EU which you would struggle to attribute a monetary value to, and that is there absence of war between member nations for 70 years. Furthermore, the EU is a significant trade bloc and collectively wields significant “clout” on the world stage. With the Uk removing itself from this collective power, that in itself is a problem. It will instead turn to looking at trade agreements with Commonwealth nations such as Australia (not as easy trading with a nation on the other side of the planet) and India. Whilst India is an emerging economy, it will doubtless seek visa relaxation as a condition of a trade agreement with the UK. How does that sit with “taking back control of our borders”? Naturally the US is seen as an obvious increased trade partner and President Trump heralds such a move, but with President Trump he will say one thing now and then shift position later if it suits him. POTUS will do what suit him first, the US second and then everybody else will come a distant third, so Johnson pinning his hopes on the US is far from a guaranteed success. What about China? The relations between UK and China will take some thawing before an increase trade agreements can be addressed, so that is an uphill struggle and Hong Kong and its protests will prove a problem. I know from many individuals that I have spoken to in certain positions of influence that they similarly regard the act as one of international self-harm.
Brilliant, as always HG. Well said x
Thank you A383.
I have wondered your position regarding Brexit as well, HG. Thank you for expanding. Your point of view is always educational and enlightening. You are a fascinating man.
I agree.
Although he is an ass clown like our ass clown here (same Australian campaign manager- levido)
The policies are pretty straight forward, I can see why people voted, be interesting to see what free trade deals start being negotiated.
According to aus an agricultural free trade is imminent. UK used to be our biggest trading partner.
There are pros and cons to everything
I guess it’s a wait n see approach.
Totally agree HG, I had this exact conversation yesterday. Anyone in any doubt of the importance of the EU should read W Churchill books, or listen to them on audible, even better.
Ok, thanks HG. As with Trump over here, the propaganda focused on immigrants being criminals and terrorists, or at least living off benefits.
You’re welcome
Violetta in most cases you can’t even claim benefits if you have not worked for at least 5years.
But all over YouTube you will find these ignorant comments about the “Islams coming over claiming benefits without contributing to the country!”
Thanks HG, I’m glad 🙂 I was surprised to see that Boris won the UK election by such a large margin. From the comments I’ve seen on social media and the critical views about Boris, I thought that Corbyn would have more votes. I think that, generally, all over the world, there is a collective pessimism and fear about what the future holds, and in that kind of ‘doom & gloom’ atmosphere, the majority of voters leans toward conservative attitudes.
It’s been a while since I have commented here, however, I still regularly visit narcsite and enjoy reading the articles and comments. I haven’t commented because of time constraints, and also because I wanted to practice, and add to, the powerful knowledge you provide. In addition to ‘knowing the narcissist’, I felt I really needed to ‘know the empath’ better too.
Lately, I’ve been reading about several therapies and theories, such as schema therapy, and also defence strategies and how they develop. This has included how defence strategies are related to attachment in early childhood. I find all of these aspects very interesting and personally helpful in unravelling my own thoughts, emotional responses and behaviours.
Indeed, when it comes to underlying ‘schemas’ and defence strategies, the root causes of their development, i.e. to protect the self from psychological distress and trauma, arise for similar underlying reasons for both the narcissist and the empath, however, they manifest in very different ways.
This knowledge has helped me to better understand and even relate to narcissists, in an intellectual way that is. This does not mean they are ‘safe’ – not at all. But it does provide insight into why and how the narcissism developed. You always need to keep in mind though, that just because you know why the tiger bites doesn’t mean you can step into its cage, so to speak.
HG, I still find that your descriptions and strategies really cut through in a practical sense. The graphic clarity in your explanations provide insights that resonate in a way that more ‘general’ theories don’t. Still I find that it helps to augment all of these ‘insights’ together to reach greater understanding.
I have also looked into ways to make empaths feel more empowered. This has also made a difference to my own mindset. There are simple ways to change our own thinking and self-reflection.
For example, when most people think of what “sensitivity” means, they may associate the word with “fragility” or “weakness”. These associated terms then create an inner belief system in the person thinking in these terms. They then learn to believe their own definitions (or society’s definitions) of what “sensitive” means. In reality though, being sensitive does not equate to being fragile. It is anything but that in many cases. The sensitive person can see, and understand, and learn, and bounce back from some very traumatic and difficult experiences. So, if you change your inner belief system to equate “sensitive” with “resilient” or “strong”, you can change the resulting emotional inner reasoning. You can also have stronger inner boundaries in place that prevent you from internalising how narcissists attempt to make you feel.
Anyway, I find all of this information very valuable and also interesting. Thank you for all your insights HG.
You are welcome.
HG,
Just another short comment about Brexit – and I know you don’t want to turn this into a Brexit discussion – is that Johnson’s slogan, “Get Brexit Done” is a dangerous red herring. By planting this “policy” seed in UK people’s minds, it is harder for anyone else to say, “no, let’s just ditch Brexit altogether”.
This is another telling way that narcissists operate. They create momentum and conditioning in people’s minds with short, easy to remember, easy to understand, cult-like sayings and attitudes. They play to people’s wants and most people in the UK probably want Brexit to just be over and done with. It “looks” like the easy way out and most people feel more secure with the illusion of an easy way out than to go through initial personal pain that will ultimately lead to greater personal autonomy and growth.
Dearest HG and WiserNow: But, Brexit was duly voted for, according to how politics works, by the populace: for Brexit. Those did not want Brexit, and are on the losing side, even if they are correct in their overall reasoning, can not then pretend that they have an epistocracy, like HG`s reader Lisa desires, and thus boldly and brazenly carry on as if the voters were ignorant, and now the wise losers must stop Brexit, as has been going on for years now over Brexit, without paying a price. It is an insult to the side that won the vote. Just like in the U.S., according to how politics works, Donald Trump was duly elected by multi-millions of people for President, but, for 4 years straight almost, the losing side has behaved as if they are wiser and the voters were ignorant, and therefore the losing side has been trying to remove the President Donald Trump by any means possible, from day one, as if they are wearing blinders. And a price is going to be paid for that activity. Because, it is an insult to the side that won the vote. All this type of raucous and harsh and disturbing activity and actions from the side that lost, but considers itself the wiser side, going against the winning side, that the losing side calls ignorant and unsophisticated, builds animosity and hostility and anger and leads predominately to one thing: Civil War. Which is a bad thing, if one does not want Civil War in ones Nation. And, conversely, it is a good thing if one does want Civil War. And many people secretly do want Civil War, although: (It is not political correct to say that one wants to physically fight, and that one has nothing to really lose anymore, and so one is ready to bring the physical fight, rather than keep `taking it.` But, many are going to want to physically fight out). And so that Civil War is coming. Tiny bubbles are already rising up in the caldron, from the polarizing heat of it all.
PrincessSuperEmpath,
You raise some interesting and thought-provoking points. I think much of what you have pointed out shows the ways a democracy, while probably still the most equitable form of government possible (even though it is *not* equitable in all cases), is not ideal. It’s not ideal, however, it is the form of government that has ‘promise’ or potential to provide equitable outcomes for all.
Overall, I’m mindful of HG not wanting a drawn out discussion about Brexit, so I’m going to talk about referendums in general instead. Referendums put a ‘policy decision’ to the general public and the public then votes yes or no. Keeping in mind that the general public (in the main) are not political experts nor do they have inside knowledge about things like trade, defence, finance, law, etc, I think that referendums should only apply to issues that are conducive to a black and white, yes or no opinion. Such issues are more easily contained in a political sense and more easily decided upon by each voter in a personally ’emotional’ or social sense.
I think referendums can be successful for issues such as, “should abortion be legal” or “should same-sex marriage be legal” etc. When it comes to issues such as Brexit though, I don’t think it should ever have been put to the people in the form of a referendum because it is far too complex in a variety of ways that the public have no personal knowledge about, yet it will ultimately affect them all. Issues like Brexit is why we have a government in the first place. The government is “supposed” to comprise of political leaders who are “experts” and whose main focus is to form policies and laws for the public and on behalf of the public.
I understand your point about those being for Brexit as being the ‘winning’ side and so their vote should be respected, however, if the underlying reasoning for having the referendum in the first place is faulty or poorly understood, then what is there to ‘win’?
I understand your argument and I agree to a point, but I think that the years of indecision and political difficulties following the Brexit vote indicate that the initial decision-making for the idea of Brexit was flawed. Because of all the difficulties and also the potential of harm to the UK, I think some form of abolishment of the initial referendum policy should be possible or open for discussion.
I think your argument is a bit like saying that if a couple gets married, they should uphold their initial vows no matter what because divorce is not an option. So, if the couple sees that their initial decision to marry was not a good one and they have arguments and conflicts in the years to follow, there is no chance for divorce because that would be an ‘insult’ to the original decision to marry.
Regarding your points comparing the vote for Trump with the vote for Brexit, I think the two ‘votes’ can and also can’t be compared. They can be compared in the sense that there are winning and losing sides. They can’t be compared in the sense that voting in an election is different from voting for a referendum. Different in a technical sense and also in the sense of political and social consequences.
PrincessSuperEmpath,
I’m not a political expert in any sense. I am just a commenter here giving my two-cent opinion, and I don’t pretend to have the answers. As an empath though, I would much rather use reasoning and learning to make progressively equitable decisions and avoid civil war or any other kind of war. Physical conflict to me is a failure – it’s a failure of intelligence and human compassion. I would rather admit that a referendum or election was flawed and needs to be revised and altered than to persist with the initial premise even if it results in unresolvable tensions, conflict and potential dangers.
I understand your comments and I respect your views. I am not here to argue or say either of us are right or wrong. I would like to believe that humans are intelligent enough to resolve their problems without conflict, but I also know that is idealistic thinking.
The problems with the Brexit referendum were
1. It was asking a binary question of a non-binary issue , and
2. Cameron never believed the Leave vote would win and granted the referendum as a sop to appease Eurosceptics in the Conservative party.
Basically, imagine this
“We can have at evening at home, or we can go out. What would you like to do?”
“Hmm. Well I know what an evening at home looks like. What does going out look like?”
“No idea. Just not being at home.”
“Sounds great, let’s do it.”
Later.
“Why have you pushed me into a river?”
“You wanted to have an evening out. You are not at home, so this is an evening out. Don’t blame me for giving you what you asked for.Toodle-pip!”
Your analogies are such an awesome communication tool, HG. I think I’ll just stay home!
Thank you MB.
HG,
You have summed it up very well, and the idea of being pushed into a river on an evening out made me laugh. I don’t think anyone knew what Brexit would look like yet they were supposed to vote either for or against it. That’s crazy.
I’m surprised that Brexit was ever presented as a referendum. As you say, it’s not a binary issue at all. I would have thought that there would be some kind of parliamentary test that it would have to pass before being made into a referendum and that it would have definitely failed that test because it’s just too big and complex.
WiserNow, I totally agree with everything you have written. Also, wasn’t the referendum-that -should-never-have- been meant to be advisory?
Yes.
Thanks, HG
HG, Perfect analogy. Funny too.
True.
Humble, aren’t we? lol. Whenever you respond to a flattering comment by agreeing with it, I find myself transported back to my time with MRN.
I am giving people validation, quit moaning!
Ha very generous, HG. I never would have guessed that you were validating me. To me it looks like modesty is not part of your vocabulary but I see you are teaching all of us a new language. The words look the same but their meaning is different.
It is all learning here.
No need for modesty.
I thank the God you don’t believe in that we will never have an evening out together, HG. I don’t care how pretty you are in person.
I mean, I can swim quite well, thanks to the Girl Scouts, but who needs this kind of stress?
WiserNow. I am sure these games feel brilliant to powerful people when they are being played. But, sometimes these same powerful people overplay their hand. Grandiosity. Magical Thinking. Blind Spots. Entitlement. Omnipotence. Just like in the U.S., many powerful people felt that it was interesting for Donald Trump to run for President, especially during the early stages. He kept the race from being boring, or something like that, they boasted in the political arenas. He sells newspapers and people are actually watching the debates, and TV ratings are up, the media said in delight. Plus, a certain number of candidates are needed, of course, to make things look right, to look legit, so to speak, and The Donald was just supposed to be a filler candidate. So, he was coddled month after month, as a non-threat, a space filler, while other classical candidates fell by the wayside. Plop, Plop, Plop. But, then, to the surprise of even Donald himself: He won. BOOM!
So certain Powers in Britain played around with the idea of Brexit also, and dangled the idea over the people to vote on, and overplayed their own hand, then. The games are always being played, yes? And now the same powerful group, that lost their little game with the populace, want to put the genie back in the bottle and say, `Hey everyone, we were just playing around. You people, when given the option, were not actually supposed to vote to leave the E.U. But, the game is over now, and so, be good little people and go home and we all will stay in the E.U.` lol. And this losing group have been trying to squeeze the populace back into the E.U. box ever since. And are hated by the winning side of the populace for doing this to them. Well, some entities grow beyond control when they are let out of the box, whether the box openers like it or not.
A risk was taken, a wager was made, and the result was unexpected, right? So, maybe the losing side can place the genie back in the bottle, right? Who knows. But, the way the losing side has carried on, in both the U.S. and Britain, has already caused a lot of bad blood with the winning side. More polarization. And that bad blood can not be replaced into the same body again, and then stuffed back into the same box again. And that bad blood is still flowing. It could perhaps be staunched in other eras, but this is the era of polarization. So, now the losing side that made the wager has a problem. They lost, and now they want to call foul. Call foul. But, no one is really listening on the winning side, as you can see. What boxes are being planned to be opened next? What games are going to be tested next? You play a game. You open a box, and who knows what will come out. Perhaps, lessons learned. But, I doubt it. Because of: Grandiosity, Magical Thinking. Blind Spots. Entitlement. and feelings of Omnipotence. Snares lie therein.
Princess, not sure when you moved to NYC, but since Hillary was the (carpetbagger) senator and The Donald has been his grandiose self there for decades, a lot of people couldn’t stand either one. I know people on both sides who voted for the simply because he/she wasn’t the other.
Then there are the ones who voted for obscure parties founded by Benedictine monks or some such thing, because they just couldn’t choose their favorite narcissist.
Violetta: People often say why they voted for one candidate versus the other, in the political arena. One evil versus another evil, or the better evil and all that, is what most people usually say. I pay no mind to what they say, but what they do. Many people voted for Donald Trump, and told no one ahead of time. And to this very day, they tell no one. And they have that right. The vocal voices sometimes represent the majority of people, but in this case, the vocal people did not represent what voters were actually going to do in the privacy of their voting selection, that day. Many people misled the exit pollers as well, when questioned, more than ever before it is said, during the past election. The operative word being, Misled. So much for exit poles and so much for people vocalizing how they would vote and why, and for those that take stock in all that. People will throw off the hunt, so to speak, if they feel it is expedient for them to do so, for whatever reason. And, people will mislead others in conversations.
Dearest HG: I do believe you, of course, when you say the action/vote was given up as a sop. My, oh my. I looked up the word sop, since I did not know what it meant. So, according to the losing side, Cameron et al blundered with their sop, and now, here we are. HG, I saw Cameron being interviewed for a couple of minutes on the news a few days ago, and he said he is fully behind Boris. I guess Cameron has to say that also since it was his own sop that started all this, in a way? Sop is a wonderful word. lol. Thank you for that: ` sop |säp|
noun
1 a thing given or done as a concession of no great value to appease someone whose main concerns or demands are not being met : my agent telephones as a sop but never finds me work. ` ~~google dictionary
Princess—you run for president. I’ll be your Vice President and we can wear cute shoes and carry nice purses. HG can do all the work.
Lorelie: HG will be our expensive illustrious advisor. You and I shall come off as very smart and wise, ALL the time, and we shall never be duped nor trounced by any sops that come our way.
I am not expensive.
I was contacted by a reader yesterday who explained that they had been offered by a particular set up a 30 minute consult for US $ 275 with regard to narcissism. The reader did not feel that it represented any decent value and would not come close to imparting the level of information that I do and rejected the offer. This was met with a response of “Not everyone can afford us.” even though the rejection was nothing to do with being able to afford it and all to do with not wanting to be ripped off.
I concur. Literally no one offers the value you do HG, nor the genuine, accurate information or actionable solutions. Not to mention the many layers of insight offered via your massive quantity of free information. It is truly remarkable.
Thank you FYC.
HG—since you aren’t expensive (your words) just how much is a weekend escort fee?!! Hahahaha! Are the guys in Vegas pricier?
Princess—I just saw this re, our upcoming ruling of the world. I just want to wear cute shoes and you & HG can do all the hard work!
Screw president. When HG takes over the world, K will be his fact-checker and Narchivist, I’ll be his copy editor, and we’ll figure out the other appointments later.
Dearest HG Tudor: I did speak over-broadly. Please pardon me. What I meant was that Lorelei and I would pay you substantially for the value of being our advisor, in that humbling circumstance of our being rulers of a great Nation. Of course, your prices our incredibly reasonable and of great value, here. But, when Lorelei and I are ruling vast quantities of lands and people, we just want you to be remunerated accordingly, as our very special advisor and for your council to us. We will ensure that you are very well-paid, both for your advice and council, as you would deserve, and also as a poison pill. This is what I meant by expensive in that overly broad statement. Specifically: Expensive for any of our opponents, whom would surely covet you and would surely attempt to steal you away from us, to not be able to afford to, at the very least. That is what I meant in my broad brushstroke comment. And not at all a comment about your very reasonable fees on here. So, this post is the interpretation of what I said, in the earlier post with Lorelei. Plus, I have had neither coffee nor tea, yet this morning. And so, I shall remedy this matter also, right now.
Thank you for clarifying, PSE.
Violetta: HG wants the freedom of power without the encumbrance of the throne, currently. And your promises are easy to make. But, what actual steps have you made in regards to establishing any sort of agreement with HG Tudor, as of this date, Violetta? Lorelei and I have already moved speedily and have Chartered the following entities for our kingdom: Manchester City (please keep this straight, Violetta, it is very important which team, and it is the least one should be able to remember, regarding an important person`s likes and dislikes, yes?), Creed, Tesla, The best Italian vacation villa, Wellies, Unlimited free meals for himself and all of his guests at Antique Garage, in NYC, and a few other non-disclosable benefits for his comfort and entertainment. Also, his renumeration package, that we presented to him, is beyond compare. We have some other additional and incredible poison pills in place, as well, Violetta, because as we posted earlier, we absolutely knew that he would be coveted and that attempts to lure him away from our kingdom, would commence immediately, once his status was known. But, we moved first. And we moved well. Value waits for no one. We wish you the best.
Catching up Princess.. I’ve never been to Manchester City. Do we get to go while on our political tour? I truly don’t think it sounds exciting but the villa in Italy is an upgrade. How did I miss all this a few days back?
Princess, I will not fight with you and Lorelei over HG, because we all know that regardless of our respective incentive plans, he’ll do whatever he wants.
Violetta, we admire your considered response. We very much prefer to not `Come in Peace,` when possible.
democracy is a faillure, whomever is put at the head of a state will fail, narcissist or not. Even with the best of intensions and will, it can’t work. to make a country function correctly you need experts it deferent fields not, people who can sell watter in the ocean.
i advocate for epostocracy.
in different = it deferent.
epistocracy= epostocracy. -_-‘
Can someone tell me if the media predicted this election result correctly over there, from what you were hearing all along, or are many of the people surprised? And Boris won by a landslide and with control in the Parliament, I believe it is the Parliament, where political control is housed over there. Is this all a surprise, or was this result already discounted by the populace, and it is just a regular day over there? I hear that Brexit can not be stopped now except by some unforeseen emergency. No more games regarding Brexit, I am hearing.
PSE – I cant speak for anyone but myself, but I was surprised. My feed, was full of anti-Tory/pro-Labour propaganda. I thought the young vote would have more influence than it did, and I didn’t expect the “red wall” to fall as much as it did, so I didn’t expect the big majority that occurred. I thought it would be closer, and at one point, near the end, I even thought Labour may get in! So, yes, I was surprised!
I was shocked too. And like unicorn, my feed was also rammed full with anti tory/pro labour stuff.
I’m still on shock over the red wall. My own families’ constituency in the North went blue.
Renarde – same here! Never in a million years would I have thought my old constituency “oop norf” would go blue!
Sad times Unicorn but as it’s been pointed out, the mandate has only been leant to them.
Watch Keir Starmer btw.
blackunicorn123
Multigenerational Democrats voted for Reagan in 1980 because he wasn’t Carter. I suspect that’s what happened oop norf.
What do you think re Keir and R B-L today Ren? Keir has to be a greater. And he recognises the threat that is R B-L so has got rid of her at first opportunity. To be fair, I haven’t read the tweet so it could be entirely justified.
Alexis
Funnily enough, I was just pondering that very point myself.
My gut instinct is that he was waiting for the opportunity, which she unarguably presented to him, and then he struck.
So it was multi faceted in my book.
The Education Secretary has, I believe only one, and let’s repeat ONE GCSE. She was a remnant of Corbyn’s Cabinet. How on earth she had been elevated to that position is utterly beyond bonkers. That woman had literally NO understanding of academia.
Keir saw it. And he waited until enough rope had been given before she hung herself. Then he can now do many things.
1 Prove he is a strong leader by quite rightly sacking the idiot
2 Prove that Labour has finally got a grip on Anti-Semitism. Which as you know, many people have been CRYING out for.
3 -Because of the above, he can use the whips to shut up the neo-commie Markists, the Red Left, once and for all
4- He proves that his his eye on the ball, Boris isn’t. Cummings et al.
Strong man. He would’ve been watching her. She just made it easy for him. Because she really is THAT stupid.
I think what is really intresting is that when he became Leader, he could have immediately reshuffled the Shadow Cabinet. But he didn’t. And why is that? He wanted to see where the fault lines were.
Clever fellow. Next PM. Better than that thundercunt Boris.
Very possibly a Greater.
Oooooh yay! Yay! Yay! Yay! Wahoo I reckon you are absolutely spot on with all of this Renarde! Bloody well said I say! Nice one! I agree with it all. Politics is getting very interesting.
Alexis
You’ve raised a really interesting point re Keir. I just want to clarify a few things. For precision.
1 – I cant seem to spell Marxist. Got it now.
2 – Keir is attempting to shut them up but they won’t go quietly. He knows this.
3- Where is the more capable Milliband? Cos hes a Marxist too.
4- R B-L was a threat of sorts. I heard she had really got herself in with the Teaching Unions. I’d entirely forgotten she had run as Leader herself.
5 -Prophetic Ren strikes again! I had entirely forgotten that I predicted Keir was a man to watch in December.
Yeah, he’s going to have a fight on his hands. For sure. But he must unite Labour and be an effective opposition.
Ot will be intresting to observe what happens over the next few days.
We obviously know Boris is aware. The Gammons adore him. But if Keir is ALSO aware, then we ate truly witnessing something very special and very unusual.
Hg. Is Keir aware?
HG is being extremely tight lipped on this one. Being the Ultra that he is, he knows that politics are about to get very special in the UK and so he’s sitting and waiting for his moment. His silence speaks volumes!! A political narc/when narcs collide – jees! it’s going to be huge for the UK and huge for HG.
I’m literally too excited for this. I’m not a narc so I don’t understand at all why anyone would want to hurt someone innocent or someone who was no challenge to them. It’s just a steamroll every time. I don’t get it at all. But then I don’t get the need to feel powerful, hmm well maybe a teeny teeny bit ahah. I don’t go on the attack and if I go on the defence, there is also no fun in steamrolling someone either. I want it to be a challenge because it then feels incredibly rewarding to ‘beat the bitch’ (it’s usually a bitch). So to watch this play out between Keir and Boris (espcially being a labour supporter), I for one cannot wait. I want to know what goes through their heads as they sus each other out and play mind chess with each other. Hmmm I may even have to consult on this. I don’t think I can wait for it to happen. I’m just too bloody inpatient! I have learned to be patient, HG has taught me to do this, it doesn’t come naturally though but it is probably one of the single best lessons I’ve learned from him. Sit and wait.
Alexis
Total agreement. If Keir is a G then utterly fascinating! It will be like watching a game of chess by two masters.
Keir is all over Boris at PMQs. Utterly on top of his brief. Comes prepared with graphs and everything which he brandishes at Boris. Its bloody brilliant!
And what does Boris do? Starts spouting Latin and Greek in the chamber. Well Bully for you.
Any fool can do that. See. Tempus omnia revelat.
It’s coming Boris. You are not Alexander the Great.
You do realise you called yourself a fool?
Hg
Yes. I rather think that was the point.
I am a fool. So is Boris. But at least I have better hair. And a better body.
I can’t speak Greek though but then again, I suspect Boris’ knowledge of Physics is pedestrian!
You’re such a rogue!
I thank you!
Hg
That reminds of a very funny conversation last night. Boris and his press ups. Who on earth is he trying to kid?
He got his happy snappers around and got them to take a picture whilst ‘planking’.
‘Hey look guys! I’m really fit!’ Only a moron would think he could get away with that! Thing is, Boris isn’t a moron but he has, what did you say? No sense of decorum. Yes. That’s it.
I bet Starmer could not stop laughing. I certainly didn’t. Still am.
Completely undignified. Disgraceful.
And Mein Gott! All the money he must have and the fucking suits! Where did he buy them, C&A? Get a fucking tailored one! Cos Starmer is looking far better than you.
But that’s his schtick. Poor, Bumbling Boris who is endlessly stuck in the Tripos at Oxford. People fall for this.
Incredible!
Renarde:
I think you’ll enjoy this reader comment on a Yahoo article about Trump:
“If a garlic pickle was left in the gutter next to a fetid sewer for a year and then was eaten by a raccoon with rabies, passed through its digestive track and came out the other end, I would vote for that pickle before I’d vote for trump.”
This was a reply to someone asking if Democrats honestly thought Biden had it in him to make a great president. I was glad to.see I was not the only one of that mind, because truthfully, Biden reminds me of Nigel Farage’s remark to Rompuy: “you have the personality of a damp rag.”
Btw, per the BBC:
Leadership sources, though, insist the sacking was not part of some grand plan.
They say Mrs Long-Bailey had to go because she repeatedly refused to remove her retweet of Maxine Peake’s article when asked to do so.
Of course it wasn’t planned.
of course no hmmmmm but also a sign of Ms L-B’s sense of entitlement in not removing it too. A mid-range I would imagine
Vi
Just read ‘garlic pickle’ and cant stop laughing!
Spot on I say! Genious level of snurk.
I wish I’d written that corker!
Alexis
You may be spot on with your diagnosis on Long-Bottom.
I am not an elitist snob because I came from the proverbial bog standard comp, but how on EARTH do you get to be Education Secretary with one GCSE?
That really does point to a special kind of stupid.
It is interesting how Boris can be a greater when he has no sense of decorum. If I didn’t know he and Kier were Ns and I were to interact with them regularly in RL I think they are both types I would be able to get along with pretty well and I’d definitely have a crush on Boris but not Kier yet I’d respect Kier far more.
Ren, I’m sensing you’re not a fan of Boris.
….Alexis!
What the hell do you mmmeeeaaannn you would have a crush on Boris!!??!
Are you okay???
Well post knowledge I just can’t have feelings for Ns, there is just nothing there any more.
If I had no knowledge of them I’d definitely have a crush on him.
Alexis
You know I love you and both you have I have had top level banter on here.
But Boris!!!?? Over Keir?.
Are you SERIOUSLY saying that on a random night out where shaggability is in order, that you would have the spindly fucker, port bellied, pencil dicked, Greek spouting fuck puffin over you as opposed to the The Starmer?
No, I don’t like The Puffin.
It isn’t so much that he is an utterly irrelevant PM, it’s more the fact he has eleventy billion babies and WHY in the NAME OF GOD women (can we say that now?), that they keep on going with this utter cockwomble? WOMEN! Keep your legs both closed and crossed. No good will come of it!
That being said, I would welcome a conversion with him. IF, he could completely drop the facade and recognise me as the Weaponised Empath I am.
Now that would be far more interesting, than having four minutes of jab jab jab; roll on/roll off.
I honesty can’t believe I’ve written that
hahahaah made me laugh but yes, Boris whilst not top of my list, he’d definitely be up there. Kier on the other hand would be close to the bottom of the list.
Alexis
Intresting! Let the good fight commence!
In other news, I have been bizarrely bizarred out by CID. Not personal, I have a witness statement. Happy for them to mail me, I’d print it of, sign and send back.
I’ve given them my email over and over. Oh have you got it? No. Getting bored now. Is it in spam? No. So I finally get en email. Is the statement attached? No.
Right, I’m now fucking out. You incompetent buffoon. I’m not wasting ANY more of my time on this. You had your chances. You fucked it.
If I need to me to stand, which I probably wont, you can get your fucking ARSES in gear. Contact my regional PF and we can take it from there.
Incompetent does not even BEGIN to cover it. I have enough on my plate without having to dealing with these quarter wits.
And that folks, is how the thin blue line fucks it up for innocents. CID? Morse, they ain’t. Half the time, they couldnt find their own arse in the dark with two hands.
Does CID do anything other than daydream, one wonders? If they had half a brain cell, they would be dangerous.
No confidence.
Jaysus! What is going on? Why are they messing around like this Ren?
Alexis
Dunno lovely. When I spoke to them she seemed like a good sort as well.
Bizarre behaviour!
You know what’s grinding my gears atm? It’s the way forces in the UK are operating as mini-fiefdoms. Surely police are police. I’m almost sure the law doesn’t change county to county.
Yes I guess the culture between forces is no different to the culture between different towns and citys.
Alexis
Must be.
HG
On the matter of Boris and now Witch is concerned, I think she requires either intervention, correction or dungeon.
There is only sometimes a person can spout The Illiad to tou before your eyes roll back. Unfortunately not in orgasmic pleasure but more the state that proceedes near total brain death.
If he has ever brought of a woman off in a ‘nose bleed of an orgasm, its probably because he knocked her on the head before she finished herself off.
I’m so glad I got that off my chest. It was praying on my mind
Honestly Alexis I feel hurt and I feel betrayed… of aaalll the white men in the world… Boris?
BO-RIS???
I mean Kier is dry as well. But Boris tho??? Boris??
HG do something!!! 😭
Hahhaha oh no sorry witch. I only want to have sex with him though, nothing more. Not sure if that makes it better or worse?
Renarde:
“Are you SERIOUSLY saying that on a random night out where shaggability is in order, that you would have the spindly fucker, port bellied, pencil dicked, Greek spouting fuck puffin”
Oh, Renarde, I had no idea you were capable of such poetry.
Alexis…
Boris looks like his sperm tastes like thick slimy dog vomit and you’re likely to catch him jacking off while wearing your underwear.
Sex with Boris!?
For why?????!
hmmmm god what have I started lol. I just think he’d be fun and I’m very good at compartmentalising so I could brush any other issues aside. It’s okay though, there is pretty much zero chance of it ever happening.
You think boris is fun?
I think boris would like to be tired up and kicked in the nuts… come to think of it, that would be fun.
But don’t expect him to know how to suck pussy that’s all I’m saying
Goodness it sounds like you’ve been giving this much thought Witch. Sorry I’m just kidding. I reckon he’d be better than you might imagine during both the golden period and devaluation. I’d stick around for both ahaha.
HG could you do an article on ‘Boris in bed’ for us please.
No.
That’s so sexy I can live without the article
HG writing erotica inspired by celebrity narcissists..now that’s an idea!
You only need erotica from one narcissist, thank you very much.
I try to read all Narcsite articles, even things that don’t relate directly to my situation, i.e., divorce and custody battles. If nothing else, it shows me what I was spared by not becoming Wannabe Playuh-Narc’s personal petrol pump.
If, however, HG writes about either BoJo’s or Trump’s amorous antics in triple-X detail, I’ll be skipping those.
Let me be clear on this point. I’d rather listen to Celine Dion murder “I Will Always Love You.” Not Dolly’s quiet, heart-breaking -broken version, but Whitney’s, with all the superfluous cadenze.
There will be nothing to skip, I am busy writing about my own amorous antics, far more interesting.
Alexis,
This conversation cracked me up but HG’s solid “No” on the Boris in Bed story was the cherry on top.
I can kinda almost see the attraction but he looks like a sweaty guy. Not hot in the moment sweaty, more like he needs to shower twice a day sweaty.
I love Boris’ sweat
Ok but HG I’m gonna at least need some 3 way action with Luke Goss as Prince Nuada
hahaha Witch. I think it’s safe to say that as empaths we wouldn’t necessarily be in direct comp for the same man.
@alexis
No competition
But I’m definitely cock blocking Boris
Mercy, I had to laugh at your comment – actually at all the comments. I find Boris disgusting to look at and to listen to. Starmer, however, is much more my type. I like men with brains like steel traps. Apart from the fact that Boris is blowsy and sweaty and dribbles and is blonde (I don’t like blonde men at all – I think they look like little boys), he’s dumb. You can’t say that about Starmer.
So dumb he became Mayor of London and the Prime Minister of the UK. “Bumbling Boris” is an act, he is laughing on the inside. That act is his escape from accountability, the lovable buffoon. He knows how to appeal to the LCD and that is what gets you elected owing to the global resurgence of populism.
HG, There sure are lots of LCD voters out there. I find BoJo anything but a lovable buffoon and I guess he is not laughing so much now that his poll numbers are diving. Question is will he burn it all down the way Trump is.
BU123 and Renarde: I am amazed at how the media can not hardly forecast election results these days. The media also is stirring up a lot of emotions, by having one side actually believing they are going to win, and then be doubly disappointed when they lose. Lots of bad emotions are being created, unnecessarily by the media. I do not know the politics over there, but because HG Tudor covered this person, I knew he was important, and only because of HG, I was not surprised at all that he won. I am ashamed and embarrassed of what is going on in much of journalism the past decade or so. Much of what is called journalism, needs to exit through the back, door by the trash bins, if I am using that phrase correctly as Violetta explained its meaning.
PSE – I think the press should be held more accountable sometimes, I must admit. Some of the “reporting” (read shit stirring) of the Brexit fiasco over the last three years has been despicable. It’s caused much division and hatred. Some of it has hardly been “proper” news at all, and has been more of an excuse to grab headlines and cause trouble. Nobody wins when this is how “news” is handled. Add social media lies and propaganda to the mix and it’s truly toxic.
The narc was watching the election and was pleased with the results hes very against liberal.
Just out of interest HG, how do you feel about so many narcissists and prime ministers running the country, I understand why this happens and it’s nothing new , but just as a person would you rather a normal or more normals we’re running the country ? With your insight into the behaviours as a normal citizen do you think it’s a problem ?
It is necessary to get things done. Of course, how that impacts on an individual depends on whether it is your “kind” of narcissist which holds power.
No that’s not what I mean, I don’t want any of them I’m fed up and have no faith in any of them, regardless of each one being a narcissist. I’m asking you if you would rather see some normals running the country or more normals , it is not true that only a narcissist can get things done or make difficult decisions . I did say normals not extreme empaths. With your understanding of both what would you prefer or think would be better ? It’s not a political question
Normals would struggle, so the answer is no.
I completely disagree with you, but thank you for taking the time to reply
Show me a successful normal head of state.
My thought has always been that less normals enter the political arena due to the intense scrutiny of their private lives, and also the shit slinging and expected lack of co-operation of the others in that arena. A narcissist has no moral issue with lying on the spot, denying, deflecting, or anything required to plow through to what they want to achieve. They also wouldn’t care about the feelings of family members and tell them to suck it up (except to keep the facade intact). You won’t find many emotional eaters in that group. Not so much the normal group who would be affected by those things. Also there are so many narcissists in power already, and not that they have any allegiance to one another (except they will fake it to achieve their own aims) that a normal (and those close to them) quickly become chum in a shark tank. Not saying that it can’t be done as there are many strong non-narcissists, but it’s a daunting task to undertake. I don’t know too many people who don’t have a skeleton or two in the closet (or in their family) that they want exposed, where narcs are ruthless and will shake that shit off (and any collateral damage to those around them) to achieve their aims.
NarcAngel, yes very true, it’s all a bit hopeless isn’t it 😩
Well I don’t know, has there ever been a normal one and if so who ? And did they fail because they were normal or because they were surrounded by a majority of narcissists . Are normals and empaths not going into politics or do they go in but can’t rise to the top due to there being too many narcissists . I don’t know the reason, I appreciate you may say narcissists have the ability to get things done , however is that really what is needed, in all areas , no it is not , it’s not all about that. I just wonder , let’s say , you were world famous and everybody understood this and people like Boris could not be prime minister . I wonder what that would look like.
You answered the question in your first sentence,Lisa.
I consider myself a normal (even though far from conventional) in the contexts we are usually discussing on this blog, i.e. someone having narcissistic traits, some empath traits, and everything in between. That’s my “normal”, natural condition. I am a fiercely independent person with typically strong opinions when I feel they are valid, not shy at all to seek and manifest my self-interests, but I do have strong motivations to get beyond just myself, and simply satisfying myself never leaves me rewarded enough. Also good at smaller entrepreneurship – I have developed a very successful private business out of an originally more structured, hierarchical and controlled job and run a small research team.
But when I have tried to get into higher-level politics, have failed big time. I have perfectly enough of what it takes to succeed in my own small business compartment, which is always based on my self-interests, often involves some significant politics and lots of strategy, but I definitely don’t have what it takes to navigate in high-level politics. Just not in my genes, I think.
I am usually reluctant to generalize, but am very convinced in this case. I don’t think people who are generally well-balanced and achieve success/satisfaction in “ordinary” relationships and everyday life will be the ones running for very large organizations, a country, or the world.
HG, I can’t think of successful Normal political or historical figures because for some reason they all seem to be on the extreme sides of the scales which are either narcissists or empaths. And for some reason, the empathic leaders seem to arise from revolutions or tragedy which are situations that normally require martyrdom (except in the Vatican). I have a hard time seeing empathic leaders in power during the regular course in politics or history. In terms of empathic leaders, the one that comes to my mind right now that is very inspirational is Nelson Mandela. HG am I right to think that he is an empath? He is definitely a very unique person and would absolutely not be a Normal.
What about David Cameron?
Still see The Knowledge Vault.
Hi Liza, In this context, I’ve been wondering if Jacinda Arden in NZ is a normal/empath. At the very least I don’t think she is a Narc unless she is brilliant at conveying empathy cognitively. NZ is hardly influential on the world stage so perhaps one factor, out of many, influencing this is that it has had many/comparatively more empath/normal politicians of influence than other nations.
People who seek power or to rule others (i.e. control) are by definition strongly narcissistic. Empaths and normals do not thirst for control. Political success is not based upon intelligence or capability. Political success is predicated upon possessing tremendous financial resources, strong alliances, charm, cunning, supreme confidence, power, a steely will and a willingness to win at all costs (or at least significant cost). Ego reigns supreme within political echelons in any form of government.
FYC,
Your comment is interesting and it made me contemplate whether “political success” is possible for empaths and normals rather than just narcissists.
“Political success is predicated upon possessing tremendous financial resources, strong alliances, charm, cunning, supreme confidence, power, a steely will and a willingness to win at all costs (or at least significant cost).”
I agree with you about all of the traits you have listed that are needed for “political success”. The one trait that empaths/normals don’t have in your list is “a willingness to win at all costs (or at least significant cost).”
Empaths and normals do not and cannot sustain winning “at all costs”. This kind of “win” is not really a “win” to them – it is a loss. A loss of their self-respect, a loss of their conscience, and a loss of their peace of mind. It represents going against the things they consider important, such as honesty, truth-seeking, justice, decency.
Having said that though, the other aspect that arises in my mind is that a “leader” can only become a leader if those who follow believe in that person’s leadership. So, the voters, for one reason or another, “internalised” their own beliefs (whether conscious or not) of what a “leader” should represent. Maybe the voters don’t believe in either Johnson or Corbyn, but out of the two of them, the majority’s internalised beliefs of what a leader “should be” were better represented by Johnson.
It makes me think of the saying, “a fish starts to stink from the head”. A while back, I was interested in this saying and I did some research to analyse whether this is actually true. In fact, a fish literally starts to stink not from the head, but from the middle, i.e. from it’s intestines or digestive system. That’s the part of the fish that starts to rot first and starts to smell first. This can be translated metaphorically as well. The social aspect of what starts to “stink” first in a hierarchical sense, is not the “leader” (or the head), it is the enablers or the middle-men (the guts) that start to stink first.
Anyway, going back to your comment, it was interesting and made me think of what actually constitutes “political success”, so thank you.
Hello WN, I agree that winning at all cost would not be appealing in the least. I would suggest that cunning (clever by way of deceit), in addition to power (desire for or maintenance thereof) would also be not appealing nor typically found to any appreciable degree in empaths. An empath is certainly not precluded from running for a high office, it just would not be appealing. Let’s say the empath decides to serve the greater good, and hires a team to manage the dirty aspects of politics (most have teams), s/he would still need need to turn a blind eye to a variety of questionable things that commonly take place. Plus, most people only see politics from a far, but within those circles there are many conversations that would be objectionable to an empath and they would not be able to avoid them all and there would be no possibility of changing the greater political pool of sharks.
As for leadership, I would suggest that voters do not select a candidate based upon genuine leadership skills. More often than not, they either vote along party lines or choose the lesser of two evils if not beholding to a party (far smaller percentage) or are issue driven and vote for the candidate that they believe will address their chief issues.
I’ve never heard the expression you quoted about dead fish. But there are many sayings that are not upheld in a literal sense. In business, if middle management is horrible, you will also find a horrible leader. In business, a CEO is accountable to the BOD and shareholders. If that CEO does not ensure they are surrounded by effective management, they are not a good leader. The CEO also influences corporate culture and corporate governance. So if any of these seem to “stink” the CEO is either complicit or wholly incompetent. Caveat: If the CEO is new to a failing organization (rotten middle management), the CEO may be “good”, but their turnaround success is dependent upon making many necessary changes to management personnel (much like amputation of a gangrenous limb saves the body) or to methods or policy. Often an unpleasant, but necessary set of tasks.
An empath can be successful in many areas of business based upon achievement and leadership skills. I know this to be true. But I cannot imagine an empath seeking power and control. That would not be appealing nor a driving factor for the reasons you outlined.
FYC,
Thank you for your reply. If an empath did find themselves in a position of leadership, I agree that “seeking power and control” would not be the main driver or their main purpose. Instead, I think the main driver would be their tenaciousness, truth-seeking, sense of decency and belief in justice. Also, I think they would also need fairly high levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy, so they would also have healthy amounts of narcissistic traits such as pride, confidence and self-determination.
Thinking of this reminds me of the example of child abuse survivors who have courageously fought against the Catholic Church in various countries over many years. They do not outrightly seek power and control over the church, however, they also do not readily back down. They have a long-standing mission that is not to gain power, but to achieve justice.
On the subject of the saying, “a fish starts to stink from the head” – this is a saying used to blame the leader at the top of a heirarchical structure when problems start to occur within that structure. I think it’s an interesting saying, mainly because it makes me think of who or what is to blame for the initial cracks that occur in such a structure. The way I see it, the emphasis in the saying is on “starts to stink”. What elements of the structure *cause* the structure’s downfall? Is it the leadership? Is it the middle-layers? Or is it the base?
In the examples you provide of different scenarios where a CEO is accountable for an organisation’s problems, the problems may already be there or are inherited or are already evolved, etc.
I find it interesting to consider the very initial root causes of the problems. Do the difficulties start because of the leader, or do they manifest because of something else that’s happening in other parts of the whole.
Wiser Now, I’ve been reading some of your your comments with interest. I share similar thought processes on this topic. Google Jacinda Ardern – you’ll find an interview when she became NZ PM in 2017, where she explicitly speaks to a notion of empathetic leadership. She appears to talk the talk and walk the talk, walk the walk…gee, have had a mind blank on the expression…she appears consistent in action and word. I have found the thought of her comforting in these times of Trump, Putin and now Boris and Brexit. Thank you for your interesting comments.
You’re welcome AnneB, and thank you for your comment. I’m familiar with some of the things Jacinda Ardern has said, and in recent NZ tragedies that have received a lot of media attention, she has come across as genuinely empathetic and decisive in her stance to create protective policies and prevent further dangerous situations.
I agree with you that she does seem to walk the walk as well as talk the talk (I think that sounds right :-)).
It’s interesting also, that Ardern is not the first female prime minister in NZ and also, as a female leader, she is not receiving the usual sexist and derogatory backlash that female leaders in other countries are bombarded with. NZ appears to be more respectful and open-minded in this respect.
The support of her as a leader may also enable and promote her own ability to be empathic and instill empathy into the decisions she makes.
The more I think about it, the more I think that leaders don’t operate in a vacuum. They respond to, and their views are shaped by, their own beliefs and also the environment they operate in.
I think Ardern’s style of leadership is comforting too. Narcissists in power have a way of creating unstable and grim outlooks for the future, whether they lead a family or a country.
Wiser, thank you, what you write, especially your last paragraph resonates. I’ve wondered about the interplay of all the factors you mention. I’ve often wondered if NZ, as a modern nation state, got off to a good (empathetic or relatively empathetic) start when the invading colonial powers negotiated a treaty with indigenous leaders, signalling respect, acknowledgement and consideration for the Islands’ existing inhabitants. Contrast with Australia which was declared ‘terra nullus’ by the powers that were at that time. I have to admit it also stood out to me that the anti muslim massacre that took place in NZ, a country with virtually no record of that kind of mass ‘hate’ violence was not perpetrated by a new zealander. I am getting off topic and will move on from this thread now. Happy Xmas WN.
Thanks AnneB, and Happy Xmas to you too.
It’s fascinating, I think, to contemplate the interplay of factors in any given situation or country. Like you say, NZ has an interesting mix of factors. I hope any New Zealanders forgive me if I’m wrong, but to me, the country is both a smaller size and also in a more sheltered location, so it doesn’t receive the same kind of international attention, or attract the same kind of diplomatic relationships with other nations, like say, Australia does.
This is not a criticism, it’s more of an advantage to NZ in some ways. It has meant the country has been able to hold on to it’s own unique ‘personality’ and also maintain its own cultural and political integrity. Also, as you mentioned, it’s quite a young and modern country, in relation to its history since the invading colonial powers. All of these aspects play a role in the society’s collective beliefs and politics.
Thank you also for your comments AnneB. Best wishes to you for Xmas and the New Year 🙂
Hello WN, No need to thank me, I am happy to engage in thought provoking conversation and I appreciate that you always give your comments such consideration. Regarding traits required to succeed as an empath, I would agree with high self esteem. I would suggest that honesty and decency are inherent in empaths and govern conduct at all times (unless empathy is suppressed due to extreme circumstances). Confidence is necessary, but I’m not sure, this is a narcissistic trait per se. I would describe confidence as knowing what you know and being able to rely upon that knowledge and act upon it effectively with certainty. I would suggest that the corruption of confidence, or over confidence (arrogance, hubris), is narcissistic. With regard to pride, one can be proud of another, or one can be proud of applying tenacity and pushing their endurance to succeed at a race or a task. I do not consider this narcissistic. On the other hand, one who is prideful (seeks recognition, superiority and praise) is narcissistic because they would seek this regardless of whether or not there was any real resident knowledge or success. An empath can be proud of someone or something as a point of recognition or gratitude. A narcissist, being overly prideful, is often grandiose, seeks recognition, seeks power/omnipotence, and seeks gain by others’ loss (zero sum game). I see determination in a similar fashion. One can be self-determined when seeking to keep a commitment to self or other, or to achieve a goal that serves others, or to honor their sense of justice. Determination could also be corrupted and become narcissistic if that determination is to win at all cost or to see others fail to establish superiority. I would think the integrity/decency of an empath would keep them from crossing the line to narcissistic behavior.
As to where the downfall of departments or entire organizations begins, what I have seen in some companies are the following: fear, arrogance, rigidity, apathy, greed, complacency, lack of vision, lack of peripheral vision, zero sum culture, and more. All of these can exist at any level of the organization, but it is the responsibility of management at all levels to set the tone and expectations; to reward/recognize good/beneficial behavior, and to address detrimental behavior appropriately for the benefit of the established goals (market/service/product/etc.). Obviously each and every manager and level of management is a gatekeeper and each has their own motivations and agendas. The degree to which traits are narcissistic happens at the individual level and that behavior is either rewarded or not based upon the next layer of management and on up to the BOD. When a culture becomes to cut-throat (win at all costs behavior is rewarded), empaths would likely bow out and find a better company. Narcissists exist in every type of corporation, but thrive (are rewarded) in some corporate cultures more than others.
I still feel like I want to thank you FYC, because you always have a very grounded and thorough way of looking at things. It’s helpful and enlightening to read your comments. I often think to myself, “of course, that’s so true!” You tend to reframe my own views in a logical way and it means I can then see things more clearly.
Yes, traits like pride, confidence and self-determination, like many other traits (both narcissistic and empathic), exist on a sliding scale. A person can have either ‘healthy’ amounts or unhealthy amounts. Also, depending on the situation, the same person can have different amounts at different times. It’s difficult to see or define when a trait changes from healthy to unhealthy, because there is no definitive line that separates the two. However, when a person continually shows behaviours at the ‘unhealthy’ end of the scale, it is obvious.
Similarly, from what you have written, I can see that the cracks that start forming in a social structure or hierarchy can come from any layer of that structure and begin at an individual level. How much these ‘cracks’ take hold and affect the whole structure will depend on a number of factors.
Thanks again for the clarity and logic in your answers FYC.
WN, You are most kind. Thank you and you are always welcome. I enjoy our thought provoking conversations. I agree with you on the sliding scale of traits on so many levels. On a personal level, I want to master awareness of myself and others, and thereby increase my active choices. The challenge lies in ET because ET can momentarily overwhelm reason. I have found my narcissistic traits, such as confidence, have been beneficial in business and life, but I only realized recently reading the Platinum Collection that the same confidence can pose a risk. I am pealing back the layers of the HG onion of knowledge and learn more daily. As for businesses, I agree that “cracks” can occur within the individual or the collective. What I have observed is that the leadership and corporate culture are the functional rudder guiding the ship. If the rudder is corrupt/broken, the boat will lose direction or stall. If enough “cracks” are permitted to persist, the boat will founder.
FYC: I consider your confidence one of your finer qualities. Confidence built upon true worth and value and quality is not narcissistic at all. False pride and overconfidence is Narcissistic, but sound confidence is a valuable trait with positive connotations., and can not be lumped in with other narcissistic traits.
Thank you, PSE, very kind of you.
Here in the USA, the salary for an honest politician is close to nothing, unless you are running for Congress. Here in AZ, the salary for a politician within state level is anywhere between 30-70grand. The successful normal and empathic individuals who should run for politics, won’t because they dont want leave their lucrative businesses and stress their families. What’s scary is here in the USA, in every state, the average lawmaker is not educated, and just wants a job to make them look important.
Ann. So true. The few non-wealthy that win a position in politics, live like the homeless practically, trying to keep 2 residences and all of that. Not much glory and good deeds for them to have the wherewithal to create. In a bad world, it is difficult for a good person to do good, and the converse, in a good world, it will be difficult for a bad person to do bad. I once lived in a very small town, and bad people ended up moving out. Word would get out and their gig would be up. Cops are underpaid as well. The glory wears thins after a while, and then you have largely these hyped-up, high-testosterone guys driving around all day in uniforms and with guns, but with little money from their legal salary: It is a bad scene, just begging to happen. Cops need to be paid much more than they are paid. It is all so incredible but true.
That must be why the world’s so messed up and where the problems arise- from narcissists running things. Most of our problems wouldn’t exist if people weren’t self-centered. Crimes, killing would be minimal if narcs didn’t exist. If people, animals, and nature were treated with kindness and respect in the first place, then narcissism and emotional issues wouldn’t exist. People wouldn’t be able to bribe and deal and cheat their way to the top. Narcissists are in charge of the mess they caused and made it there by cheating because narcissists must win. Don’t insult the world that Empaths are too lowly people to run the world – we are stronger than narcissists- we take their load of abuse everyday- a narc could never take the stuff we shoulder – hence why a narc becomes a narc. Now that you’re enlightening us about the wolves in the flock, we can see how narcs get to the top, how the world is messed up by them, and that these kind of people even exist. We didn’t know we were being conned, we didn’t know our parents, siblings, lovers and bosses were narcs and that most the crime and injustice in this world comes from narcissism, but we do now. Believe me, empaths are strong, and now we’re wise, and being at the top is not about power for us, it’s about rolling up our sleeves and getting the work done the right way, and now we know our enemy is narcissism.
If empaths were as good as you say you are, why aren’t you running the world?
Because we get bullied out of positions by narcs.
I was considering becoming a D.I but I’m scared of what it might do to my soul, not because I’ll be around criminals but because I’ll be around narcs in the police force and i’ll have to listen to them talk shit about about DV and SV victims and how do I get away with throwing a mug at my colleagues?
It makes the empaths leave so only the narcs are left.
But Kel maintained that you are stronger than us, so why aren’t you in the top position to mean such bullying is ineffective or why do you not persevere and rise above it? I do not write this to diminish the effect of bullying, I understand it is horrendous for those on the receiving end of it, but rather that I find comments such as that made by Kel to be emotionally driven, rather than based on logic and as such unhelpful.
You’re right, we are emotionally vulnerable against narcs. The super empath is probably better equip at handling it but the majority of us are not able to cope and function effectively whilst working within a narc environment and certain jobs attract more narcs than others. When you’re the minority it’s hard
Accurate observation.
HG
My comment was not emotionally driven. It is logically stating that narcissists could never take the mental abuse that empaths are able to handle. Empaths are stronger because they actually face the abusive treatment they receive, instead of escaping it by pretending it away as narcissists do. And because we didn’t know narcissism existed before, we didn’t understand why we were treated that way. Now that we’re aware of narcissism, we’re not gullible to responding to it emotionally anymore.
Narcissists are running the world because they cheat their way there. Look at Trump. Look at Putin. Look at all of those type of current leaders. Narcissists must win, they must have power, they’ll do anything to get there – like shoving a little boy into nettles several times so the narcissist boy can lead. To me narcissists are emotional.
They are doing a shitty job of running the world too. And I mean that factually, not emotionally. Their decisions are based on their narcissistic emotions and warped personal perceptions, and not for the good of the world.
Now that the world is becoming aware of what we’re up against, narcissism, we know what to expect from them iin order to defeat them. We really didn’t know people pretend and cheat and perceive things as personal insults before.
You’re offended that I said Empaths are stronger, for example. I didn’t mean it to offend. I meant we’re stronger because we can take abuse, and though it may temporarily hurt us, it doesn’t destroy us.
I meant that since Empaths are aware of narcissism now, we understand our opponents and how to defeat them.
Thank you Kel, I am not offended, many narcissists are arse-wipes, others are effective, I am not here to be Defender of Narcissism but rather to explain it. My response was with regard to the emotional response as opposed to a logical one.
Narcissists indeed pretend it away from your perspective, but most do not from their perspective because they do not see what they are doing as pretence.
We must achieve the Prime Aims, winning is the route to that and power is a route to that, but winning and power are not the ultimate aims, they are part of the Prime Aims.
Narcissist’s decisions are not based on narcissistic emotions, they are based on the narcissistic perspective. Some of those decisions are effective for others and some of those decisions are horrendous for others, but what they are always effective at is the application of control and fuel. That is what the narcissism exists for.
As I have repeatedly explain, your destruction is not the aim, control as part of the Prime Aims is the aim.
Oh wow. This response explains so much about a few particular responses my narc had towards me while expressing my opinion on work. The learning never stops here!
I am example of someone who “rose above it” [ back story : my narc and member of his loyal followers were trying to get me fired… or at the very least, aggetated (they admittedly succeeded on the latter one ) I decided on a plan for myself. I implemented it. I ended up with a transfer to a new location and a promotion). I made the decision for myself to remain with the company as I have no other issues there and love my job. I decided no one was going to bully me out. When I leave (which I now do have an exit plan but it will take time to implement) it will be on my terms only.
Now this has also had reprecussions. A) I still have to associate with him and loyal pack of wolves frequently enough that it can, at times, ruin my ET. B) I’ve kept a sphere of influence open – and to this day I still get indirectly hoovered (knowing what it is though, it’s easy not to take the bait)
Most would advise me to leave so I can be proper no contact. I won’t do it… I have my pride. I decide when I leave not my emotional thinking.
Is this best ? Is this logical ? Is this truly rising above it ? …. I don’t know… I really don’t know what the answer is. I suppose we each have to decide for ourselves.
The. most effective approach would be to leave and go elsewhere. If that is genuinely very difficult to achieve (or take some time to achieve) you need to impose as close to no contact as possible by using the assistance package How to Handle a Narcissist at Work. If you can leave, but you will not do it because of pride, you are falling prey to emotional thinking which is hijacking your narcissistic trait of pride.
Personally, I don’t want to run the world. I’d rather act than direct.
If the narcs were Greaters, it wouldn’t be such a problem. I loved Bill Clinton as a president. His prissy, mid-range wife annoyed the piss out of me, and as for Lesser Trump, I agree with the reader who commented on Kanye’s presidential aspirations, announced during a presumed bipolar episode:
“Look at the bright side. He wouldn’t be any crazier than the current one.”
Fair observations.
Empaths are not running the world because they play by the rules and don’t manipulate their way to the top. It is the longer more difficult route. This doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be effective leaders when/if they make it to the top.
Narcissists are apparently running the world but they are clearly not doing a very good job of it.
I think Beyoncé said it best.
Who run the world ?
Girls.
Well, she got it wrong.
It was a joke….
The song was a bit of one also!
While admittedly my pride is involved.
My decision to stay was purely logical. I am neither staying FOR him nor DESPITE of him. I am staying for me. Because it’s whats best for me at this point in my life. What’s great about my decision… is it didn’t involve him at all.
If I had been unable to transfer locations this would be a different story. The close proximity and constant harassment wouldnt have worked.
Given your discussion with the others I wanted to demonstrate that empaths can excersise their choices when it comes to work. We can find solutions that work for us and not have to constantly feel bullied out of positions and Bow to narcissits.
But… given witches point. Often times we have no choice. Making empaths who would otherwise be affective leaders in the dust… since we won’t lie and cheat to get there.
You have no idea how often i have thought of this–how I have come to realize my sensitivity holds me back. If I was not as sensitive as I am, I think I would have more outward recognition for my achievements. It is awful!
I would be more like the UMR at my job and push my way over people and demand they admire me. I don’t know how to effectively do this. When the UMR pisses me off, I envision myself as a narcissist stepping all over him and putting him in his place.
I notice how my empath supervisor fell for his charm and she kept promoting him b/c she values talkers and presenters, which is what he is. (And probably a quality she wants but lacks in herself.) Even though his work ethic is crap and he spent years putting others down to get ahead–he always managed to spin himself into the victim.
But when I do speak out, I feel like many don’t take me seriously. They don’t. I feel that meme of the little cat who thinks he is a lion in the mirror, but is just a little cat. (I am more than a kitten, dammit!)
I relistened to your recordings on the Fuel Matrix of both the MMR and UMR and they are both described so well–the MMR lacks the higher charm of the UMR and thus is going to be resentful.
A lot of my decisions in life have been adjusted to accommodate my high sensitivity. Unfortunate, really.
@bibi
I just watched a video of Sam Vaknin ranting about how life is meaningless and we are all losers and social mobility is fake and I’ve been knowing this I just didn’t always accept it. But now I’m coming to accept it, i feel far less worried about life or about “progress” “status” etc. Just follow your interests in whatever way you can because the likelihood that we are going to end up as the CEO is very slim to non-existent so why care so much?
Kel,
Your logical argument that Empaths are stronger is this:
“Empaths are stronger because they actually face the abusive treatment they receive, instead of escaping it by pretending it away as narcissists do”
It is a perceived “strength”, on the part of Empaths, to stay and face the abuse. However, it actually takes much more strength to escape the abuse.
And, on the topic of “pretending it (abuse) away”, narcissists cannot pretend the abuse away, because they cannot actually see the abuse, in order to pretend it away.
(Greaters, of course, are the exception to not having the ability to pretend it away.)
Finally, I would argue that many empaths, in effort to stay in a relationship, on one level or another, pretend away the abuse. Do you view that as a strength?
Correction:
“(Greaters, of course, are the exception to not having the ability to pretend it away.)”
Greaters are the exception to not having the ability to *see the abuse.
Although, one could put in the argument for pretending it away too.
WC,
Just quickly want to reply that my comment isn’t an argument. It was in reference to the statement that narcissists are needed as leaders because they’re better at it than normals, and guessing, empaths too. I cited that narcissists are what cause most of the problems we’re dealing with in the world in the first place- crime would be lower without the chaos they create.
The insinuation seemed to me to be Empaths are too weak to make harsh decisions. I was pointing out that Empaths are not weak, in fact we’re able to shoulder a lot of abuse, which is more than narcissists can handle. We are strong not weak, and we have all the emotions narcissists have plus all the good ones too that makes us able to be unbiased, empathetic and harsh when necessary. We’re generally in it for the right reasons and not for power and glory like narcs are, making our decisions logical and not swayed. Of course everyone can get swept up with greed, but at least an empath has a conscience.
I stated narcissists are leaders because they cheat and will step over others and do anything to win.
Empaths have been blindsided by them, not realizing the narcissism around them and the deceitful crookedness. Knowledge is power for us, it means we can recognize narcissism and deal with it head on.
Narcissists are in charge of the mess that they themselves created, is what I said. I agree there are good leaders that have been narcissists and have been effective. Empaths are well equipped for being great leaders too. Empaths are us after all, do you not have faith in your abilities above a narcissist or at least equally to a good one? Good one as in an effective one.
Anyway I’m in awe of the good work HG does, and am ever grateful to him for teaching me about narcissists. Just pointing out, empaths have been blindsided, we are not weak, and we are very capable of running the world. Now that we know what we’re up against, we know how to defeat them to get to the top.
It’s necessary for Empaths to step up and run the world. Narcissists strengths are also their weaknesses. What Empaths probably don’t like having to deal with is the crookedness and manipulations of narcissists, but we have no choice.
Anyway, not arguing. I am logically defending Empaths as being capable leaders able to make harsh decisions, and able to make it to the top now that they can see their opponents without the masks on.
Kel,
“Just quickly want to reply that my comment isn’t an argument.”
I wasn’t arguing that Empaths can or cannot be world leaders or that narcissists are/are not good world leaders.
I was simply examining your position that Empaths are “stronger”. You based that position on empaths being able to face abuse or “shoulder a lot of abuse.” I fail to see how that quality identifies empaths as the stronger of the two.
For example, staying in a romantic entanglement by ‘shouldering the abuse’ does not equate to a “strong” individual, for me.
“We are strong not weak, and we have all the emotions narcissists have plus all the good ones too that makes us able to be unbiased, empathetic and harsh when necessary. We’re generally in it for the right reasons and not for power and glory like narcs are, making our decisions logical and not swayed.”
Regarding making harsh decisions; leaving one’s home and breaking up a family (when involved with a narcissist) is a harsh decision and generally regarded as the healthier choice for all involved – but a lot of Empaths struggle with that. Also, having a full spectrum of emotions does not make an Empath inherently unbiased, impartial or logical.
Although, I would agree that weaponized empaths make more logical decisions and as a result can make more “harsh” decisions. (But there are differing opinions on what would qualify as a harsh decision.)
“Empaths are us after all, do you not have faith in your abilities above a narcissist or at least equally to a good one? Good one as in an effective one.”
I have faith in my *lack* of ability to use others and ping-pong my way to the top, so I would never strive to reach a place of power that narcissists would reach for. I am not made that way. I look back at my life and see where there were skills and pursuits of mine that – had I been single-mindedly driven and lacking the tendency to attach to people and honour obligations – I could have indeed succeeded quite highly, as the opportunities were there. I would have had to be very opportunistic and would have had to not care about anyone (family and otherwise) around me to single-mindedly strive for those things.
I would think it takes a certain kind of empath to choose that road.
Specifically, in politics, strong or not, I think there are very few empaths able to play the game to get to the top in the political arena.
@
Kel I agree that we are capable of running the world especially if narcissists didn’t exist. While they do exist it will be extremely difficult for us to run the world uncorrupted. We tend to take on other people’s feelings and problems so it only takes the influence of one narc to throw us off course. Once they creep into our beds and our heads we change.
@kel
That’s not to say we aren’t strong. I’m surprised I made it this far under the influence of several narcs. But let’s be real I’m f’d up and it shows.
I could have been great but god was like “nah, let’s give give her 7 narcs and anxiety”
Hmmmm I’m not sure thet May I entirely agree re empaths not having strength for stating to be abused. I got out pretty much as soon as devaluation started because I did not have the strength to stay and take it. I had to get away. I also believe empaths could rule the world ‘if’ and it’s a very big it. If we all stuck together. What’s sad is we don’t. We allow the narcs to pit us against each other. If we stuck together we got this!
Witch,
I get what you’re saying and I know it’s upsetting to be around narcs, but if some Empaths don’t stand up to them, then they win – and we end up with the world we’re living in now – and we’ll wonder how trump became the king of America and Putin became the emperor of Europe. What’s sad is, I’m not even joking.
I always used to wonder how hitler could possibly have gotten into power- he was insane- what a crazy thing. Now I’m seeing it happen in America and then it’s also like Trump is Putin’s Trojan horse.
It’s easier not to deal with it, but it has to be dealt with. Wouldn’t it be helpful if some capable and effective narcissists would step in and fix things?!
You need to read America : You Are Being Conned.
Empaths may be capable of running the world, but they don’t necessarily want to do it.
Narcs may or may not be capable of running the world, but they’d all love to do it. Some settle for running their families or their employees, and might be incompetent enough at that, but they still think they’re perfectly capable of running the world. Dunning-Kruger.
@alexis
Most people don’t know what a narc is so it would very difficult for empaths to stick together because more empaths think people can change
Alexissmith2016,
“Hmmmm I’m not sure thet May I entirely agree re empaths not having strength for stating to be abused. I got out pretty much as soon as devaluation started because I did not have the strength to stay and take it.”
I understand the concept or belief in one’s strength to stay and endure or “shoulder” the abuse in the relationship – but at what cost?
Once you are an informed Empath, then you have no doubt it is a losing battle.
I do understand the sense of pride that can come from a situation of abuse – I am still amazed sometimes, that I managed to make something of my life, despite my circumstances in the context of my last relationship, and managed to protect my child and get him out relatively unscathed. It is nothing short of a miracle from one perspective, and it happened because of certain “strengths” of mine. But I took a lot of losses with that, a lot – so I wish that I had not had the ‘strength to endure’ for quite so long.
You’re taking what I said out of context, I didn’t say abuse makes Empaths strong. I said Empaths are stronger than narcissists Because a narcissist could never take the abuse we take on a daily basis, hence why a narcissist becomes a narcissist.
1. Not all narcissists are created from abuse, abuse is but one of various types of LOCE. It is the LOCE plus the GPD which creates the narcissist.
2. Where abuse plays a part, at the point when the abuse occurs, the individual is not a narcissist. When that individual becomes a narcissist, they are able to cope with the abuse owing to the creation of the narcissist. Thus, the narcissist is able to “take” the abuse.
Kel,
“I didn’t say abuse makes Empaths strong.”
I know you didn’t say that.
HG
A narcissist gets wounded easily, and lashes out abuse on others when he does. What a narc does when he ‘takes’ abuse is he whirls it at someone else even harder.
I agree that narcissists are not created from abuse, but used that based on the common explanation.
But I was just clarifying that I did not say abuse makes empaths strong. I was only restating what I’d originally said, which was explaining that empaths are not weaklings. Abuse isn’t healthy for anyone.
Not necessarily, see The 3 Assertions of Control with regard to the response of the narcissist, some of the time the direct response will include a heated response.
Do not use the common explanation, it is incorrect.
WC
Excellent points made.
In point of fact, I’m now going to fly against the popularist view on here.
Unaware Empaths are UTTERLY INCABABLE of being in positions of power. It’s quite frightening actually. See Hgs writings on the ‘Seas’.
Inevitably, we have been picked up intimate partners, dealing with recaltrient MRNs who are drawing on our energy, our fuel. I often felt that when I left the UMS, I was leaving one child behind and taking the two geuine children with me. They deserved my attention; he had proved over 18 years that he did not.
I lived this life. I’d like to feel I’m empathic.
This is the key to Weaponisation. You finally see them for what they are. Until Empaths can get to that point, they will be ineffectual leaders.
No, women do not run the world. But maybe that particularly silly song might prompt other empathic females into a different way of thinking?
What an intriguing sub thread!
Both Hg and Kel are correct which makes it so intresting.
Unawares play by the rules of some game. Narcs say, fuck that! And get away with it. Largely due to the majority ‘heads down brigade’.
Whether we are taking about Boris, Putin, Trump, May. Merkel. Oh she’s a good un.
They get away with it because the prolls LET them get away with it.
Most people couldn’t find their own arse in the dark with two hands. They really are that dumb. I think we’ve all seen that recently.
Well bollocks. The wrong narcissist got in. We needed the other narcissist in to fix the mess that this narcissist has made, before creating his own mess in turn. But every idiot voted for the wrong narcissist, because he can “get Brexit done.” Can he hell get Brexit done. If he was going to get Brexit done, he’d have done it already.
I’m a noid. I may also be annoyed but I think I’ll stick with being a noid for today.
I’m also rambling.
HG you run for PM next time please. If we’re going to have a narc in power I’d rather have one with a pleasant voice and a sense of humour.
Most kind. I prefer doing what I do now though.
They look old too fast in politics. The before and after photos of politicians are alarming. I guess, too much extra bad stuff goes into their system. What is all the bad stuff that makes them look so old so fast in politics, exactly? I am not quite sure.
“What is all the bad stuff that makes them look so old so fast”
I think that’s just the general rule of being middle aged and English
I live in the United States, and I am still exhausted waiting for Brexit to conclude. Is it exhausting for those that live over there, or are you numb and burned out and do not care one way or the other at this point?
Largely, people are fed up of it all and even those who voted remain just want it to be addressed and executed.
Dearest HG: Yes. It affects so much, including travel and currency and residency and citizenship, and trade and on and on. It is difficult for so many people to make plans and decisions. I do desire to visit when Brexit, the exhausting and long nightmare, is concluded.
So how do you classify Boris, HG? What school and cadre of narcissist?
How do you classify him Dorion?
But have invented the NarcDetector and have seemingly analyzed him in depth. Should we now book consultations to get your view on public figures as well, public figures that you self-admittedly have put under the “Tudorscope”? 🙂
I really like your narc classification system. I have not read any of your books yet, have only been reading some of this blog in the past… maybe 2-3 weeks. Listened to some audios online as well. Yet another reason I am here is because I get your thinking, analyses and even expression style very easily. I don’t think this is related to narcissism so much, more to certain (similar?) cognitive styles. Well, maybe some shared narcissistic traits also create similar cognitive styles. I like your classification system, because I am the same way: like to understand everything within a structured system, meaning “structure” often made artificially, for the sake of our understanding… but eventually leading to genuine understanding and perhaps even change in how we deal with things.
Nature usually does not create the systems for us so clearly, so we do. Usually, once I am able to see complex phenomena within a structure that I am able to compartmentalize in a meaningful ways and overview, navigating the system becomes quite easy as well. Including social interactions…
Anyhow, I don’t know nearly enough about Boris to classify him confidently. I am not in the UK, and while I lived there in the past for a while, I am not following the politics and political figures so tightly and accurately now that I would be comfortable making such an analysis. But I thought you had done that!
I would be comfortable making such classifications about people I know personally or have sufficient amount of info about. I believe you usually suggest the same when people approach your with questions, recommending consultations with more detail? My original question had a similar logic. You seemed to have analyzed Boris in quite some depth, posted about him repeatedly on this blog, moderated discussions. Is that not enough to run him through the NarcDetector? 🙂
But my current guess is that he is probably somewhere around the mid-higher Mid Range and Lower Greater (not sure what exactly separates Mid Range and Greater – self-awareness is usually a gradient spectrum). Not entirely somatic but also definitely far from a high intellectual (cerebral). This is almost entirely intuitive. I would analyze someone I know personally, or have researched significantly, in a very different way.
My objective right now is to learn from your knowledge and analyses here, so looking forward to an expert view 🙂
The Narc Detector Consultation is for use in personal circumstances, not for use on famous figures.
Dearest HG: I just love this: `Bumbling Boris`. He sure manages to largely bumble and stumble, up, though. And your direction: Note how telling a lie was downplayed to “cock-up” and a “howler” Hahahaha. Regarding the bumbling: I am reminded of the actor Hugh Grant. He bumbled around Hollywood all the way to the top of actor fame. I never fell for his exuberant affability persona. Perhaps Hugh Grant is also a Narcississt. Many females thought and perhaps still think of him as charming. So much bumbling and irrational exuberance these days and cock-ups and howlers as these types stumble, and falter, and trip their way all the way to top positions. lol. My laugh of the morning. Feminism is failing many of us women, these days, but, Marilyn Monroe cut one of the heels of her shoes lower than the other so that she jiggled more when she walked, and one never knew if she would accidentally fall or not. Eli Manning cried when he was told last year to sit back for the rookie Quarter Back, and thus Eli retained his position to start as the QB lead, and the rookie had to continue to sit back on the football team. One baseball Player cried when he found out he was being traded, and so he was not traded at that time, and he became a role model for children, as their teachers pointed out his crying on the field to the children and told the children that it is okay to have feelings and to care about something. I need to stumble and jiggle and falter and cry more, with some bumbles thrown in, along with plenty of irrational exuberance, plus a howler or 2 thrown in for good measure. Who knew. I went about my life all wrong. Indeed. This morning, my future feels much brighter.
Dearest HG: Will you please place Marilyn Monroe on your assessment list. And she read a lot of books in her spare time, I heard. What was she really all about?
Dearest HG: On Boris` paternal line, was his Grandfather of the Arab race or the Caucasian race?
Wiki says Circassian-Turkish are from Russia so white with a Turkish Nationality
Witch: Thank you very much for the info. on Circassian-Turkish. I find it interesting. I would not be surprised if Arabs were happy he won, though. Interesting times, indeed. However, I have never really understood what it meant to be Turkish, and I never met anyone from Turkey to ask them their take. Is Turkey considered in general to be an Arab country?
Witch. Are not many people in Chechnya, etc. over in Russia, white muslims, as well then? Aren`t they persecuted or something like that? I wonder how Putin feels about Boris. I would guess that Putin would be irritated over Boris rising so high in such a strong country and that Boris` rise would stir up the white muslims that he, Putin, persecutes in his realm. Boris` status within Britain seems sort of messy to me from the religious angle and the nationality angle, added on to his Narcissism personality. Boris must be drowning in fuel, practically. So much benign fuel, and malign fuel, and challenge fuel. Is there such a thing as too much fuel? If any fire is lit: BOOM! Oh my.
I am sure that Putin is glad that Brexit should be passing soon. Brexit weakens the European Union, and certain countries that looked for the E.U. to protect them from the long and strong reach of Putin, better go back to the drawing board, and stop rattling their swords so loudly. They are now in check. And possibly, mate. So, Narcissists Putin and Boris are on the same page regarding Brexit, at least, but for different reasons. On another note, it seems that Ireland is treated sorted of roughly, in Great Britain, for whatever the reason. It is said today, over here, that Ireland will be treated a bit bitter under Boris` Brexit Plan than with Theresa May`s Brexit plan.
Hi PSE, It is the Russian State and Russian nationalists who have persecuted Chechnians. Russia had conducted devastating war/s on Chechnya in the recent past (within the last 20 -30 years) using national security and the terrorist card as the pretext. From what I can perceive, Russian nationalists’ persecution of Chechnians tends to be based on racism. , ie these nationalists exhibit traits of superiority and entitlement when viewed through the lens of narcissism.
No, Turkey is not an Arab country and neither is considered such.
Dolores: Why was Turkey treated so roughly by the E.U. committee, when they tried to join the E.U.?
I don’t know too much about Middle Eastern history but I believe “true” Arabs are from the Arabian Peninsula like Saudi and Yemen and much of the Middle East was colonised and influenced by Arabian culture, so there are Arabs in Turkey due to migration but originally they aren’t really Arabs, there are different ethnicities in the Middle East.
Although many middle easterns who speak Arabic would say that they are Arabs but some don’t.
OMG, is there anyone in amongst them that is a normal 🤔
The world of politics is a viper´s nest of our kind.
I don’t think Jimmy Carter is a narcissist. Is this why he was regarded as doing an overall inadequate job? Or maybe he is and I’m way off the mark.. He seems like a normal person.
Carter was not a narcissist.
Yay! Wahoo a non N president! Definitely worth celebrating. I’m guessing narcissistic but not an N then in order to cut it. Not based on any other logic as I know nothing of him.
Some of my earliest memories are of my father screaming at the dinner table about Jimmy Carter. He seems to be a nice man, but did not make a good President. Interest rates were so high, people couldn’t afford housing. Of course, things like that can’t be blamed on a single person. The entire administration and economy come into play.
He seems genuinely kind and ambitious from a more altruistic place. Thank you for confirming.
Lorelei, you didn’t read Narc Tales 2? The Jimmy Carter “cock up” was discussed in a quite amusing tale.
I read some of it—I have terrible ADD reading. I’ve been skipping over Martha Stewart’s blog half in/half out lately. I’m reading two books for a month.. I skip around here too.
Narc Tales should hold your attention. The stories are short and very amusing. (As well as educational!) I highly recommend.
A well acted Mousetrap just kept my attention but not until after intermission. My brain is not quite wired correctly!
Carter was a well-meaning idealist. They can do more damage by accident than some people do out of open malice.
With regards to my other comment about Jacinda Ardern (NZ), just wanted to add that thinking she is a normal/empath is only based on impressions gleaned from media interviews. I haven’t done any research into her background etc.
AnneB: Are not the Chechnians largely caucasian by race? If so, if the rulers in Russia are caucasians, how do you call that racial persecution. Unless Chechnians are largely of the Arab race that migrated to that region? Are Chechnians largely caucasian that follow an Arab religion, or are they largely Arabs? If they are racially Arabs, I can see that there may be racial persecution, as you say, but if they are largely Caucasian, I can not see it as racial persecution, but perhaps religious persecution.
PSE, Just a note but an Arab would be someone who speaks Arabic. Arab is not a ‘race’ – there is no such thing as a ‘race’ of people. ‘Caucasian’ signifies people of European heritage and euphemistically means ‘white.’ Again, not a race because there is no such thing. Of course Chechens are not a race either but I imagine AnneB meant that Russians perceive Chechens as being of a different ‘race.’
SMH: Is this question really this difficult for someone to answer? Or, is there something politically or socially incorrect about it all? And I have somehow stepped into a hornet`s nest? hahaha. Because, when political correctness and social correctness enters a room, truth no longer bothers, and leaves. Case closed. Hopefully, that is not what is happening, in this case. I only want to know what is the name of the different race that Russians perceive Chechens to belong to? And, by the way, SMH, you may not, but most Arabs do consider themselves to be a race, and they consider themselves to be a great race, and a descendent of Ishmael, that they trace in their family records, and with great pride they will tell one all about their race. So, many, many, many Arabs would beg to differ with one, and would be highly offended, if one told them that, that from one`s worldview, that they, Arabs, had no race and were of no race. Can one imagine an Ambassador or a Diplomat saying this to them, as a people? War would be somewhere nearer on the horizon. Anyway, I still can not figure out what are Chechens considered to be? Do they consider themselves of European heritage and Caucasian and euphemistically `white` as you say? And, what race do Russians perceive Chechens to be, since Russians consider Chechens to be of a different race: What is the name of this different race, is all that I am asking anyone? Because, I find this all important, and it does determine how world leaders treat various people, by how they categorize them. So I do not understand what is all the mystery and difficulty about, about these questions of how Chechens are racially categorized. lol. Does anyone know the answer to these questions. And my computer is glitching….the Chechen question must disturb some bot on my computer. Any thoughts are welcome.
Hi PSE, I don’t see it as a question of political correctness. I see it rather as a question of accuracy. Just my two cents but if we (meaning people in general, not you and I) don’t agree on terms and what words mean, we cannot communicate with each other. Maybe ‘ethnic group’ is more accurate?
Hi PSE, Yes, the majority of Chechnians are Muslim but as I understand it goes further than persecution based on Islamic belief. Chechians are considered by Russian Nationalists to be ‘southerners’ from the Caucasus and differentiated from ‘ethnic Russians’ (slavs in origin). Russian nationalists highlight their swarthier appearance and cultural differences. Chechnya has it’s own history as a country and has been subject to Russia’s hegemony for several hundred years. A group of Chechnian ‘terrorists’ were blamed for a bomb that went off at the Moscow ballet, some time in early 90s I think, resulting in Russia increasing it’s hostilities in Chechnya shortly after. I may be wrong on the exact dates. I used to know this stuff a bit better but it’s been a long time. Neighbouring Georgia has been subject to similar hostilities throughout its history (re religion, now mostly Georgian orthodox). Those identifying as Russian (“ethnic Russian” of slavic origin) can be very “racist” and demeaning of Chechnian and Georgian nationals – of their cultures, history, origins and “southern/swarthy” appearance. Chechnians and Georgians living in Russia are subjected to what western countries would consider racially motivated attacks – that is attacks based on their appearance and culture and stereotyped traits, based on ethnic Russians perceived superiority. I think the majority of Russians are Russian orthodox, there are groups of ‘old believers’, and then within Russia, there are small populations of indigenous/native people who follow their own beliefs. Similar to US, Aus, Canada, native peoples were subsumed into the expanding Russian state as the empire moved east and north.
Hey PSE, p.s.Chechnians are not Arabs at all, it’s to do with nationality, cultural difference but mostly about Putin expanding his control and power IMO.
AnneB: Sounds right. I get it, now. I can understand all that. Thank you. Mystery solved. I wondered why all the Arab nations never substantively rushed to the defense of Chechnya. I think with Britain leaving the E.U., and thereby weakening the E.U. , Putin, a possible Greater Elite Narcississt, has become more powerful overnight. And, on another note, if I hear about the Ukraine one more day, over here in the U.S., I could, and many other regular people could, scream. The media coverage of Ukraine in NYC where I live, is non stop with the impeachment coverage/debacle/fiasco. I am sure Putin is looking at the Ukraine as well. The Ukraine`s autonomous growth and power was just weakened, overnight, as well, with Brexit. This election of Boris is a game changer in world politics, IMO.
Hi PSE, No problem. Yes, I agree with you about Putin. Frighteningly cold. I can see my reference to ‘racism’ caused a little confusion. Racism is always a subjective state, but I didn’t clarify that was where I was coming from in my original comment. Thank you for the exchange PSE! (I responded earlier to some of your other comments re Putin and Russian media down thread somewhere (just in case you missed them ). Look forward to crossing paths again here in the future!
AnneB: Thank you and likewise.
Hi HG, I apologise if this has been asked and answered previously, but is Jeremy Corbyn a narc too? The covert, angel with a dirty face kind? To me, he just doesn’t add up.
Boris is a narcissist. Corbyn is a narcissist. Farage is a narcissist.
John Bercow… a codependent?
No, another narcissist.
Really? Damn, THAT’S why I liked him so much 😂
Corbyn is. What?! No way! Now I want to cry.
Of course he is.
They all are. The idealists don’t make it this far.
Indeed they do not., Violetta.
Does Corbyn know what he is?
No
Agghhh okay. He totally lacks charisma.
Is there a politician who has made it big, not necessarily a PM or president who is not an N?
If a normal couldn’t ‘cut it’ at the top, could any non Ns at all?
Hi Alexissmith,
NZ’s Jacinda Ardern? What do you think? Each time I mention her name here I always add the NZ ref, cos NZ isn’t a big player on world stage. All I have are impressions of her. NZ is left leaning though I recognise that Ns straddle the entire political spectrum. I think she may be a normal or even an empath. My impression is that she has the capacity for emotional empathy and has genuinely exhibited that empathy publicly at various times.
H.G, would you be willing to cast your expert eye over this lady PM and add her to your to do list?
She can go on the list. It is a long list.
AnneB – interestng re Jacinda. I honestly couldn’t answer that at all.
I don’t particularly follow UK politics (I’m British), although I am becoming interested in it but only because I’m looking at to consider the different personalities. So I’m afraid I don’t know anything about her at all. I just googled her picture, she certainly looks incredibly warm and friendly. Some people you can see the dead eyes or the hallmark sneer in their photos but I can’t see that with her. Some do keep it incredibly well hidden, I was shocked to learn Sheridan Smith was an N (confirmed by HG, I’m guessing she must be an UMR but only based on the fact she does display pretty good CE). WHat makes you think that Jacinda is not a narc?
What initially made me start wondering about Corbyn was when I heard he “didn’t do housework”. I presume it is beneath him and only suitable work for a female minion. That really stood out for me. Then I researched other things about him, and his house, his three wives (and their circumstances) and his current wife’s business interests and I just thought “hmmm”. Funny what makes you start thinking!! The housework comment was definitely a trigger for me, lol!!
Thanks HG! I thought so; I’ve found it interesting that the media have used the term in relation to Boris and Farage, but not Corbyn. He’s a proper wolf in sheep’s clothing. Corbyn makes my skin crawl in a way the other two don’t. I know he’s on his way out, so there will be little point in doing a Tudorscope on him, but it would be so satisfying – to post on my FB feed if nothing else. Revenge for all the sycophantic political crap about him I’ve had to endure on my feed over the last few months!
I asked this already above but seems more fitting to ask here.. what about David Cameron? I would predict not a narcissist.
See the Knowledge Vault.
HG ..did you ever hang out with Alex or members of his family ?
HG, The after taste of Boris’ true nature reflects on what he saw behind closed doors while growing up. The reality of his own mother, a Catholic ‘good girl’, dedicated to her husband and children, had a nervous breakdown then his father wandered off to the sunset with other women after the divorce mirrors Boris’ exact nature.
Question: On the wider scope, the political scene — Who is pulling the strings behind Boris’ who seems to be enabled to continue his theatrics, con game towards the Brit citizens with False Stable Future? Is he being used as a Red Herring to distract citizens from core issues? (PS: I read alot of contrarian economic-financial newsletters regarding UK, Brexit, EU)
No, he is the string puller.
All Prime Ministers and Presidents are just front-men and me thinks you know this HG. You don’t fool me my friend. Of course they pull the strings of others below them, but their own strings are pulled by those above them. They are quite low down actually on the totem pole of power and an intelligent man such as yourself would be well aware of this fact.
Not all.
Some are far more aware than others, I accept, but all are still puppets. They are only front-men. The real powers at the top of the pyramid are the so called ‘hidden masters’. If you are not aware of this basic fact of how the world system operates then you are not as intelligent as I have given you credit for. Me thinks you are playing games again. Oh well…
I know far more than you. I am also far more intelligent than you. I know you are attempting to get my attention. There, you’ve received it.
HG,
Some comments aren’t worth your attention. I’m sure they are bored and wanna poke. Trust and believe no one doubts your intelligence. It’s beneath you. Tell certain people to carry on lol.
Indeed Dr HQ and I am obliged.
Hmmm HG, is ebvilnuskhat one of the ones I’m always interested in learning about?
not to give too much credit here because we don’t hate them, we don’t love them just feel indifferent towards them. Almost like they don’t even exist really. Practically nothing.
Not quite.
I seek knowledge and understanding, not attention. Am I wasting my time with you?
Hardly. Read my work.
It is only one of the ones I know of that type who is actually that Twatty. So I’m unsure whether this is a separate sub-breed?
Alexissmith2016
What are you talking about? I’m curious.
Is Corbyn any better? Or Farage?
*****
‘I like the Walrus best,’ said Alice: ‘because you see he was a little sorry for the poor oysters.’
‘He ate more than the Carpenter, though,’ said Tweedledee. ‘You see he held his handkerchief in front, so that the Carpenter couldn’t count how many he took: contrariwise.’
‘That was mean!’ Alice said indignantly. ‘Then I like the Carpenter best—if he didn’t eat so many as the Walrus.’
‘But he ate as many as he could get,’ said Tweedledum.
This was a puzzler. After a pause, Alice began, ‘Well! They were both very unpleasant characters—’
*****
Corby and Farage are both narcissists.
Witness Farage´s comments when being interviewed alongside Michael Gove last night, which were basically I won this election for you. Grandiose and magical thinking.
As for Corbyn, his rejection of accountability for a disastrous election and his refusal to stand down immediately are manifestations of his narcissism.
Corbyn seems to be more googled and talked about than Boris now.
I think the search engine has him confused with Steptoe Senior.
Hahhahahah nice one!
HG, So glad you said that about Corbyn. I watched the interview and in the exact moment that he refused to take responsibility, realized he was a narc. I could never stand him anyway and have no idea why he attracts any followers at all given his utter lack of charisma. I think he repels me more than Boris does. Really sad for Labour.
HG
I saw that too and I was gobsmacked.
End of the day, the Natural History Museum is missing a diplodocus.
I’m not saying anything….
But it probably involves the secret recipe to Won-Ton soup.
BlackUnicorn123 and Violetta, etc.: While I am speaking about the other side of the pond: Last night my apartment complex had a meeting to vote on 5g technology and there were raffles to incentivize much participation. The overall vote was, NO, to 5G for the complex, but I won one of the raffles and the prize I won was a Burberry large check scarf of %100 cashmere and made in Scotland. Is this brand and such a scarf popular in Great Britain. Should I wear it when and if I visit London, etc? It seems quite beautiful to me in a classic sort of way. I was shocked to win it.
Don’t know what HG will say about the UK, but if you wear it anywhere in NYC, just be careful of muggers. They like recognizable brands.
Violetta: If I am mugged for my Mulberry cashmere scarf then, I will dress as well as I can and have my hair done and everything, and wear red lipstick and pearls, and then cry on TV (with waterproof mascara of course) and talk about how I loved the scarf so dearly, and how I wanted to wear the scarf on a dream vacation to Scotland and all over Great Britain. And I would say that whomever ends up with the scarf should try very hard to appreciate such beauty and craftsmanship. And then I would probably be gifted, by the brand etc., an entire Burberry collection of goods and first class airfare and five star hotel stays for the trip.
Sure you’re not a Narc, Princess?
That is proficient playing of our 15-minute celebrity culture.
You left out the GoFundMe and a picture of your floppy-eared hound looking very sad.
your complex voted against 5G ? do you want help to finde a new place?
PSE – The Burberry brand has been cheapened in the UK because, in the past, it was favoured by “chavs” and footballers; particularly the beige large check colourway, which is now iconic, but for all the wrong reasons! Burberry have been trying to reverse this image for the last decade or so and are succeeding. As long as your scarf is not the “iconic” beige colourway, you will be safe to wear it!! Congratulations on your win!!
blackunicorn123: What is a “plopcarpet”? Somebody called somebody else that re: UK election coverage. Is this when Fluffy makes a mistake on the living room rug?
Hi Violeta – I must admit, I’ve not heard that expression before so I’ve just googled it and seen the context – as far as I can tell it was a made up insult (because someone was frustrated with how the BBCs political editor was covering the election). I love made up insults – can be quite illuminating about how someone’s mind works!
Thanks, blackunicorn123. Maybe he was just on something and came up with this because he wasn’t capable of “I Am the Walrus.”
Violetta: re: I am the walrus, again? Please do not get me started. So scary to me. Hahaha. Just, don`t do drugs: Message brought to you by the egg man. Because, an egg is a terrible thing to waste.
Violetta: I mean that the youtube and instagram, etc. influencers are pushing the brands/designers, and keeping the brand names in the public spheres. This way of advertising, this new way, is supposedly cheaper than a sustained traditional marketing campaign, I heard on a marketing financial report, very recently. For example they were saying on the report: let`s say that an influencer has millions of loyal followers, the operative word being, Loyal.
NOT the influencers that buy followers from a bot or whatever, or that go viral every now and then and that is all there is to them, says the report: But an influencer that has built a loyal following over time can actually say, this the bag or watch or jacket, or perfume/cologne, or restaurant etc., and their followers, a good enough percent will actually buy it in quantities enough to satisfy the brand that is promoted. Finding these type of influencers is striking Gold, and is the new marketing by many brands, and it is working, I am hearing–so please don`t sleep on this.
And I believe it. Some people enjoy following, and some people also do not have the time, nor stamina to test everythng out, since there is rarely set standards anymore. So, if they find an influencer that they can relate to, that has standards, that influencer is a great find for such people. For example, I wanted a watch, and I was having a major headache trying to decide, and then I asked someone on here, and I am planning to purchase the watch recommended to me, and I did investigate the recommendation, and it suited me. The same for a handbag brand suggested to me, and I did purchase it.
Some people do not need to do what I did, and do not want to, and can not even understand it, but I am well pleased about it. I was saved a lot of time and headache. And there are many people like me regarding shopping. I do not really like to shop. And, I prefer quality within my budget, and I often get a headache when I try to shop. However as far as trying to look exactly like someone else on social media, like you are bringing up, well that is a different story altogether, even though these 2 stories do meet at times, and will sell products as well.
BU123: Thanks for the info on the scarf and the cultural chaos with Burberry! It is just amazing. Hahaha. I did a tiny bit of research, and my goodness, what a riot over it all. The scarf is beautiful though. I then took a peak on Youtube at the fall runway style of Burberry 2019, and they barely use that iconic pattern. But the line looks sort of non-distinct now. Except for the trench coats. They do seem to still make beautiful trench coats, with a small part of that pattern peeking out here and there, at times, and, Small, being the operative word. Very interesting info. regarding culture and style colliding. I do remember, some years ago, that the same or similar sort of thing happened with the designer/brand Tommy Hilfilger: Tommy said that he did not like some of the people that wore his clothing. Hahahaha. And even in the technology world, when Steve Jobs was asked why he did not lower the price of his computers, and that he could actually afford to do so, he honestly responded that he did not want people that could not pay full price, to have his computers. I never forgot that.
You’re welcome PSE! I remember the Tommy Hilfilger thing too! It’s a very fine line between remaining exclusive and tipping into commonality. I think Louis Vuitton bags are falling into this category. Everybody seems to want one, for their supposed exclusivity and status – and really, along with the “genuine fakes”, they are no longer exclusive at all.
BU123. You mentioned brand exclusivity. Well, a lot of brands were actually caught furtively burning their clothing, and shredding their clothing and burying it, at the end of the seasons, because people were not buying all that stuff. (these were the brands and companies, of course, that have the privilege of being the indulged favorites of the investment banks, and were actually thriving on this sort of quality and quantity money presented to them from the investment banks, over and over and not from the amount of customers that purchased from them).
Many of those famous luxury stores are practically empty, every day, all day. I know. I have my own eyes. Right here in NYC. Not only were ready-to-wear lines such as H&M (caught more than once) and the like caught burning and burying and shredding their unsold items (many had pretended to send unwanted items to `third world countries.` Well, they would sure be better dressed in third world countries than what I have seen all these decades, if it were the case, that they were being shipped all these unsold items, yes?) lol, but also, very prestigious designer brands were caught and exposed as well. They too were secretly and surreptitiously destroying and burying and shredding unsold merchandise.
Now when some of the famous luxury brands were ALSO caught surreptitiously doing the same and burying and burning and shredding their unsold items, the luxury brands tried to spin it with the media and with their clients. hahaha. The spin they gave was that they were maintaining exclusivity, and that sort of thing. And, that it would hurt their brand if they reduced the price too much because of a lack of sales. Hahahaha. They were still chastised by investment analysts (actually for being caught in destroying the items) and many clients did not fall for this tale of secretly burying and shredding, etc., unsold clothing and bags etc, to maintain exclusivity. And their environmental and sustainability clients (for their reputation for that sort of thing, were upset with them for being caught, and perhaps for actually doing it, by some others) and also their various enemies were upset ( the enemies: because they could not receive nutritious bank loans to do their own business and burying in like manner). And still many others of their clients did not like hearing that the brands were not actually selling, and that the prices were falsely propped up by literal smoke and flames and shredders and dirt. They felt sucker-punched. hahaha.
Let us wonder together how much of their property these luxury brands, in particular, could afford to shred and burn and bury, etc. if the banks were not their personal cookie jars, decades after decades. And, the word on the street is that there is more scrutiny on these investment banks of late, for some reason, and now some banks more than before are turning an irritated eye at some of these luxury brands when these brands knock on the door requesting more handout money. Some luxury Brands are going to go down, or perhaps sell themselves to a cheap, but powerful brand. Nothing is worse than luxury being bought by budget. You have seen it. A designer`s name is then placed on an item that a pig would not even eat, or some saying like that.
In NYC, Lord & Taylor is going down. And now, Barney`s New York is going down. But, these are major department stores that just showed the designer lines, even though they did have their own labels after a while. And also obtained much leveraging from the banks. No more loans for them, is why they are going down. Why did the money train kick them off? Who knows. But, it sure wasn`t business. What business? It was personal. But, some of these Luxury Labels may actually have to start working for a living, as well. And guess what? They do not know how. That is how long they have lived off of money from the banks. They do not even know how to live off of actually selling enough of their products to actually make a profit, any longer.
And so much of that clothing is ugly and created by psychotics that do not like women at all. Including many envious female psychotics as well as many male psychotics. And, it did not matter at all. If we did not buy it, they would just bury and shred and burn it, and then run to the banks for more money to do it all over again, while living their own lifestyles of the rich and famous, season after season, for decades, off of these same bank loans, as well. Even Donald Trump said, when he discussed his business career, he could not believe how much money the banks would give to him over and over. Or, Other People`s Money, as they it is so rightly called.
Good grief. Surely we don’t want to force people in third world countries to have to wear H@M. They suffer enough indignity.
NA: I did not really want to name names, but what does it hurt. And also, so that H&M does not end up being the scapegoat now, over time. Perhaps this tiny list would expand more about what Brands have been caught and then exposed for furtively destroying their merchandize that was not selling: Chanel, Burberry, Nike, H&M, Louis Vuitton, Stella McCartney, Richemont of Cartier and Montblanc, Gucci, and Hugo Boss etc, etc. etc.. This list is not at all an exhaustive list of course, and is only covering some Brands that were actually caught burning and shredding and burying and other methods of destroying some of their luxury merchandise, as I discussed earlier with BU123, and like I discussed earlier, many of their clients did not like hearing about this destruction for various reasons, and neither did Wall Street, etc. etc.
Surely people in `third world countries` would be savvy enough to at least resell the luxury items, if these items were actually sent to them and not actually destroyed like they were, if they preferred not to wear them, nor carry them, yes? And it is quite easy to look up the purchase value of even the least expensive luxury items, especially, of these famous luxury designers, and the resell marked is a large and extensive part of the `gig` economy, that the `third world people` out of necessity partake in very much. Anyway, happy shopping everyone.
By the way, I saw a Hermes handbag on sale. Price: $450, 000.00. Four Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars. Close to a half of a million dollars for a handbag. What will happen to it, if it is not sold? Who knows.
PSE
I was only making a joke because I have been in H&M and found their stuff generally of pretty poor quality, but I am not impressed by brands or labels. I’m more interested in people’s actions or what comes out of their mouths rather than who they’ve paid to be a walking billboard for. The former is harder to dress up than the latter.
Oh, Princess, you’ve made me so homesick.
Used to love getting a group together and doing the annual window decoration crawl in Manhattan: Macy’s, Barney’s, Saks, etc … Generally with high-proof lubrication before and after, just to keep us warm, of course.
I wanted genuine designer labels, however, I’d hit the thrift shops, especially the ones on the upper East side. Society matrons wear something once or not at all, then give it away. $300 suits for $15, often with the tags still on them. Dry-cleaning frequently costs more than the item
Violetta: I am not against designer labels at all, per se. Because for many of them, the quality first brought the merchandise to its famed statues. But, then, after a while, one has to be careful to know if the quality is still there. And then, one also has to be careful of unwarranted and irrational price inflation after a while. `Old Money,` especially. excels at this knowledge. It is like a TV series: Many of these series hire the best writers for the initial pilot and for quite a few episodes, and then they fall off and hire cheaper writers, and suddenly, a viewer wonders why they do not enjoy the series any longer. Because it has changed, from whence it came. These designers do the same. They sometimes fall off of what made them famed in the first place. They even later hire psychos to design the line, and they change away from the top professional craftsmen, and they then market hard to keep the price up, and all that, and party and live it up, especially the ones that are living off of lucrative bank loans after a while. That is why `New Money` is especially good for many such famous and rich designers/brands that are permitted to live off of bank loans in grand style in the end. It looks good for them if someone is still actually wearing the line, hahaha, and if the new money stops buying the line as well, then these designers/brands still subtly give their clothing away to these influencers on youtube and instagram and such to push for them and to push onto their followers. Very cheap advertising for them. To keep a public business face. They keep one fingernail in the game of the real world, that way. While keeping both hands in the cookie jars of the banks to thrive, because many famous designers/brands no longer even know how to make a profit from actually selling enough of their clothing and handbags and pens, and shoes, etc., and other merchandize, and for decades, at this point in time.
PSE
You made some excellent points there. I have noticed that some brands are revered because they have excellent quality while others are revered because they used to have excellent quality, riding the coat tails of a good name and good marketing,
I find that wearing visible brand logos can look tacky and has become less and less popular, a sign that brand exclusivity is loosing it’s pull, like paying the brand to do the marketing for them.
A friend of mine is studying to become a fashion designer and I remember when I got to know her a few years ago, she made some money on the side by actually removing the brand logos from expensive brands. A few local businessmen would give their poloshirts to her and she would rid it off the not-so-tiny crocodile or polo pony with operative precision. I still have some in my closet and catch myself covering up the logo with my hair when I wear it, maybe I should make use of her services.
It is certainly a good idea to look into new and on-the-up brands that are more ethical and often provide top notch quality at a very reasonable price. A much more interesting field of study than chasing the lost glory of certain brands that have now become Made in China without letting their consumers know.
Princess:
The influencers thing has killed fashion. I can imagine wanting to look like Linda Evangelista or Claudia Schiffer, but why in the hell would I want to look like some pointless bimbo with a big butt?
Desiree: Have you noticed how much easier men have it in fashion and style. I remember reading an article about Coco Channel. She wanted to bring some of that standard and comfort and quality and ease into women`s clothing. And she did. Well, before psychos started designing for that line, here and there. And other lines. And also, like you say, the quality comes and goes on a lot it, as well as the aesthetic comes and goes, and sometimes returns. And then, they just burn or buy or shred what their clients refuse to buy.
I would love to find new designers reasonably priced with the good quality and their aesthetics still intact. All in one location. lol. Many of the famous designers were once like that before the became spoiled. I never got into the luxury designer clothing for various reasons, including the cost, but I never was against it, and I admired a lot of the beautiful clothing, but if one is not aware of what they are doing these days, when purchasing, one can basically just burn their money and toss the ashes, when buying some of it.
I was looking at a video on youtube, where these women from `new money,` were actually hiring these women from `old money` to take them out and about and shopping to show them what was what, quality and brand wise, before they made many of their purchases. That is very smart `new money` women, IMO.
Wow. I find it easier to understand narcissists than the need for Influencers. It’s truly unfathomable to me.
Well we all know it’s a two horse race. A choice between a narcissist who bleeds the poor until they starve to death, or an extreme left wing Marxist nutcase who makes promises that even leprechauns wouldn’t be able to grant.
Why on earth can’t we have a centrist option?
Well push-me pull-you. I’m fed up of Boris so I’ve voted for Corbyn. I reckon it’s his turn to fuck up the country this time.
I’m not sure what’s more shocking the list of sackings and lies that is public knowledge and he ends up prime minister or that even one woman would ever be attracted to him never mind several.
Both.
Is John Major a Narcissist ?
Just boring.
Ah Ha ! I spotted a normal, remember the spitting image puppet of him , just totally grey , of course I’m sure your much too young HG to remember the program 😀
Blair?
Steptoe senior Hilarious, I suppose we are lucky that the more handsome of the 2 won😱
If anyone wants to dispel the myth that all narcissists are attractive, looking at politicians is the evidence for all to see
Lisa: Attraction is often mysterious. Who is attracted to whom, will never surprise me.
We are living in narcissistic times as regards world leaders it seems, though probably throughout history world leadership I would assume has always been very attractive to Narcissists. Quite a crop at the moment though: Trump, Boris, Kim Jong and that calculating psychopathic narcissist Putin. Watch out for his minions dispensing Radium xyz with the aid of an umbrella tip or fiddling with a helicopter prior to it transporting a political rival to a rally.
Australia has had its fair share of Narc-like PMs swimming around in a little pond, being all grandiose and overestimating their influence on the world stage. Cringe worthy when recognised for what it is.
But what a breath of fresh air the lovely and empathic Jacinda Ardern, PM of NZ, is. NZ is a very interesting country. It is home to a history and political culture that appears to be unsuitable to the needs of Narcissists.
AnneB: Regarding Putin: Unless Russia`s media is rigged, his populace appears to hold Putin in good favor.
Putin is God-like for the majority of Russians & he would win big time even in democratically held elections, if that arrangement would have been possible in a Russia.
What do you feel that Putin thinks about Boris. Especially with Putin`s reported harshness towards caucasian muslims and such dynamics, in his realm? I do not think the 2 will become BBF. (my computer is glitching….this could be a duplicate). I guess trying to reconcil, Brexit and Putin and Boris and caucasian muslims is all too much for my computer.
I don’t think Putin thinks of Boris at all.
Dearest HG: I would wager that Putin is one of the rare: Greater Elite Narcississt. People and Politicians that ignore him and discount him do so at their own risk.
PSE, me too! (re Putin being a GEN). It would be very difficult and dangerous to try and uncover Putin’s machinations during his life and rise to power, let alone how he operates/controls now to maintain that power, as the murders of various Russian journalists likely attest to.
Hello PSE! Not quite sure what you mean by rigged? I think that the Russian state does control the media there to a large extent, quite a few noted journalists have been murdured/targetted as hits’ Expatriate political dissidents who have fled to other countries, including the UK, have been sought out and murdered there (hence the reference to umbrella tips!). Putin’s stare is frightening! I’ve heard of an analysis that Putin’s popularity with the masses is carefully manipulated, photos of him bare chested in Siberia hunting a bear and so forth. Some analyses see his popularity with the masses as maintained through this sort of cult promotion. I believe or imagine that he has a very efficient inner fuel matrix, lieutenants and coteries, that keep his power in place through both overt and covert force and manipulation. It seems to be very effective facade maintenance.
Also, from what I see in the media, those who do protest in Russia re freedom of speech, the media, even music are quickly and forceably shut down.
I’d love to see H.G. put Putin under the narcscope!
Voting again already? That was a short term! brb…going to Google
“HG Tudor says:
December 17, 2019 at 16:04
Thank you for your thoughtful observations Emma. For an empathic person, it will seem like a lonely path but as you identify, that is preferable to ensnarement.”
Thanks HG, my love of truth and love of freedom keeps me on the right track, and it is a relatively small price to pay for being free. I am developing a new way of choosing friends.