Why the Narcissist Wants You Dead


“I’m going to fucking kill you!”

“You’d better do it or you’re dead!”

“I wish you were dead!”

“You are going to die.”

You may well have heard such threats and declarations of intent from our kind. The savage Lesser who has erupted in a volcanic reaction of ignited fury who grabs the kitchen knife and thrusts it through the air towards his victim, the self-pitying Mid Ranger who in a tantrum of impotence and hatred expresses his wish that you were dead or the dread words delivered with the reptilian smile of the Greater ; each school has its own ways of issuing this threat.

Yet, is this just wishful thinking or a solid desire to see you dead? Are these words issued more for effect than the reality of murdering you, causing an ‘accident’ or hoping that some intervening act causes you to be wiped from this mortal coil?

The general position is that we do not actually want you dead in the sense of physically dead. There are notable exceptions, which we shall address below, but it is rare for those exceptions to occur. The fact is that numerous commentators believe that we want you dead and the truth is, we do not. That is another myth that is held about our kind, that it is our ultimate desire, our final expression of victory for us to kill you. It is largely incorrect and here is why :-

  1. A dead appliance is a useless appliance. Your purpose is threefold to us, whether you are a tertiary, secondary or primary source. You are to provide us with fuel, character traits and/or residual benefits and the more important the appliance in our fuel matrix, the more likely that you will provide all three and do so impressively. Accordingly, if you are providing us with the very things that we want and need it makes no sense at all to render you incapable of providing them. But, I hear you ask, what of the appliances that are no longer functioning in the way that we want? A valid question.

Firstly, when you stop functioning in terms of the provision of positive fuel (you do not provide enough/frequently enough/it runs stale) we switch to devaluation and even though we hate you and paint you black for your treachery in no longer fulfilling your specified role through the provision of positive fuel, you still have a role to play. You become the fountain of negative fuel.

Secondly, you still have a role to play with regard to the provision of character traits and residual benefits. You may be supporting us financially, taking care of us, running a household, caring for the children and other matters which not only benefit us day-to-day but support our all important façade.

Thirdly, you are required for the purposes of triangulation with our other appliances and maintaining the provision of fuel as we seek out your ultimate replacement.

Now you ask, what then when we choose to dis-engage, clearly we have no longer       any desire to interact with you at all, why not kill you then? These leads us on to the other reasons why we choose not to kill you.

2. Notwithstanding our contempt for rules, the law and regulations, the higher functioning of our kind are mindful of the adverse interference that comes from nosey law enforcement if we murder you. It brings unwanted scrutiny and the potential to fetter our right to do what we want and we are not so stupid as to act in a way that will blatantly jeopardise that.

3. We treat you as dead without the inconvenience of actually killing you. We effectively delete you when we concentrate on the new IPPS through the new golden period. Accordingly, by ignoring you, removing you from social media postings, blocking you, not answering your messages or calls, then we have ‘killed’ you and this provides us with a far more satisfactory outcome.

4. You are ‘kept alive’ for the inevitable hoover. Although wanting to see you, interact with you or indeed do anything with you at all is last on our list when we have dis-engaged from you, unconsciously there remains that advantage to be achieved by keeping you alive so we can hoover you for fuel (positive or negative) or achieve this as well as bring you back into the Formal Relationship to acquire the other aspects of the Prime Aims. Remember, there has been a considerable investment in you and whilst we ‘kill you’ by putting you from our minds during the golden period with the new IPPS, we will want to draw down on our investment in due course. Accordingly, there is no point physically killing you.

5. There are alternative methods where we can in effect murder you without the potential risk to liberty. The key ways that this is done are as follows :-

a. Character assassination – ( The Paranoia of Character Assassination )

b. Smearing – ( see Smear and Loathing )

c. Silent Treatments – ( The Smiling Assassin )  and ( 17 Salvos of Silence )

d. Devaluation as a whole

Thus whilst we do not physically kill you, we slay your character, your reputation, your self-worth, your sense of existence, your connection to us and still continue to draw fuel from you, something we could not do if you were physically dead.

5. Punishment. By you remaining alive, we are able to punish you. This asserts and maintains our sense of superiority, enables us to draw fuel and ensures that we feel a sense of achievement and retribution against you. It also means we can keep on punishing you, something that could not be done if we were to actually murder you.

6. By stating our intent or desire to kill you, this simple form of threat carries with it the ability to gain fuel from provoking a reaction from you, but also allows the establishment of superiority. It is a simple sentence but one which carries significant power with it. This low usage of energy with maximum impact appeals hugely to our kind and therefore it makes far more sense for us to THREATEN than to EXECUTE. Yes, in that moment we do want to kill you or see you dead because you have done something which has mortally offended us and therefore our reaction in uttering those words is entirely in accordance with a desire to kill but we do not actually do so (and ultimately we do not want to do so) because it goes against our fundamental needs.

Thus for all of these reasons whilst we may say we want you dead or that we want to kill you, the reality is we do not and we will not.

Thus this is the general rule, however, as with all rules, there are exceptions. What are the exceptions when the desire to kill is acted on?

  1. The loss of control through ignited fury. Whilst the ignition of fury can potentially result in any school of narcissist entering a frenzy whereby there is the commission of physical violence, it is the Lesser who is most likely to murder as a consequence of the loss of control. This does not mean that all Lessers will kill, but rather, of all the schools, when there is a serious loss of control resulting in the ignition of fury, then the Lesser will want to kill and can and does kill. The fuel arising from the act, as he stabs, bludgeons, throttles or beats will be significant but not enough to heal the wound that has resulted in the ignition of fury and the loss of control, meaning the murderous act continues until the victim lies dead. Therein the fuel halts from the deceased victim. The narcissist may gain fuel from the reaction of witnesses also but ultimately that burst of fuel has gone with the demise of the victim. The murdering Lesser may use the fact of his killing to gain fuel in the future but as of now, he has lost a major appliance (if for instance he has murdered his IPPS) and therefore he will face a fuel crisis if he does not achieve fuel from alternative sources.
  2. Going, going gone. There are circumstances where the narcissist recognises that the major fuel provider is ‘on the way out’ and thus the fuel is going to be lost anyway. This is not the situation where the appliance is escaping or leaving – our narcissistic perspective of you always belonging to us means that your escape, leaving or departure is not something that will happen because we control you and we will bring you back under our control through a Initial Grand Hoover or through Follow-Up Hoovers. Thus, if someone is about to escape, move away etc, this is not applicable. The situation of Going, Going, Gone applies to where the appliance is at risk of dying. There are two clear situations where this arises ; terminal injury or illness and suicide. In respect of terminal injury or illness, the narcissist knows that the fuel source will not be around for much longer and therefore ‘helping’ this person on their way would appeal to particular narcissists. There also has to be a benefit associated with such an act, namely doing it as an act of revenge for wounding, punishing for railing against the narcissist’s control and such like.

With regard to suicide, if the narcissist recognises that the victim is at a very low ebb and therefore is likely to end their own life and thus deprive (in one final act of defiance) the narcissist of fuel etc, the narcissist will encourage that individual to take their life and push them over the edge. This is rare, but accords with a desire on the part of the narcissist to punish and gain revenge. This punishment and revenge goes beyond that normally experienced and would be as a consequence of a major exposure and/or major wounding. Thus if an individual is in a position whereby suicidal ideation occurs, the narcissist is aware of this and senses that it is likely to occur, the narcissist, in accordance with his or her god-like view of themselves and the need to exact punishing revenge will pressure, cajole, encourage and manipulate to push the victim over the edge so that he or she commits suicide.

3.  Malice. A Greater Narcissist wants you dead. There is no Going, Going Gone scenario which would be harnessed by any of the schools of narcissists. In this instance the malicious and calculating Greater has determined that your death is required. Again, this is rare and the Greater will have evaluated that the loss of a useful appliance is offset by the need to dis-incentivise this individual. There will be no clumsy rage-filled Lesser bludgeoning, or pillow-smothering Mid-Ranger with the dying cancer-ridden parent. Here the Greater sees you as a problem, an obstacle which must be removed. Usually it will be because the Greater recognises that you have access to information which will cause him or her considerable difficulty or that you have the ability to create a significant exposure problem. The Greater will not go down this route lightly, instead he or she will look to manipulate the situation in an alternative manner, but ultimately the Greater’s malicious core, their need for the maintenance of the status quo and their superiority means that sometimes, sometimes there is a need to remove an individual completely. It may be made to be an accident, it may be subtle, it may involve a contract killing, but certain individuals, on rare occasions, will be removed because they pose a threat to the Greater’s plans and control. The individual may be a romantic appliance, a business appliance or a familial appliance, but if the Greater deems their removal necessary and this outweighs the benefits of continued punishment, torture and fuel provision from this individual, then they will be dis-incentivised.

Thus, the prevailing circumstances are that we do not want you dead, no matter how many times it might be threatened, because an alive appliance is a very useful appliance. However, on rare occasions there will be exceptions.

9 thoughts on “Why the Narcissist Wants You Dead

  1. dollysupreme says:

    My Narc wanted me dead. I actually caught him with a 20 year old girl. His daughters acquaintance. She was a cheap young slag, who he fed drugs to all night. The wounding to him was massive. He knew the fall out from exposure if I revealed everything would be huge. He hated the fact he couldn’t lie his way out of it. I also have pictures and evidence on my phone. His image would be destroyed.
    So he encouraged me to commit suicide. I almost did. And he thought I had. Except I wasnt. I was picked up in the early hours after he encouraged me to walk out into a freezing cold tide while he went home to bed and slept……..
    Easier for him if I was dead…….But here I am lol. I’ve had my breakdown……. He will be sweating on the end of lockdown wondering if I will expose him. Because I’ve regained my own stability now. His two following hoover attempts have failed……I’m waiting for a spectacular smear campaign seems as I’m inconveniently alive.

  2. lickemtomorrow says:

    Another very interesting post. I note the use of the term ‘dis-incentivized’. A polite way of saying ‘killed’? Or a necessary way of authoring (not authorizing) an execution?

    Maybe another twist on this is the parent who kills their child/children in an act of revenge on the other parent (where there has been some kind of relationship breakdown normally). With the lack of conscience and empathy involved, it’s possible a narcissist could continue to draw fuel from such an horrific act for a lifetime. They do not feel the loss of their children the way a normal parent would, but they can exist on the thought fuel of the grief of the other parent and heal the massive wound caused by the separation. I am aware of a number of these cases. While they might be seen as crimes of vengeance, the difficulty I would have, and most people would have, is around how can a parent kill their own child so callously? I think I am beginning to find the answer to that question here. And the reasoning behind their spouses leaving them in the first place. Where control, etc. could be cited, I wonder how many ever thought to consider narcissism the real reason behind the tragedy.

  3. Wiser Now says:

    I believe my ex truly wanted me dead. He allowed (encouraged) me to drive alone in a blizzard to an airport 3 hours away to get on a plane to visit my family in a different State. It was scary and treacherous. Were I to die, he could have acted the grieving widow for all to see, including his new appliance. Unfortunately for him, I made it because I drove close to the tail lights of the Mack truck in front of me in almost zero visability. He was not happy, lol. I left him shortly thereafter.

    1. HG Tudor says:


      1. Wiser Now says:

        Yes, right!

  4. Karen maher says:

    What if narc is so obsessed he never leaves you alone and continue s to stalk

    1. HG Tudor says:

      You ensure he has no choice but to leave you alone. I will show you how. Organise a consultation.

    2. DrHouse says:

      My son was on the receiving end of emotional abuse and she also hit him, always accidentally. No bruises. This is at least what she always says. Also she did this tickle thing, where she tickled him and he said stop, stop. I became aware and walked over. I believe she tickled him in a way that I feel was like torture in a sense. Of course how do I prove it.
      I remember talking to my son and asking him after he was upset: Did Mummy do it on accident or purpose? He was quiet, and said on purpose. Then he asked if I will call the police? I said, only if she hit you on purpose, he then quickly changed his story to an accident.

      Recently he was swimming. And he told me that mummy pushed him under water On purpose( with the hands on the head) after I believe he squirting or splashing her with water. She has a short fuse, understand no jokes and takes everything like an attack.

      And also one time he came to me, and said he believes mommy wants to kill him, as she seemingly had a weird look.

      I’m pretty sure she’s on drugs.

      Hg, from your experience, how likely would a narc harm a child seriously?

      What can I do short term to protect him?

      1. HG Tudor says:

        It depends on the school of narcissist and relevant factors with regard to control, use this https://narcsite.com/narc-detector-2/
        As explained previously, this link is paramount in terms of protecting your son https://narcsite.com/child-defender/

Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous article

Drunk With Fatigue