Kakistocracy: You Asked for It

FCC Chair Ajit Pai Unmasked Psychopath?

Many have accused FCC Chairman Ajit Pai of being a telecom shill between his background as a former Verizon lawyer and his determination to ignore all public input (not to mention complaints about comment bots) as he kills net neutrality. And apparently, his attempts at joking about it are only reinforcing those views. Gizmodo has obtained video of Pai trying to roast himself at the Federal Communications Bar Association’s annual event, including a pre-recorded skit where an actual Verizon executive (senior VP Kathy Grillo) talks about wanting to “brainwash and groom a Verizon puppet” to become the FCC chairman, with Pai responding that it sounds like an “awesome” idea.

Aside from the jokes falling flat, there are all kinds of problems with the routine. To start, FCC officials shouldn’t be joking about being shills. Whether or not they have industry backgrounds (like former Chairman Tom Wheeler), they’re supposed to take corruption allegations seriously instead of turning them into comedy sketches. The humor fails in part because there’s a painful degree of truth to it — it wouldn’t have come up if Pai weren’t pursuing the exact deregulation policies that major telecoms want. And crucially, telecom executives shouldn’t ever be involved. If anything, Grillo’s inclusion in the skit supports accusations that Pai is on the take, since he’s clearly cozy enough with Verizon to recruit one of its VPs for a gag.

For that matter, why would a Verizon executive agree to appear in a skit that makes light of corruption, especially knowing that the video might become public and damage the company’s reputation?

Excerpt from “FCC Chairman Ajit Pai ‘jokes’ about being a Verizon shill” by Joe Fingas, December 9, 2017

 

Psychopath TEST Politicians
DomesticEnemies.Org

.

.

The Corporate Psychopath’s Arsenal

An adult having a childish tantrum = psychopathy

Psychopathy, often confused with sociopathy, is typically defined as a personality disorder with symptoms of persistent antisocial behaviour such as frequent violence; impaired or nil empathy and remorse, and brash, disinhibited, egotistical personas. Whilst the term is often used by the media to describe the psychotic and mentally ill, Professor Robert Hare, the creator of the ‘Psychopathy Checklist’, explains that psychopaths are not disorientated with reality and suffering from hallucinations or extreme distress but rather are very rational and have a high awareness of their behaviour and environment. All of their resulting actions are made out of choice and are freely exercised.

The Psychopathy Checklist, the most valid and reliable psychopathy measuring tool, points to three recurring observable characteristics of psychopathy: boldness, disinhibition and meanness. Psychopaths are well-known for their lack of empathy, coupled with predatory and parasitic behaviour. They are found in 1% of the general population but the number rises to 3.5% at the management level in corporate organisations.

The Corporate Psychopath’s Behaviour

Corporate Psychopaths are too often successful in organisations and the workplace. They are very career orientated but behaviourally they are ruthless, unethical, manipulative and extremely exploitative in order to quickly climb the corporate ladder. Some behavioural trademarks are:

• Superficial charisma
• Emotionally shallow
• Pathological lying and manipulation
• Lack of empathy, remorse or guilt
• Promiscuous sexual behaviour
• Grandiose sense of self-worth
• Constant impulsive and irresponsible behaviour
• Lack of realistic long term goals

Psychopathic behaviour differs when exposed in different environments. At an organisational level or within the workplace environment, these behaviours would typically result in scenarios such as:

• Frequent temper tantrums to cause high anxiety amongst peers
• Ridiculing or blaming others for bad work performance
• Intentionally spreading malicious lies for their benefit
• Stealing credit for the accomplishments of others or sabotaging others
• Refusing to take responsibility for behaviour or errors
• Doing whatever it takes to close a deal with no regards for ethics or legality
• Often taking the belongings of others without any intention of returning

Research shows that there are more instances of corporate psychopathic behaviour at the management level when compared to the general population, the reported scenarios are as such:

• Setting unrealistic and unachievable expectations to set employees up for failure
• Reluctance or refusal outright to attend meetings with more than one person
• Threatens perceived opponents with dismissal or discipline in order to taint employee profile
• Refusal to provide sufficient training or instructions to victim
• Invasion of personal privacy of employees
• Multiple sexual encounters with junior and/or senior employees
• Developing new ideas without real follow through
• Public humiliation of others and even encouraging of peers to torment or humiliate others

Havens for Corporate Psychopathy

Corporate Psychopaths are attracted to organisations and positions where they can easily gain power, influence, position, prestige and money typically in the financial services, media and legal sector. Other less known sectors include the civil services (e.g. the military, police, government and even the clergy). Clive Boddy’s paper on “The Corporate Psychopaths Theory of the Global Financial Crisis” comprehensively explains and illustrates how corporate psychopathy when left to flourish at the top hierarchy of companies, specifically Wall Street Banks, were the main culprits of the Financial Crisis of 2007-08 in America. None of the biggest culprits were prosecuted and they got away scot-free with their ill-gotten gains. What was most revealing was their behaviour: their total lack of empathy for the chaos and massive suffering they had caused to individuals, economies and countries.

There are measures to identify, prevent and monitor instances of corporate psychopathic behaviour in the workplace. The dilemma is the reluctance to use them due to company policies, data protection and confidentiality clauses. In our next article in this series, we will delve deeper into details concerning workplace norms, employment cases, legal implications and penalties of corporate psychopathy from a British perspective.

Excerpt from “The Corporate Psychopath’s Arsenal” By C.H.I. Talent Assessment, Nov 8 2016

The Corrupt DSM-5’s Missing Psychopathy Diagnosis

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the United States and contains a listing of diagnostic criteria for every psychiatric disorder recognized by the U.S. healthcare system. In addition to supplying detailed descriptions of diagnostic criteria, the DSM is also a necessary tool for collecting and communicating accurate public health statistics about the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders.

In October, 2015, the DSM-5 transitioned to using ICD-10 codes for diagnosis, and psychopathy is listed as a diagnosis under Antisocial personality disorder, code ICD-10 F60.2

It is very suspicious that the DSM-5 itself would leave out psychopathy as a diagnosis, since it is a concrete neurological condition. It points to corruption in the APA (American Psychiatric Association), most likely by psychopaths being in control of the DSM-5 publication. Scrutiny needs to placed on David Kupfer, who served as Chair of the DSM-5 Task Force.

Psychopaths know they are different from childhood. They grow up to become more manipulative as time goes by. Society would best be served by diagnosing children so that they can be led to a less destructive life path. And, also schoolchildren should be taught the basics of personality disorders so we all don’t grow up oblivious to the deviant con artistry of the psychopath’s mask.

The missing psychopathy diagnosis in the DSM-5 means that mental health care workers are discouraged from education in pinpointing that specific type of harm to society. The majority of mental health care workers do not know how to identify victims of the extreme abuse of psychopaths, and we are left floundering to do our own research.

Excerpt from Comment submitted by Tina Taylor on October 31, 2016 to “Diagnosing Psychopathy:
Psychopaths are manipulative and dangerous” by Scott A. Bonn Ph.D., Oct 23, 2016

 

Psychopath TEST Politicians

…

.