Tagged: organizations Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 08:21 on December 15, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , organizations, , , , , , ,   

    Kakistocracy: You Asked for It 

    Ajit Pai Unmasked Psychopath?

    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

    .

    .

    Advertisements
     
    • nowve666 10:15 on December 15, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      What an arrogant little pup! But that’s life under Trump. You probably think Ajit is acting like a typical psychopath. To which, I would reply not all bad behavior is indicative of psychopathy. This whole regime is like an alternate “reality,” a dystopian nightmare (or is that a double negative). Thank gods, we still have recourse to legal challenges. That can delay implementation long enough for a new government. Jones’ election in Alabama is a sign the tables are turning. And that arrogant pup, Moore, refusing to concede has got to be for the purpose of letting McConnell delay seating Jones so he can push through that dreadful tax bill before he is seated. I read that a sizeable group of Trump supporters are evangelicals who think Trump was chosen by “God” to bring about Armageddon. So the worse Trump does, the happier they are. They want the world to end. If that isn’t psychotic, it’s pretty damned close. Which is an excellent opportunity for me to point out that people who aren’t psychopaths can do things politically that are as bad if not worse than what a psychopath could do. Instead of testing politicians for psychopathy, maybe we should be testing voters for insanity. (I say this tongue-in-cheek as I know what an impossibly bad idea it would be to test voters. I haven’t forgotten the literacy tests under Jim Crow. I wish I could really think of a way to protect ourselves from crazy voters but, as someone said, “Democracy is a bad form of government but all the others are so much worse.”)

      Liked by 1 person

      • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 10:22 on December 15, 2017 Permalink | Reply

        Anyone can be antisocial and corrupt. It is not necessarily the antisocial political moves that raise my suspicion of psychopathy. It is Ajit Pai’s gloating and glee over his foul actions that appear to be psychopathic.

        Like

        • James 13:26 on December 19, 2017 Permalink | Reply

          You’re probably right there. Non-psychopathic politicians tend to be embarrassed by their own destructive actions. Makes you question what embarrassment / guilt is for when it doesn’t prevent moral shittery.

          Happy Christmas to you both and / or happy hanukkah to Fran.

          Liked by 1 person

        • TypicalCritter 11:01 on December 27, 2017 Permalink | Reply

          I agree.

          Non-psychopathic politicians often see a world that’s heavily colored by their own ideology, then add the fact that people who are good at lying, are also often even better at believing the lies they tell themselves. Behavioral brakes like embarrassment / guilt can be useful to have, but they are even more useful if people take the time to reflect over their own actions sometimes.

          Liked by 1 person

          • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 17:54 on December 27, 2017 Permalink | Reply

            I think that the atmosphere of the political parties makes it into a gang or mafia type of expected loyalty situation. Nobody wants to be outcast, because they will be minimized and their voice will not be heard. The worst people then gain control of the best people in groups like that.

            Like

  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 11:04 on November 18, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , organizations, , , , , , ,   

    The Corporate Psychopath’s Arsenal 

    An adult having a childish tantrum = psychopathy

    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

     
  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 08:20 on October 31, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , organizations,   

    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

    .

     
    • James 08:20 on December 22, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      I know this is really old, but I only just saw it through Facebook. What about the current DSM entries relating to psychopathy (cluster B personality disorders, most particularly but not exclusively antisocial and narcissistic PDs) do you find inadequate?

      Like

    • nowve666 14:41 on December 22, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      ASPD is all about behavior. Psychopathy involves one’s whole inner landscape. People diagnosed with ASPD do not all have a measurement of 25 or above on the PCL-R. The difference between a psychopath and a narcissist is that the narc needs “supply” from other people. The narc cares who others think of him and is capable of guilt. BTW, how did the excerpt from my blog post end up here? I don’t think I put it here. Just wondering.

      Like

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: