The U.S. Constitution — is it dead or dying?

History has shown that republics last on average about 200 years.  The United State is a republic underpinned by a Constitution.   As we stand today, that constitution is defunct.

Here’s why:

  • In Congress a large and powerful government agency has been found full of corruption.   That agency is the Internal Revenue Service.  Lois Lerner an IRS operative in Cincinnati, OH, may be at the center of some of it.
  • Lerner repeatedly evokes the Fifth Amendment and refuses to answer question, thus preventing the investigation to proceed.
  • Congress which has the Constitutional authority could find her in contempt but President Barack Obama’s Justice Department under the leadership of Eric Holder would have to prosecute her.
  • There is little chance that the Obama regime’s prosecutorial arm would reveal corruption inside itself.
  • The courts are powerless without the justice department
Constitutional toilet paper?

Constitutional toilet paper?

Meanwhile POTUS governs by fiat.   The representative democracy that was given checks and balances has been wadded up and thrown in the trash.  Right now the Constitution is simply a museum piece.

Most dismaying is that after 150 years and a civil war that cost a half million lives, some radicals talking about session.  What does that say?  That many don’t expect that would be the kind of compromising that made the Constitution a workable document.

This blogger remembers Ronald Reagan, who was elected along with a Democrat controlled House of Representative and a slim majority in the Senate.   Reagan proceeded to negotiate with the House members and formed a coalition of Democrats and Republicans.  That coalition formed a majority that passed Reagan’s program and turned a deep recession into prosperity.  That’s the way a republic should work.  That is the way the founding fathers envisioned that a republic should work.

That has been lost and along with it the fundamental document that it all depended on.

 

 

Texas Independence Day

By The InkDemon©

The slavery issue often comes up with the people talk about the Texas Declaration of Independence.

I am a native Texan and some of my ancestors were here before 1836, the date of Texas Independence. It is a joyous day which I celebrate.

However, in the back of my mind I am also reminded of the darker side of that event.

Mexico gain independence from Spain in 1821. By 1824 the Mexicans and the Texans help form a true constitutional government.

The truth be known. The Independence document complains that Texas sought its independence because the will of Texans were overridden by an assembly in the capital of the state of Coahuila y Tejas, Mexico. The capital of the state was in Saltillo.

This took place during the first Mexican Republic which the Texans initially supported.

Immediately, the assembly forbade any further immigration by Anglo-Americans into Mexico.  The assembly went further:

“In 1823, Mexico forbade the sale or purchase of slaves and required that the children of slaves be freed when they reached fourteen. Any slave introduced into Mexico by purchase or trade would also be freed. Many of the colonists in Texas, however, owned slaves which they had brought with them from the United States. In 1827, the legislature of Coahuila y Tejas outlawed the introduction of additional slaves into the state and granted freedom at birth to all children born to a slave,” according to Wikipedia.com.

That legislation by the Coahuila y Tejas assembly stands as a testament to the humanity of the elected representatives of Mexico.  Sadly, this is not revisionist history as has been alleged on another Liberty Linked site, but the actual history.  It is the history that  many Texans never received.

The Texans, my ancestors, first refused to free their slaves and threatened revolt in 1827. Mexico relented at first; however, in 1832, slavery was outlawed entirely.

Mexico, fearing that the U.S. would attempt to annex Texas, then outlawed all immigration from the United States. The Texans responded by taking over fortress city of Anachuac, Texas. The small rebellion was over very shortly.

Then the struggled took a different direction. General Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana took over the central government and shelved the Mexican Constitution of 1824. He became a dictator.

Santa Ana abolished the state of Coahuila y Tejas. That prompted the Texans to revolt.

While Texans deliberated the fate of independence at Washington-on-the-Brazos, that fateful day, they also decided the fate of African Americans.

The Texans concerns about their servants was buried in the verbiage of the Declaration of Independence. Everyone living at that time knew exactly what it meant.

Now, more than 150 years later, Texans are concerned with immigration.

This blogger does not believe anyone in the Tea Parties of North Texas stands for restoring slavery or condones slavery.

Our stated purpose however ironically is opposition to illegal immigration. Illegal immigration was not an issue with the Mexicans. Their issue was any Anglo immigration. The Tea Party’s issues is illegal immigration. There is a fine line there.

Eventually, Santa Ana signed a document — a treaty —  giving the Republic of Texas lands far beyond the original boundaries. For example, the southern boundary of Texas was a roughly-defined line that included the Nueces River. The Nueces empties into Corpus Christi Bay.

The document Santa Ana signed marked the Rio Grande as the southern border.  That is roughly 150 miles south of the Nueces River.  This effectively gave the Republic of Texas a claim to all villages in what is now the state of New Mexico.  In fact, every significant Spanish settlement in North American. This was a document which was bound to cause controversy.  It did!

We separated from Mexico but not completely. Spanish-Mexico remains with us to this day.

The Trinity, the Brazos, and the Colorado Rivers are Spanish names meaning or referring to The Holy Trinity, the security of being in Arms of God, and Colorful River. 

Even the very name of our state, Texas, is derived from the Spanish which means Friendly or Friendship.

Few names commemorate the black Americans who were forced to come here.  They, too, are very much a part of Texas.

But today (March 2), we celebrate the birth of Texas just as we also celebrate Cinco de Mayo (Fifth of May) and Diez y Seis (16th of September), days special to Mexico and Latinos living in Texas.

Our histories are forever tied together. Our people are forever tied together in culture and religion. All over Texas, we are reminded of our Spanish-Mexican heritage by the names of the landmarks.

South of here on Interstate Highway 45 lies the County of Navarro. It’s county seat is Corsicana. Jose Antonio Navarro was a native of San Antonio, and he fought with the Texans. The city is named in honor of his mother who was a native or Corsica, an island in the Mediterrian Sea.

Juan Sequin on the other hand fought with Texans but later grew disgusted at the turn of events after Independence and moved his family to Mexico.

According to the Houston Institute for Culture:

But later on, as Mayor of San Antonio, [Seguin] and other Tejanos felt the hostile encroachments of the growing Anglo power against them. After receiving a series of death threats, Seguín relocated his family in Mexico, where he was coerced [Editor’s note: Could have been conscripted.] into military service and fought against the US in 1846-1848 Mexican War

Another Mexican who fought with the Texans was Ignacio Zaragoza. His family later moved to Matamoros, Mexico. It is clear, that Zaragoza was a Mexican, who was fighting to restore the Constitution of 1824, not Texas Independence nor annexation with the United States.

He later joined the Mexican Army and fought to restore the Mexican Constitution of 1824. He became a general in the Mexican army.  Ironically, Zaragoza ended up fighting along side Santa Ana against the French at the Battle of Puebla. That battle is celebrated today as Cinco de Mayo.

Some say this was the flag that flew over the AlamoThe only flag claimed to fly over the Alamo was the Mexican Flag with 1824 in the middle.

Ironically, the English Parliament abolished slavery in its colonies in 1833. A monument to that act of Parliament stands on the grounds of the Parliament beside the River Thames.

Monument to the 1833 Act of Emancipation by the British ParliamentTexas rolled the dice for slavery twice. In 1836 they went against the winds of change and won. The last time they rolled the fateful dice, they came up with snake-eyes.

What blurs the truth about the Texas War of Independence is Hollywood. Filmmakers took liberties with the truth.  That imprinted falsehoods that will last forever in many people’s minds.  Hollywood is famous for revising history!

We can only speculate how different Texas would have been as a Republic either with or without Mexico and free of slavery.  The entire western world was ending slavery as Texas and the United States were fully bathed in it.

The Inkdemon believes it would have been a better Texas.  Here maybe we can take a lesson from Mexico.  They have a history of slavery, and they cleansed themselves of it.

Sources:

Footnote:  Santa Ana was president of Mexico 11 times.  He was a hero to the Mexicans at the Battle of Puebla and against the American Army in the Mexican War of 1848.

Santa Ana lost his leg in that war with the French.

At the Battle of Cerro Gorda, the Mexicans were surprised, forcing him to run away, leaving his prosthetic limb.  That leg remains today is Illinois National Guard Museum, which is virtually a roadside museum.

So since when does a soldier’s prosthetic limb become a source of pride and put up for display?  Mexico has repeatedly asked for the return of the leg.

Does capturing  a soldier’s prosthetic leg rise to the level of heroism?  Is it such a “national treasure” that the U.S. should refuse to return it to Mexico?  The Inkdemon believes Mexico is on the right side of this issue.

Describing the Obama Regime

We must be consistent on how we describe the Obama regime.

We must remember Google picks up these comments on blogs and even tweets and indexes them.  The more often a word or phrase is used, the higher Google and the other search engines with put weight on them. 

Here are some examples:

  • It’s is the Obama Regime – not White House or D.C.   Example:  The Obama Regime was the laughing stock of the world for his failure to ….
  • Use the words fail or failure generously when mentioning Obama.  Those words get picked up and associated.   Example:  He’s Obama,  the leader of the Obama Regime,  and he’s a failed president.
  • Also use communism or socialism when mentioning Obama, his regime or his failed presidency.    Example:  The Obama regime’s venture into overt socialism and his association with avowed communists have contributed to the regime’s failure.
  • Also the word “joker” should be used to associate with Obama.  Example: Not only is his picture plastered almost everywhere as a Joker on posters at the demonstration, but the Obama Regime’s failure to act on the economic crisis makes him a true joker.
  • Another word to associate with Obama is narcissist.  Read this link.  Example:  The Obama Regime showed the narcissism of its leader today when members failed to show respect for the flag.

 

The Obama Death-Stare

 Obama_animated_gangster_death_stare 
Watch the animated GIF above

There may be more to the Obama Death-Stare.  According to one psychologist pathological narcissists display the following traits:

  1. Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.
  2. Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).
  3. Displays false modesty and unctuous “folksiness” but unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true Obama is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.
  4. Has a messianic-cosmic vision of himself and his life and his “mission”. Consequently, sets unrealistic goals within unrealistic timeframes.
  5. Talks about himself in the 3rd person singular or uses the regal “we” and craves to be the exclusive center of attention, even adulation

Obama used the pronoun “I” 56 times in his 45-minute speech.

Obama the Narcissist?

Editors Note: 

I didn’t copy this from someone else’s blog or a website.  I got this from the author’s own website.

This article is quite long,  but I urge you to read it all the way through.  If you cannot, then scan it and carefully read the highlighted areas.  I embedded a video/audio of a radio talk show host at the end.

I tried to be balanced by including Snopes.com and re-printing the entire Dr. Vaknin article along with his disclaimer. Thank you.

Who is more likely to run up the red flag when they spot a narcissist than the Israeli Jews?

The Jews suffered under the most horrible narcissist of the 20th Century, one Adolf Hitler.  Der Fuhrer and his cult following were responsible for the deaths of six million Jews and millions more non-Jews elsewhere.

A prominent Israeli psychologist has studied President Barack Obama.  He says that Obama displays the signs of being a pathological narcissist.   That psychologist is Dr. Sam Vaknin.  He penned an article about Obama earlier.  The source of this blog is Dr. Vaknin’s own website.  LINK 

To be fair, the internet myth buster website, Snopes.com, weighed into the issue.  Their conclusions were mixed.  LINK

This is what Dr. Vaknin wrote.

Granted, only a qualified mental health diagnostician can determine whether someone suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) and this, following lengthy tests and personal interviews. [CLICK HERE TO] Read the disclaimer below.  But, in the absence of access to Barack Obama, one has to rely on his overt performance and on testimonies by his closest, nearest and dearest.

Narcissistic leaders are nefarious and their effects pernicious. They are subtle, refined, socially-adept, manipulative, possessed of thespian skills, and convincing. Both types equally lack empathy and are ruthless and relentless or driven.

Obama’s childhood may have supported or triggered Obama’s narcissistic behavior, Dr. Vaknin writes:

Obama’s early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations. Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then, his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia: a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995.

Pathological narcissism is a reaction to prolonged abuse and trauma in early childhood or early adolescence. The source of the abuse or trauma is immaterial: the perpetrators could be dysfunctional or absent parents, teachers, other adults, or peers.

Dr. Vaknin explained the behavioral patterns of a narcissist:

The narcissist:

  • Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates accomplishments, talents, skills, contacts, and personality traits to the point of lying, demands to be [recognized] as superior without commensurate achievements);
  • Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal,everlasting, all-conquering love or passion;
  • Firmly convinced that he or she is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status people (or institutions);
  • Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation – or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (Narcissistic Supply);
  • Feels entitled. Demands automatic and full compliance with his or her unreasonable expectations for special and favourable priority treatment;
  • Is “interpersonally exploitative”, i.e., uses others to achieve his or her own ends;
  • Devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with, acknowledge, or accept the feelings, needs, preferences, priorities, and choices of others;
  • Constantly envious of others and seeks to hurt or destroy the objects of his or her frustration. Suffers from persecutory (paranoid) delusions as he or she believes that they feel the same about him or her and are likely to act similarly;
  • Behaves arrogantly and haughtily. Feels superior, omnipotent, omniscient, invincible, immune, “above the law”, and omnipresent (magical thinking). Rages when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted by people he or she considers inferior to him or her and unworthy.

Narcissism is a defense mechanism whose role is to deflect hurt and trauma from the victim’s “True Self” into a “False Self” which is omnipotent, invulnerable, and omniscient. This False Self is then used by the narcissist to garner narcissistic supply from his human environment. Narcissistic supply is any form of attention, both positive and negative and it is instrumental in the regulation of the narcissist’s labile sense of self-worth.

Perhaps the most immediately evident trait of patients with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is their vulnerability to criticism and disagreement. Subject to negative input, real or imagined, even to a mild rebuke, a constructive suggestion, or an offer to help, they feel injured, humiliated and empty and they react with disdain (devaluation), rage, and defiance.

From my book “Malignant Self Love – Narcissism Revisited”:

“To avoid such intolerable pain, some patients with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) socially withdraw and feign false modesty and humility to mask their underlying grandiosity. Dysthymic and depressive disorders are common reactions to isolation and feelings of shame and inadequacy.”

Owing to their lack of empathy, disregard for others, exploitativeness, (sic) sense of entitlement, and constant need for attention (narcissistic supply), narcissists are rarely able to maintain functional and healthy interpersonal relationships.

Many narcissists are over-achievers and ambitious. Some of them are even talented and skilled. But they are incapable of team work because they cannot tolerate setbacks. They are easily frustrated and demoralized and are unable to cope with disagreement and criticism. Though some narcissists have meteoric and inspiring careers, in the long-run, all of them find it difficult to maintain long-term professional achievements and the respect and appreciation of their peers. The narcissist’s fantastic grandiosity, frequently coupled with a hypomanic mood, is typically incommensurate with his or her real accomplishments (the “grandiosity gap”).

An important distinction is between cerebral and somatic narcissists. The cerebrals derive their Narcissistic Supply from their intelligence or academic achievements and the somatics derive their Narcissistic Supply from their physique, exercise, physical or sexual prowess and romantic or physical “conquests”.

Another crucial division within the ranks of patients with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is between the classic variety (those who meet five of the nine diagnostic criteria included in the DSM), and the compensatory kind (their narcissism compensates for deep-set feelings of inferiority and lack of self-worth).

Obama displays the following traits of a pathological narcissist, Dr. Vaknin writes:

Obama displays the following behaviors, which are among the hallmarks of pathological narcissism:

  • Subtly misrepresents facts and expediently and opportunistically shifts positions, views, opinions, and “ideals” (e.g., about campaign finance, re-districting). These flip-flops do not cause him overt distress and are ego-syntonic (he feels justified in acting this way). Alternatively, refuses to commit to a standpoint and, in the process, evidences a lack of empathy.
  • Ignores data that conflict with his fantasy world, or with his inflated and grandiose self-image. This has to do with magical thinking. Obama already sees himself as president because he is firmly convinced that his dreams, thoughts, and wishes affect reality. [Editor’s Note: This was written before the election.] Additionally, he denies the gap between his fantasies and his modest or limited real-life achievements (for instance, in 12 years of academic career, he hasn’t published a single scholarly paper or book).
  • Feels that he is above the law, incl. and especially his own laws.
  • Talks about himself in the 3rd person singular or uses the regal “we” and craves to be the exclusive center of attention, even adulation
  • Has a messianic-cosmic vision of himself and his life and his “mission”. Consequently, sets unrealistic goals within unrealistic timeframes.
  • Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon)
  • Displays false modesty and unctuous “folksiness” but unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true Obama is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.
  • Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.
  • Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).

Dr. Vaknin writes that narcissists display a distinct body language.

Many complain of the incredible deceptive powers of the narcissist. They find themselves involved with narcissists (emotionally, in business, or otherwise) before they have a chance to discover their true character. Shocked by the later revelation, they mourn their inability to separate from the narcissist and their gullibility.

Narcissists are an elusive breed, hard to spot, harder to pinpoint, impossible to capture. Even an experienced mental health diagnostician with unmitigated access to the record and to the person examined would find it fiendishly difficult to determine with any degree of certainty whether someone suffers from a full fledged Narcissistic Personality Disorder – or merely possesses narcissistic traits, a narcissistic style, a personality structure (“character”), or a narcissistic “overlay” superimposed on another mental health problem.

Moreover, it is important to distinguish between traits and behavior patterns that are independent of the patient’s cultural-social context (i.e., which are inherent, or idiosyncratic) – and reactive patterns, or conformity to cultural and social morals and norms. Reactions to severe life crises or circumstances are also often characterized by transient pathological narcissism, for instance (Ronningstam and Gunderson, 1996). But such reactions do not a narcissist make.

When a person belongs to a society or culture that has often been described as narcissistic by scholars (such as Theodore Millon) and social thinkers (e.g., Christopher Lasch) – how much of his behavior can be attributed to his milieu and which of his traits are really his?

The Narcissistic Personality Disorder is rigorously defined in the DSM IV-TR with a set of strict criteria and differential diagnoses.

Narcissism is regarded by many scholars to be an adaptative strategy (“healthy narcissism“). It is considered pathological in the clinical sense only when it becomes a rigid personality structure replete with a series of primitive defence mechanisms (such as splitting, projection, projective identification, or intellectualization) – and when it leads to dysfunctions in one or more areas of the patient’s life.

Pathological narcissism is the art of deception. The narcissist projects a False Self and manages all his social interactions through this concocted fictional construct.

When the narcissist reveals his true colors, it is usually far too late. His victims are unable to separate from him. They are frustrated by this acquired helplessness and angry at themselves for having they failed to see through the narcissist earlier on.

But the narcissist does emit subtle, almost subliminal, signals (“presenting symptoms”) even in a first or casual encounter.

Then Dr. Vaknin describes Obama’s body language exhibited during his public appearances:

Compare the following list to Barack Obama’s body language during his public appearances.

These are:

“Haughty” body language – The narcissist adopts a physical posture which implies and exudes an air of superiority, seniority, hidden powers, mysteriousness, amused indifference, etc. Though the narcissist usually maintains sustained and piercing eye contact, he often refrains from physical proximity (he is “territorial”).

The narcissist takes part in social interactions – even mere banter – condescendingly, from a position of supremacy and faux “magnanimity and largesse”. But he rarely mingles socially and prefers to remain the “observer”, or the “lone wolf”.

Entitlement markers – The narcissist immediately asks for “special treatment” of some kind. Not to wait his turn, to have a longer or a shorter therapeutic session, to talk directly to authority figures (and not to their assistants or secretaries), to be granted special payment terms, to enjoy custom tailored arrangements – or to get served first.

The narcissist is the one who – vocally and demonstratively – demands the undivided attention of the head waiter in a restaurant, or monopolizes the hostess, or latches on to celebrities in a party. The narcissist reacts with rage and indignantly when denied his wishes and if treated equally with others whom he deems inferior.

Idealization or devaluation – The narcissist instantly idealizes or devalues his interlocutor. This depends on how the narcissist appraises the potential his converser has as a Narcissistic Supply Source. The narcissist flatters, adores, admires and applauds the “target” in an embarrassingly exaggerated and profuse manner – or sulks, abuses, and humiliates her.

Narcissists are polite only in the presence of a potential Supply Source. But they are unable to sustain even perfunctory civility and fast deteriorate to barbs and thinly-veiled hostility, to verbal or other violent displays of abuse, rage attacks, or cold detachment.

The “membership” posture – The narcissist always tries to “belong”. Yet, at the very same time, he maintains his stance as an outsider. The narcissist seeks to be admired for his ability to integrate and ingratiate himself without investing the efforts commensurate with such an undertaking.

For instance: if the narcissist talks to a psychologist, the narcissist first states emphatically that he never studied psychology. He then proceeds to make seemingly effortless use of obscure professional terms, thus demonstrating that he mastered the discipline all the same, as an autodidact – which proves that he is exceptionally intelligent or introspective.

In general, the narcissist always prefers show-off to substance. One of the most effective methods of exposing a narcissist is by trying to delve deeper. The narcissist is shallow, a pond pretending to be an ocean. He likes to think of himself as a Renaissance man, a Jack of all trades. The narcissist never admits to ignorance in any field – yet, typically, he is ignorant of them all. It is surprisingly easy to penetrate the gloss and the veneer of the narcissist’s self-proclaimed omniscience.

Bragging and false autobiographyThe narcissist brags incessantly. His speech is peppered with “I”, “my”, “myself”, and “mine”. He describes himself as intelligent, or rich, or modest, or intuitive, or creative – but always excessively, implausibly, and extraordinarily so.

The narcissist’s biography sounds unusually rich and complex. His achievements – incommensurate with his age, education, or renown. Yet, his actual condition is evidently and demonstrably incompatible with his claims. Very often, the narcissist lies or his fantasies are easily discernible. He always name-drops and appropriates other people’s experiences and accomplishments.

Emotion-free language – The narcissist likes to talk about himself and only about himself. He is not interested in others or what they have to say, unless they constitute potential Sources of Supply and in order to obtain said supply. He acts bored, disdainful, even angry, if he feels that they are intruding on his precious time and, thus, abusing him.

In general, the narcissist is very impatient, easily bored, with strong attention deficits – unless and until he is the topic of discussion. One can publicly dissect all aspects of the intimate life of a narcissist without repercussions, providing the discourse is not “emotionally tinted”.

If asked to relate directly to his emotions, the narcissist intellectualizes, rationalizes, speaks about himself in the third person and in a detached “scientific” tone or composes a narrative with a fictitious character in it, suspiciously autobiographical. Narcissists like to refer to themselves in mechanical terms, as efficient automata or machines.

Seriousness and sense of intrusion and coercion – The narcissist is dead serious about himself. He may possess a subtle, wry, and riotous sense of humor, scathing and cynical, but rarely is he self-deprecating. [editors note: Like making fun of the Special Olympics?] The narcissist regards himself as being on a constant mission, whose importance is cosmic and whose consequences are global. If a scientist – he is always in the throes of revolutionizing science. If a journalist – he is in the middle of the greatest story ever. If a novelist – he is on his way to a Booker or Nobel prize.

This self-misperception is not amenable to light-headedness or self-effacement. The narcissist is easily hurt and insulted (narcissistic injury). Even the most innocuous remarks or acts are interpreted by him as belittling, intruding, or coercive. His time is more valuable than others’ – therefore, it cannot be wasted on unimportant matters such as mere banter or going out for a walk.

Any suggested help, advice, or concerned inquiry are immediately cast by the narcissist as intentional humiliation, implying that the narcissist is in need of help and counsel and, thus, imperfect and less than omnipotent. Any attempt to set an agenda is, to the narcissist, an intimidating act of enslavement. In this sense, the narcissist is both schizoid and paranoid and often entertains ideas of reference.

These – the lack of empathy, the aloofness, the disdain, the sense of entitlement, the constricted sense of humor, the unequal treatment and the paranoia – render the narcissist a social misfit. The narcissist is able to provoke in his milieu, in his casual acquaintances, even in his psychotherapist, the strongest, most avid and furious hatred and revulsion. To his shock, indignation and consternation, he invariably induces in others unbridled aggression.

He is perceived to be asocial at best and, often, antisocial. This, perhaps, is the strongest presenting symptom. One feels ill at ease in the presence of a narcissist for no apparent reason. No matter how charming, intelligent, thought provoking, outgoing, easy going and social the narcissist is – he fails to secure the sympathy of others, a sympathy he is never ready, willing, or able to reciprocate.

Dr. Vaknin writes about the narcissist leader:

The narcissistic or psychopathic leader is the culmination and reification of his period, culture, and civilization. He is likely to rise to prominence in narcissistic societies.

The malignant narcissist invents and then projects a false, fictitious, self for the world to fear, or to admire. He maintains a tenuous grasp on reality to start with and this is further exacerbated by the trappings of power. The narcissist’s grandiose self-delusions and fantasies of omnipotence and omniscience are supported by real life authority and the narcissist’s predilection to surround himself with obsequious sycophants.

The narcissist’s personality is so precariously balanced that he cannot tolerate even a hint of criticism and disagreement. Most narcissists are paranoid and suffer from ideas of reference (the delusion that they are being mocked or discussed when they are not). Thus, narcissists often regard themselves as “victims of persecution”.

The narcissistic leader fosters and encourages a personality cult with all the hallmarks of an institutional religion: priesthood, rites, rituals, temples, worship, catechism, mythology. The leader is this religion’s ascetic saint. He monastically denies himself earthly pleasures (or so he claims) in order to be able to dedicate himself fully to his calling.

The narcissistic leader is a monstrously inverted Jesus, sacrificing his life and denying himself so that his people – or humanity at large – should benefit. By surpassing and suppressing his humanity, the narcissistic leader became a distorted version of Nietzsche’s “superman”.

But being a-human or super-human also means being a-sexual and a-moral.

In this restricted sense, narcissistic leaders are post-modernist and moral relativists. They project to the masses an androgynous figure and enhance it by engendering the adoration of nudity and all things “natural” – or by strongly repressing these feelings. But what they refer to as “nature” is not natural at all.

The narcissistic leader invariably proffers an aesthetic of decadence and evil carefully orchestrated and artificial – though it is not perceived this way by him or by his followers. Narcissistic leadership is about reproduced copies, not about originals. It is about the manipulation of symbols – not about veritable atavism or true conservatism.

In short: narcissistic leadership is about theatre, not about life. To enjoy the spectacle (and be subsumed by it), the leader demands the suspension of judgment, depersonalization, and de-realization. Catharsis is tantamount, in this narcissistic dramaturgy, to self-annulment.

Narcissism is nihilistic not only operationally, or ideologically. Its very language and narratives are nihilistic. Narcissism is conspicuous nihilism – and the cult’s leader serves as a role model, annihilating the Man, only to re-appear as a pre-ordained and irresistible force of nature.

Narcissistic leadership often poses as a rebellion against the “old ways” – against the hegemonic culture, the upper classes, the established religions, the superpowers, the corrupt order. Narcissistic movements are puerile, a reaction to narcissistic injuries inflicted upon a narcissistic (and rather psychopathic) toddler nation-state, or group, or upon the leader.

Minorities or “others” – often arbitrarily selected – constitute a perfect, easily identifiable, embodiment of all that is “wrong”. They are accused of being old, they are eerily disembodied, they are cosmopolitan, they are part of the establishment, they are “decadent”, they are hated on religious and socio-economic grounds, or because of their race, sexual orientation, origin … They are different, they are narcissistic (feel and act as morally superior), they are everywhere, they are defenceless, they are credulous, they are adaptable (and thus can be co-opted to collaborate in their own destruction). They are the perfect hate figure. Narcissists thrive on hatred and pathological envy.

This is precisely the source of the fascination with Hitler, diagnosed by Erich Fromm – together with Stalin – as a malignant narcissist. He was an inverted human. His unconscious was his conscious. He acted out our most repressed drives, fantasies, and wishes. He provides us with a glimpse of the horrors that lie beneath the veneer, the barbarians at our personal gates, and what it was like before we invented civilization. Hitler forced us all through a time warp and many did not emerge. He was not the devil. He was one of us. He was what Arendt aptly called the banality of evil. Just an ordinary, mentally disturbed, failure, a member of a mentally disturbed and failing nation, who lived through disturbed and failing times. He was the perfect mirror, a channel, a voice, and the very depth of our souls.

The narcissistic leader prefers the sparkle and glamour of well-orchestrated illusions to the tedium and method of real accomplishments. His reign is all smoke and mirrors, devoid of substances, consisting of mere appearances and mass delusions. In the aftermath of his regime – the narcissistic leader having died, been deposed, or voted out of office – it all unravels. The tireless and constant prestidigitation ceases and the entire edifice crumbles. What looked like an economic miracle turns out to have been a fraud-laced bubble. Loosely-held empires disintegrate. Laboriously assembled business conglomerates go to pieces. “Earth shattering” and “revolutionary” scientific discoveries and theories are discredited. Social experiments end in mayhem.

It is important to understand that the use of violence must be ego-syntonic. It must accord with the self-image of the narcissist. It must abet and sustain his grandiose fantasies and feed his sense of entitlement. It must conform with the narcissistic narrative.

Thus, a narcissist who regards himself as the benefactor of the poor, a member of the common folk, the representative of the disenfranchised, the champion of the dispossessed against the corrupt elite – is highly unlikely to use violence at first.

The pacific mask crumbles when the narcissist has become convinced that the very people he purported to speak for, his constituency, his grassroots fans, the prime sources of his narcissistic supply – have turned against him. At first, in a desperate effort to maintain the fiction underlying his chaotic personality, the narcissist strives to explain away the sudden reversal of sentiment. “The people are being duped by (the media, big industry, the military, the elite, etc.)”, “they don’t really know what they are doing”, “following a rude awakening, they will revert to form”, etc.

When these flimsy attempts to patch a tattered personal mythology fail – the narcissist is injured. Narcissistic injury inevitably leads to narcissistic rage and to a terrifying display of unbridled aggression. The pent-up frustration and hurt translate into devaluation. That which was previously idealized – is now discarded with contempt and hatred.

This primitive defense mechanism is called “splitting”. To the narcissist, things and people are either entirely bad (evil) or entirely good. He projects onto others his own shortcomings and negative emotions, thus becoming a totally good object. A narcissistic leader is likely to justify the butchering of his own people by claiming that they intended to kill him, undo the revolution, devastate the economy, or the country, etc.

The “small people”, the “rank and file”, the “loyal soldiers” of the narcissist – his flock, his nation, his employees – they pay the price. The disillusionment and disenchantment are agonizing. The process of reconstruction, of rising from the ashes, of overcoming the trauma of having been deceived, exploited and manipulated – is drawn-out. It is difficult to trust again, to have faith, to love, to be led, to collaborate. Feelings of shame and guilt engulf the erstwhile followers of the narcissist. This is his sole legacy: a massive post-traumatic stress disorder.

DISCLAIMER

I am not a mental health professional. Still, I have dedicated the last 12 years to the study of personality disorders in general and the Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) in particular. I have authored nine (9) books about these topics, one of which is a Barnes and Noble best-seller (“Malignant Self-love: Narcissism Revisited”). My work is widely cited in scholarly tomes and publications and in the media. My books and the content of my Web site are based on correspondence since 1996 with hundreds of people suffering from the Narcissistic Personality Disorder (narcissists) and with thousands of their family members, friends, therapists, and colleagues.

Here is more on Obama’s narcissism from Dr. Vaknin.  CLICK THIS LINK


Radio talk show video/audio on Dr. Vaknin’s work.