Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work; A Review

I apologize for the lack of content with this post, however it is late, I am tired, and regardless, wanted to share this documentary as I have not seen it posted in this thread yet. I feel it is relevant to the OP's topic, and I thoroughly agree.

The Corporation

Originally posted by LadySkadi
ability to appear genuine when faking sincerity and honesty

That's the one that sticks out. Aside from Wall Streeters we have now and have had US Presidents that profess to be one thing and are blatantly not. And these are people where much more of their personal background is known to the public. To think this is prevalent on Wall Street is no stretch. Consider that the Wall Streeters and Banksters are the men and women that ransacked our country and did more damage to more people than anyone we've ever labeled a terrorist. Psychopaths? Very likely or they couldn't live with themselves and we have not seen many suicides.

Originally posted by Kevinquisitor
I apologize for the lack of content with this post, however it is late, I am tired, and regardless, wanted to share this documentary as I have not seen it posted in this thread yet. I feel it is relevant to the OP's topic, and I thoroughly agree.

The Corporation

Having scanned just a few minutes of that video I was reinforced in what I had already thought. That is that our Constitution and our rights were undermined from the beginning. The Constitution does not say what most think it says and when push comes to shove, it will not protect us any more than a grocery list on a napkin.

Thanks for posting that link Kev. It's got a lot to offer on corporate conscience or lack thereof.

Remember : people are not born like that. Today's "civilization" encourages greed and developing a big ego. Few remain unaffected.

The machine in our heads



[edit on 23-2-2010 by pai mei]

Originally posted by Hemisphere
That is that our Constitution and our rights were undermined from the beginning. The Constitution does not say what most think it says and when push comes to shove, it will not protect us any more than a grocery list on a napkin.

That is worth repeating. I think those who push for Constitutional rights being owed to them are going down the wrong road. It can all be dissolved so quickly or twisted to become something else. Most contracts do not really say what you think they do. Even now, there are some corporations who use "presumed consent" in contracts and unless you read all the fine print and have a lawyer interpret the legalese, you may be in for a big surprise. Some of these same corporations also tell you that even if you do use your "opt out " that they have the right not to comply with your wishes. As far as the Constitution I am guessing that if I did "opt out" of my corporate citizenship there will still be a "getcha" in there.



If we look at the origins of the Constitution, it was mainly some paperwork to pacify the masses. It sounded good and tickled the ears. But there were other things hidden between the lines that we have never known until now. It's so true what you said...it will no more protect us than a grocery list.

"United Snakes Of America... I Will Not Stand!"

And This Ladies And Gentlemen,

Was The Root Cause Of Why I Stepped

My *** Out Of That Corporate Regime!


S & F

[edit on 23-2-2010 by Tek-Neek55]

In a capitalist system, society has agreed to allow the most qualified people whom make a profit and excluded the idea of out right barring a socially and psychologically unstable person from participating in the system. People can argue that only wolves exist when people choose the role of sheep.

Personally, I disagree with a full capitalist society and enjoy what people would have called a government running a nanny state. Of course, some issues arise with the possibility, like in Singapore, that the psychopaths will actually simply run the country.

So now everybody's a psychopath?

Just like all kids are autistic nowadays, I suppose.

Psychopaths are, essentially, violent criminals. There is a very wide margin between a psychopath and a ruthless, assertive personality that dominates its social group.

The authors of this cynical, confusion-sowing book obviously guessed that, by pretending the margin doesn't exist or is just a thin grey line, they could write a book stereotyping powerful and effective people as psychopaths--and that if they did, then less assertive, less effective, less powerful people who resent their lowly status in life would buy their book by the truckload. Clever fellows; it seems they have guessed right.

Here's a quote from Snakes in Suits: (I took it from one of the reviews posted by the OP): 'Power is something a good person will not seek, and a bad person should not have.'

Actually, it's a rewrite of something Plato said. Like many other things Plato said, it is rubbish.

That is because

1. There are no good or bad people, only good or bad actions; and
   
   
2. Many people seek power in order to do good things with it. For example, Winston Churchill fought his way back from the political wilderness to become Prime Minister of Great Britain because he wanted to save his country and Europe from tyranny. He succeeded, too.

Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy; all sought and gained power. Martin Luther King did. Mahatma Gandhi did. Were they all bad people?

This kind of spurious oversimplification is typical of such works of junk-science drivel. The kingpins of Wall Street may be ruthless hardball players; that does not make them psychopaths. A disproportionate number of them may, perhaps, suffer (if that's the right word) from antisocial personality disorder, which some clinicians confuse with psychopathy; but as Robert Hare, a clinical expert in the subject, points out,

Most psychopaths (with the exception of those who somehow manage to plow their way through life without coming into formal or prolonged contact with the criminal justice system) meet the criteria for ASPD, but most individuals with ASPD are not psychopaths.

-- 'Psychopathy and Antisocial Personality Disorder: A Case of Diagnostic Confusion' by Robert Hare, Ph.D , Psychiatric Times, vol. 13, #2 Link

It is true that rich, powerful people didn't get where they are by being sweethearts or pushovers. That doesn't make them murderous lunatics. Have some self-respect, my friends, and keep your sense of proportion--don't let a couple of charlatans and your own envy blind you to reality. American Psycho is a work of fiction.

* * *

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Yeah, sociopaths, borderline personalities and schizoids are all very much products of their environments, usually either stemming from extreme praise or complete rejection. It varies with the individual.

This formerly widespread belief has been largely discredited by recent research, which tends to support a genetic or biological origin for personality disorders; however, no-one knows for sure.

The origin of personality disorders is a matter of considerable controversy. Traditional thinking holds that these maladaptive patterns are the result of dysfunctional early environments that prevent the evolution of adaptive patterns of perception, response, and defense. A body of data points toward genetic and psychobiologic contributions to the symptomology of these disorders; however, the inconsistency of the data prevents authorities from drawing definite conclusions.

-- 'Personality Disorders' by David Bienenfeld, MD Link

The belief that it is environment (or 'society') that makes people anti-social was popular in psychology at a time when psychological theories were based mostly on the theorist's imagination (Freud being the trailblazer in this regard) rather than on good, falsifiable research and an understanding of how the brain works.

Most lay folk don't realize that the field of psychology has changed enormously in the last ten to twenty years, and much of what was formerly accepted as true has now been disproved or called into question.

reply to post by Astyanax

1. There are no good or bad people, only good or bad actions; and

2. Many people seek power in order to do good things with it. For example, Winston Churchill fought his way back from the political wilderness to become Prime Minister of Great Britain because he wanted to save his country and Europe from tyranny. He succeeded, too.

Seriously, murderers, rapists, serial killers are not bad people?

Then why do we have jails?

The people you list, are people who did not seek power, but solutions. There are people who step when they are needed because solutions are needed.

You fail to grasp the difference between those who seek power, and those who seek solutions.

Most corporate executives are nothing but private sector politicians, and yes, these power seeking megalomaniacs do terrible things.

Originally posted by LadySkadi
reply to post by unityemissions

 

The main problem has become that those who set up the system which everyone else must play to an extent have infected us all with their psychopathic values. Their values have become our own!

Really great point!

Also may help to explain the apathy most people feel. If one believes that is "just how the game is played" than it is understandable, though not excusable, for many to let it be...

Isn't history filled with this behavior?

At the dawn of man (and woman) we doubtless had to fight like the animals we are to survive and to ensure the survival of our own kin. Ergo evolution has favored the Psycho, since they ruthlessly apply themselves to this survival.

Certainly there have been flashes of civility and renaissance since then, but has any of that really taken hold, or have the ruling Psychos simply adapted to these changes?

E.g. Once upon a time a ruler/government dictated. But via print, TV and now the web the masses have become too educated and too aware to be ruled by open dictatorship. Thus we have the democratic 'system'...
We are told that we have choice and are presented with 2 or 3 candidates, all representing and protecting the very same hierarchy. The written word, TV and web which threatened this hierarchy is used to convince us that these candidates are the only choices. Psychos are indeed great at exploiting systems to serve themselves - evolution favors the Psychos, as if they were an efficient virus.


But i don't think that business has taken the shape of our ancient savage natures, rather i'd say that our savage natures has taken the shape of business. Psychos have been among us since the beginning and as the majority of threads on ATS would suggest, we are still those same savages - wreaking havoc on our surroundings to ensure the survival of our own kin.

That's not to be pessimistic - the opposite in fact. If we'd recently turned into psychos in the workplace, then that would suggest it's the end of the journey, of our evolution. I think that the work place - and marketplace - was the inspiration of psychos who saw ways to further manipulate their people for personal gain; making money-from-money is what separates the worker from the true financial worth of their labour.

I digress...

To bring this down to a religious metaphor:

The Old Testament would have us utilize the psycho in us all - 'An eye for an eye' etc. Or in other words, you have to be a little psycho yourself in order to survive among psychos. This is our basic instinct for survival - i believe scientists have called it 'the Selfish Gene' - without it our kin/genetic line dies out.

However, The New Testament asks for something different: 'To turn the other cheek'; don't allow yourself to become 'a little psycho' in order to survive. The philosophy here being, what point is there in protecting your genetic line if in the process you are cursing it to live in a world full of psychos?

Neither of these philosophies give you a way to survive righteously, just a choice:

Live righteously, or survive well.

Righteousness and success would seem to be rare bedfellows.


Great thread. And BTW, i'm glad the author apparently explains things more simply elsewhere in the book, because his dense cerebral explanations shown here weren't an easy read.












[edit on 23-2-2010 by McGinty]

If you work in a second generation family owned business.
9 times out of 10 that description will fit your boss like a glove.

lol

Society nurtures us into these behaviours as well. I think that this point is being missed in the article and it lumps all the negative onto the person without recognizing the root cause, which is an environment that nurtures those behaviours and so we adapt into them quite often as there is no other way to self actualize or succeed by ones reckoning.

the underpinnings f society are what is broken. If we can fix the root, we can revive the tree of life and make a proper life for everyone.

Now, all we need is a method!

reply to post by Astyanax


While I agree with you that good people also seek power, I wouldn't say that psychopaths are violent criminals and that's that, that to me is the false and widely believed stereotype. Psychopaths are social chameleons, they learn how to act normal and adapt, they manipulate their environment to suit their needs.

Edit: I wanna share this site, there's some great links as well as Mask of Sanity, the book I linked earlier.

www.cassiopaea.com...

I found an interesting article called: "Bush Isn't A Moron, He's A Cunning Sociopath", this is something I've been suspecting for a while, I haven't read the whole article yet so I can't comment but here it is if anyone else is interested:

www.georgewalkerbush.net...

[edit on 23-2-2010 by TheLaughingGod]

reply to post by LadySkadi


I have a fascination with criminal psychology, especially the psychopathic personality types and it really does appear that some of the most successful executives show some real psychopathic traits. This goes for women and men.

If corporations reward such people then how can we ever expect them to be working for humanity rather than against it? Psychopaths are predators and they'll do what is right for themselves. If you're in the way, be it a coworker or a homeowner on some land the company wants then you should be scared.

The system is designed to reward the ruthless. Then again this has been the same throughout history, it is how kings and queens were made after all.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

thats really scary lol, and quite right too, my opinion is that clever people don't work though

reply to post by Astyanax


Uh, given the fact that I suffer from Borderline personality disorder and bi-polar disorder I think I would know how it develops better than some "genius" putting forth a bunch of THEORIES about how it develops.

The additional links and references that people have been adding are fabulous.
Thanks for this!

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
reply to post by Astyanax

 

Uh, given the fact that I suffer from Borderline personality disorder and bi-polar disorder I think I would know how it develops better than some "genius" putting forth a bunch of THEORIES about how it develops.

No offense, but given your 'admission', taking your advice on this subject is a bit like a politician appointing the judges that will try him on corruption charges....

Another interesting perspective - Hollywood gets into the "game"




[edit on 23-2-2010 by LadySkadi]

reply to post by LadySkadi


Building on my previous post, LadySkadi, two more books which I've found fascinating lean towards your original post, in a historical context.

The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6d7ff66b0af1.jpg[/atsimg]

Amazon Review :

Nearly 20 years ago, McCoy wrote The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia , which stirred up considerable controversy, alleging that the CIA was intimately involved in the Vietnamese opium trade.

In the current volume, a substantially updated and longer work, he argues that pk the situation basically hasn't changed over the past two decades; however the numbers have gotten bigger.

McCoy writes, "Although the drug pandemic of the 1980s had complex causes, the growth in global heroin supply could be traced in large part to two key aspects of U.S. policy: the failure of the DEA's interdiction efforts and the CIA's covert operations."

He readily admits that the CIA's role in the heroin trade was an "inadvertent" byproduct of "its cold war tactics," but he limns convincingly the path by which the agency and its forebears helped Corsican and Sicilian mobsters reestablish the heroin trade after WW II and, most recently, "transformed southern Asia from a self-contained opium zone into a major supplier of heroin."

Scrupulously documented, almost numbingly so at times, this is a valuable corrective to the misinformation being peddled by anti-drug zealots on both sides of the aisle.

First serial to the Progressive.

Copyright 1991 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Anyone who knows the history of the C.I.A., they are essentially businessmen.

That they can act within the confines of U.S. Governmental sanctions and still pull of some of the most heinous crimes, and or push someone else to do so fits the bill of the snakes in suits metaphor.

Think about it if you will about our Government sending these men and women to deal with underworld elements, criminals, sociopaths, and sycophants.

To deal with them one must find common ground with them which is where I see this leading.

The Pirate Hunter : The True Story of Captain Kidd

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/50c01f412abe.jpg[/atsimg]

Publishers Weekly : Amazon Review :

Entertaining, richly detailed and authoritatively narrated, Zacks's account of the life of legendary seaman William Kidd delivers a first-rate story.

Though Kidd, better known as Captain Kidd, was inextricably bound with piracy and has popularly gone down as a marauding buccaneer himself, Zacks (An Underground Education) argues that he was actually a mercenary backed by the English government and several New World investors to track down pirates and reclaim their stolen wares.

The book is cogent and replete with supporting evidence without the heavy-handed feel of some scholarly work. What really sets the book apart is Zacks's gift as researcher and storyteller.

He highlights the role of an undeniable pirate, Robert Culliford, in Kidd's tale and pits the two men against each other from the outset, constructing his book as an intriguing duel.

Aside from the tightly constructed plot, Zacks also wonderfully evokes the social and political life of the 17th century at land and at sea, and he takes turns at debunking and validating pirate folklore: while it appears the dead giveaway of a skull and crossbones made it a rare flag choice, Zacks contends that pirates did often wear extravagant clothing and were as drunk, cursing, hungry, horny... and violent as myth would have them.

Augmented by such details and driven by a conflict between Kidd and Culliford that keeps the pages flying, Zacks's book is a treasure, indeed.

Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

I am halfway through this book right now and according to it nobility can be bought.

Both in the sense as of bribery, bribing those noble lords, and of the purchase and or inheriting nobility due to family lineage, and Captain Kidd is no exception.

Quote from : Wikipedia : William Kidd

William "Captain" Kidd (c. 1645 – May 23, 1701) was a Scottish sailor remembered for his trial and execution for piracy after returning from a voyage to the Indian Ocean.

Some modern historians deem his piratical reputation unjust, as there is evidence that Kidd acted only as a privateer.

Kidd's fame springs largely from the sensational circumstances of his questioning before the English Parliament and the ensuing trial.

His actual depredations on the high seas, whether piratical or not, were both less destructive and less lucrative than those of many other contemporary pirates and privateers.

I speak of course of the privateering, piracy in the name of the King that he did, as well as others did in this time frame, and contextual history of our country.

Maybe this is where the birth of our snakes in suits comes from because of the notions of the False-Flag of piracy, which lead to what we call False-Flag Operations?

An interesting thought no less because if Captain Kidd, having a home on Wall Street, and being that he had the favor of local businessmen as well as the King of England prior to the Colonies becoming America, Kidd would be one of the first snakes in a suit.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
reply to post by LadySkadi

 

If corporations reward such people then how can we ever expect them to be working for humanity rather than against it?

The system is designed to reward the ruthless. Then again this has been the same throughout history, it is how kings and queens were made after all.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

This is exactly the truth of it...

And for a while - these tribal heirarchies served us relatively well - particularly when society was mostly a struggle of Man vs. Environment.

But - as we have become the most technologically empowered spicies on this planet - all that is left is the struggle of Man vs. Man.

And - lets face it - if those of us who are empathetic don't want to be ruled by the psychopathic tribal hierarchies of old anymore - it is US who will have to TAKE BACK the REINS OF POWER from their Kleptocratic hands!

The question is - do we have the WILL TO DO IT!!!!

The time draws near when every Free and Honorable citizen will have to draw the line - and say - THIS FAR and NO FURTHER!!!!!

On that very day - the Second Renissance Period of Man WILL BEGIN!!

I eagerly, EAGERLY, await for that day - the DAY WE BECOME FREE MEN AGAIN!!!!