Personally, I tend to see extreme individualism as particulary ape-like and unevolved. I think that there's a good balance to be found between individual strength and humanitarian empathy. My main criticism of Satanists and their ilk is that they've taken the easy way out. It takes a lot more strength to act with integrity than it does to act with self-interest. Power in the latter is predicated on breaking human-imposed laws and norms. Power in the former is predicated on breaking evolutionary bonds. You tell me which is harder...
From Gozar...I mean Trouser's link to the Phil Hine review of PTB:
To sum up, then, my contention here is that the ‘psychopath’ and the worldview associated with that ‘ideal type’ are not really as outré – at least in terms of cultural imperatives – as one might initially suppose. On closer examination, one finds that there are elements of American culture that do much to support and validate that perspective. After all, the behavioural characteristics generally associated with psychopaths that seem to hold an attraction – autonomy, emotional distance, detachment, becoming an ‘alpha individual’, control and manipulation of others, etc., are very strong cultural messages in modern society, particularly for men. Charlene Spretnak (States of Grace, 1991) sums this up quite neatly:
“For anyone whose identity is entwined with the patriarchal project of separateness and reactive autonomy – which is a personal choice, not a matter of biological determinism – the cultural history of the West could indeed be viewed as a triumphant progression towards the unencumbered strutting of the existential Lone Cowboy.”
In a similar manner to the PD ethos of ‘success’ using corporate strategies, the idea of identifying with the psychopath provides the lure of clarity and single-mindedness of purpose, obviating any requirement to confront the complexities and ambiguities of modern culture. After all, misanthropy means never having to say you’re sorry. |
