Criminal Psychopaths Run The Government...Let's Give Them More Power!!!

07/22/2017140 Comments

Watch this video on BitChuteYouTube

We all know that the criminal psychopaths who populate the government will stop at nothing to achieve their sadistic ends. But you've gotta vote for someone, right? So why not vote for the criminal psychopath that promises you free healthcare? Or maybe the criminal psychopath that promises to keep you safe from the big, bad turban-wearing (Gladio-sponsored) boogeymen? Anyway, I'm sure it'll all work out...

Bob Murphy on Trumpcare

The REAL Hastert Scandal: Pedophilia, Drug Money and Blackmail

Tjeerd Andringa Exposes the Kakistocracy

Political Ponerology

Episode 090 – Our Leaders Are Psychopaths

"Psychopathy" on

Filed in: Videos
Tagged with:

Comments (140)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Pablo de Boer says:

    Hola aloha señor James,

    I have two questions for you.

    Are Democratic presidents more warlike than Republicans and why is the Republican Party perceived as “pro-war” and the Democratic Party as “pro-peace”?

    My personal thoughts are as you also mentioned in your video (so you already answered my both questions 🙂 ), the political system is only created by and for psychopaths. And for me people who support them and vote are also psychopaths.

    Saludos para todos,

    Pablo de Boer

  2. Pablo de Boer says:

    Ed Griffin on the Left / Right Paradigm

  3. Pablo de Boer says:

    Mind Control in American Politics

  4. Pablo de Boer says:

    It would not be hyperbolic to say that overthrowing democratic governments is as American as apple pie. It’s our “democratic” tradition – like waging war.

    — Edward Curtin —

  5. PeaceFroggs says:

    The two propositions that you present James are a false dichotomy, since not “all” governments are run by criminal psychopaths.

    Furthermore, I’d argue that history shows us that civilizations in the past were born out of tribes first coming together mainly to protect themselves from invaders (criminal psychopaths).

    Rome would be a perfect example.

    A tribe of people (region), that organized, eventually became a city state, grew into a Republic, then expanded its territory and became an Empire (Julius Caesar).

    Question is: Are there power hungry psychopaths that have tried and succeeded at taking over their country’s established system of government in order to declare themselves emperor? Of course, no doubt about it, and this would apply today as well (ie:Patriot Act).

    A more recent example would be how Hitler and the Nazi’s had to burn down the parliament building for starters, and then had to arrest and jail their political enemies, and then had to pass the Enabling Act, before Hitler could declare himself Führer.

    Fact is, governments are created in such a way to help prevent psychopaths like Hitler and Caesar from ever having complete control, which history shows is no easy feat.

    Here’s an oxymoron, if anarchism is ever to take root, anarchists will have to some day come together, organize (ie:government), grow and become the majority, and then collectively agree to abolish all forms governments, including the very government that helped implement anarchism.

    There’s a mind bender.

    • Octium says:

      If not all governments are run by criminal psychopaths, then I’d like to know the name of at least one government that isn’t?

      • HomeRemedySupply says:

        Octium nailed it.

      • PeaceFroggs says:

        Since we are splitting hairs between corruption, criminal and psychopath, I think it would serve us well to at least look the word definition of psychopath and criminal.

        psy·cho·path . noun

        a person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior – an unstable and aggressive person.

        crim·i·nal . noun

        a person who has committed a crime.

        Here’s a short list I’ve compiled of just a few current government leaders that do not exhibit unstable or aggressive tendencies, nor have they been charged with a crime.

        1- Justin Trudeau – Canada
        2- Theresa May – England
        3- Shinzo Abe – Japan
        4- Narendra Modi – India
        5- Angela Merkel – Germany

        Of course, If you want me to point to a perfect angelic being that ascended from heaven to run a country like some benevolent dictator, then I guess you got me Octium, you got me.

        But, if you’re a rational human Octium, then even you would acknowledge that corruption would exist even in a anarchist Voluntaryism society, it’s human nature.

        Pragmatically speaking, I did come across CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 2016

        That’s about as close to a Utopian run society that we’ll ever achieve here on earth.

        • wingsuitfreak says:

          You list psychopaths as examples?

          • PeaceFroggs says:

            I know you are just wasting my time, but please, I beg you, enlighten me wingsuitfreak. Let’s pick one, how is Shinzo Abe a psychopath?

            Has Shinzo Abe sent the Japanese military to fight in some foreign land for gold and conquest?

            Has Shinzo Abe cracked down and jailed his political opponents and declared himself emperor?

            Has Shinzo Abe lashed out at people around him for no good reason?

            Has Shinzo Abe been charged and found guilty of any criminal wrong doing?

            I mean this should be super easy for you to point out and prove me wrong here, but I’m willing to wager that you will resort to attack my character and/or deflect, or simply wait till one of your friends comes along and redirects the conversation another way.

            • wingsuitfreak says:

              Do you really think I would let you choose my battlefield? look it up for yourself. You don’t want to learn. You just want to justify your own pre-conceived notions. Which were based on nothing. Educate yourself. I only find you useful to mock as an example of what happens when you confuse asking for answers vs. learning. Other than that, you disgust me.
              I did note that you did not bother explaining how you are something more than a statistic. Could it be that at some deep spot in your unthinking mass that you know that is true?

    • generalbottlewasher says:

      Dear squashed frog: your first sentance lays a rotten egg and doesn’t do the goslings you propose further on any favors. They mislead the gaggle of goose thoughts that follow. James is as brilliant a word Smith as there has ever been and Unlikely to have proposed a false dichotomy as you propose. Also the assumption that in the primitive violent past at the birth of Rome being civil by today’s standards just did not exist. I would propose Leaders were made by ,not chosen for their psychopathic characteristic; namely ruthlessly violent,cunning,ambitious and mystically predestined and entitled to hold the leadership positions with all benefits included. First I would entertain the proposition that a pair of twins suckled at the teets of a she wolf in their formative years did not grow up being normal. Secondly, I would entertain that Shakespeare satires the honorable men you are suggesting(Wikileaks may not be a treasure of accuracy in the future) and supports James dialog that the politic like the egg is as psychopathically first as to politic as the psychopathic chicken is first to the political egg.
      I whole heartily agree that a government formed of anarcists is an oxymoron and will lack all psycopothy. Beinvenitos PeaceFroggs.Que’fueah?

  6. HomeRemedySupply says:

    Amen Brother!
    I was pounding my desk! “Yes! Yes! Yes!” at this point of the video… (Go full screen for best impact)

  7. HomeRemedySupply says:

    I am so glad that James repeats the message about the psychopaths.
    This topic is urgently important.

    Like James points out, many people are somewhat “awake”; (that is they are aware of things like the 9/11 Cover-up).
    Yet, these “awake” people have a difficult time grasping that the system is run by psychopaths.
    By repeating the message, perhaps more folks will recognize what the real situation is.

    It’s a rigged game designed by evil, soulless nutjobs who con suckers into playing their game. Only the psychopaths win at this game and anyone else who plays is a sucker.

    • PeaceFroggs says:

      “…perhaps more folks will recognize what the real situation is”

      — Which is?

      • Pablo de Boer says:

        Estimado HRS already answered your question dear socialist country boy PF,

        HRS wrote:

        “It’s a rigged game designed by evil, soulless nutjobs who con suckers into playing their game. Only the psychopaths win at this game and anyone else who plays is a sucker.”

        But I know you, PF, because you always blame only the neocons.
        You also said that governments are corrupt, but we need a government…. ai ai ai caramba que pasa ….
        You also wrote here that monarchs can be social……

        I thought first you were ignorant, but after watching the last 2 episodes of señor James about psychopaths, I don’t think like HRS that you are a sucker who plays the game with your political leader, but you behave just like politicians. But I’m honest to mention here, that when I believed in the political system, I behaved also as a psychopath

        Saludos y abrazos,

        Pablo de Boer

        • PeaceFroggs says:

          I wasn’t talking to you Pablo, but even in your reply to me just now, you do not offer a solution either. Pfft! just more copy pasting with an irrelevant anecdote.

          Pretty simple question: what is the real solution?

          Here, let me make it easier for you Pablo, since you insist on taking over every discussion… is anarchism your solution Pablo, yes or no?

          • Pablo de Boer says:

            Dear socialist country boy PF,

            I already answered your question in the past, but I will repeat it for you, I’m not an anarchist, because that is even not for me totally freedom. I don’t know exactly when I wrote this here, otherwise I voluntarily copy pasted the link for you.

            And you write

            “I wasn’t talking to you Pablo’

            That is the typical behavior of politicians… But muchas gracias, because your behavior is a good reminder for me, a kind of a copy paste of my own past as psychopathic sheeple.

            And for me you may create your socialist commune with psychopathic leaders as long you don’t mandate me to be like you and follow your psychopathic leaders.

            Saludos y viva la independencia,

            Pablo de Boer

            • PeaceFroggs says:

              Oh gimme a break Pablo, why you keep avoiding a very simple question? It is you that is acting like a veteran politician.

              What I don’t get from you Pablo, is that you spend countless hours writing comments at the anarchist Corbett Report, copy pasting link after link purportedly supporting whatever it is, but you can’t seem to sum up in just a few words, without attacking me, your own real solution.

              What’s up with that?

              • Pablo de Boer says:

                Estimado socialist country boy PF,

                You forget to mention that I wrote my comments and copy pasted the links totally voluntarily and while I did that I didn’t dropped an average of 72 bombs every day like your beloved psychopathic leader Barack Obomber and his warwitch Hitlary did in 2016 or do you blame Trump and the neocons for that?

                And I’m not attacking you estimado PF, because I’m telling you honestly how I think about your person and your beloved psychopathic leaders.

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                More deflection(s), still no answer.

              • Pablo de Boer says:

                Estimado country boy PF,

                I know my English is crippled, but I will repeat my answer aka copy paste my response:

                For me you may create your socialist commune with psychopathic leaders as long you don’t mandate others and my person to be like you and follow your psychopathic leaders.


                I also hope that you and your psychopathic leaders as Obomber will not bomb us, because we voluntarily don’t want to join you.

                And I promise you, that I will not copy paste my answer again, because that is unnecessary when you don’t get the message now. And I even remember now, how I reacted when I behaved like a sheeple. That’s why I stop now voluntarily this conversation with you estimado socialist PF.

                Buenas noches y viva la paz,

                Pablo de Boer

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                Ah finally, now we’re getting somewhere Pablo,

                You say: “For me you may create your socialist commune with psychopathic leaders as long you don’t mandate others and my person to be like you and follow your psychopathic leaders.”

                I believe James sometimes refers to this as Voluntaryism, a philosophy which holds that all forms of human association should be voluntary, a term coined in this usage by Auberon Herbert in the 19th century. –Wiki

                If this is so Pablo, then I’d have to say that Voluntaryism is nothing more than a Utopian concept, it’s just not realistic.

                Something else I find kinda comical, is that for somebody that doesn’t want others to mandate to him how to live, you Pablo choose to live in a country ruled by Monarchs. If that isn’t an oxymoron, I don’t know what is 🙂

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Yes, they are pathetic, but I think they deserve our attention; but only to crush them, as they are too dangerous to tolerate. There is a YouTube channel that you might find interesting in this regard. The Academy of Ideas. The Jung section pretty much covers them and why they are to be avoided (or crushed). Now, I’m off to the Library to see if I can get a copy of Thus Spoke Zathrusta (sp?) by Nietche. Ahhh, philosophy? The questions have always been there! Cheers Amigo, Jim from the state with real face-eating zombies: Florida

          • wingsuitfreak says:

            PF why do you need others to think for you? try thinking for your own solutions. That’s what the grown-ups do.

            • Pablo de Boer says:

              Hola aloha wingsuitfreak ,

              This is typical behavior of a collectivist, they always depend on others, because that is what they only learned from their psychopathic leaders…

              Maybe socialist country boy PF also will awaken once, otherwise his life is lost.

              Saludos y abrazos,

              Pablo de Boer

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Yes, I just find it annoying when people who are too lazy to care about themselves always expect others to care more about them than they do themselves. Laziness and fear are the driving forces behind these types. Two of the most disgusting behaviors. Oh well, if he doesn’t figure it out, then it’s no big loss.Amazing how so many people don’t figure out that the sheep lies down with the lion because it is dinner until they become dinner. By the way, your English is better than many native speakers. I thought about offering corrections for you, if you want, in the spirit of helping; not to insult.

              • Pablo de Boer says:

                Hola aloha wingsuitfreak,

                You always may help me with improving my English, I consider that as help and not as an insult amigo.

                The socialist behavior is disgusting and parasitic just like the behavior of psychopaths. They also want to impose their lifestyle on others. Read Kermit the socialist his comments on señor James website as good example how derailed their thoughts and behavior are. It is a pitty that they are a danger for humanity and peace, otherwise I would’t give them my attention.

            • Pablo de Boer says:

              Muchas gracais Jim for sharing your thoughts.
              I will visit later the youtube channel The Academy of Ideas you mentioned and as Jung mentioned:

              Carl Jung: “The world hangs on a thin thread….”

              Carl Gustav Jung was a wise man amigo.
              I’m going also offline now and we keep in touch amigo Jim.

              Saluidos y abrazos,


    • mkey says:

      Principles of propaganda work both ways. Repeat something often enough and it will become the truth. Being the truth in the first place can’t hurt it.

  8. Pablo de Boer says:

    Champagne socialist leader of the Dutch Purple government

    “Purple” (Dutch: Paars) is the nickname of a government coalition of social democrats and liberals, excluding Christian democrats. It is derived from the combination of the colour of the social democrats (red) and liberals (blue).
    In the Netherlands the two cabinets of Prime Minister Wim Kok (Kok I and Kok II, 1994–2002) were composed of social democrats (the Labour Party, PvdA), conservative liberals (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, VVD) and progressive liberals (Democrats 66).

    Before Wim Kok, social democrat, became a politician he was the leader of the biggest Dutch labor union FNV. After his premiership, Kok retired from active politics at the age of sixty-three and became a lobbyist for the European Union and presided over several “high-level groups”. He also occupied numerous seats on supervisory boards in the business and industry world (ING Group (Dutch Banksters), Koninklijke TNT Post / Royal Postal Group, Royal Dutch Shell, KLM, Stork B.V., International Commission on Missing Persons, International Crisis Group, Anne Frank Foundation and served as president of the Club of Madrid from 2009 until the December 2013). On 11 April 2003, he was granted the honorary title of Minister of State.

    In Holland they name these kind of leftist “een salon socialist” and in English they call them “Champagne socialist”. “Champagne socialist” is a pejorative political term originating in the United Kingdom.

    The alliterative phrase is used to describe self-identified socialists, whose comfortable upper middle class lifestyles are thought to contradict their political convictions; this is typified by their supposed consumption of the luxury drink Champagne. It is a popular epithet which implies a degree of hypocrisy and it is closely related to the concept of the liberal elite.[3][4]
    It is broadly similar to the American terms limousine liberal or latte liberal, and to idioms in other languages such as the French Gauche caviar, the German Salonkommunist, and the Italian Radical Chic. Other related terms include Hampstead liberal, Gucci socialist, and in Ireland smoked salmon socialist.

  9. Pablo de Boer says:

    George Carlin Illusion of Choice

  10. Hotfoot says:

    What do James and my fellow subscribers think of the UK Labour Party Leader, Jeremy Corbyn? Is he necessarily a criminal psychopath? He has actively campaigned against aggressive foreign policy for a long time, and indeed was the chair of the ‘Stop The War’ campaign in the UK.
    I am inclined to agree with James assertions in the main about politicians, but I honestly feel that Corbyn is the exception that perhaps proves the rule.

    • Kedi says:

      It’s a tricky one.. perhaps on a personal level he’s a decent guy that believes in a peaceful world. However his party is/would be all to ready to bomb innocent civiliations (ala Tony Blair).

      I think it’s a subtle game to make us follow a messiah, only for him/the party to let us all down by not delivering on promises – which will probaly lead to rioting and disorder, leading to punitive measures and further totalitarianism

    • nosoapradio says:

      I personally know very little or nothing about Corbyn; but if, by appearing honest and well-meaning he helps people to believe in the system, if he helps to maintain the illusion of democracy then

      I suppose he’d be considered here to be the most dangerous sort of unwitting (or witting) idiot.

      He helps perpetuate the idea that “if only” we can get the sincere folks into positions of power of this totally rigged system, made by and for criminals,

      then things’ll get better.

      Which is how you keep everyone chained into the rigged system. With hopeless “Hope for Change” by showcasing honest-looking mavericks that never, but never, change anything for the better.

      • Kedi says:

        That’s really astute, and reminds me so much of the Obama “yes we can” bullshit.

        The slogan/song for Corbyn is even dumber “oh Jermey Corbyn”

      • nosoapradio says:

        Then again, if Corbyn’s a useful idiot then I guess the same could be said of Ron Paul (though he retired from politics in 2013 and perhaps used his platform as a politician to essentially denounce the system as a whole?)

        Needless to say, I’m also fairly ignorant with regards to Ron Paul…

        If you play the game, you’re condoning it.

        • Richard Ran says:

          Hi nosoapradio,

          “Ron Paul […] perhaps used his platform as a politician to essentially denounce the system as a whole?

          And to educate people, I might add. No need for psychopath boogeyman distractions. The movement he inspired was a genuine threat to the state (and deep state), because the message was to de-legitimize and dismantle it. Compare that to the avoidance strategy of going voluntarist Hippie2.0 style and as such posing no meaningful threat to the state at all.

 (For Liberty, check out the feature length version)

          Cheers from Amsterdam,

          • HomeRemedySupply says:

            Ron Paul
            You guys really make a strong and very important point.

            “Ron Paul […] perhaps used his platform as a politician to essentially denounce the system…
            …And to educate people…
            …The movement he inspired was a genuine threat to the state (and deep state), because the message was to de-legitimize and dismantle it….

            His message impacted the World like a religious crusade.
            Many folks “woke up”.

            • Richard Ran says:

              Yes indeed.

              But now are we going to let ourselves be distracted from the main point by this “Beware of the Psychopaths”-meme? No sure if that would be wise, to put it mildly.

              And to answer beforehand the claim that it* complements or fits in nicely with what RP is saying or what is the central educational message from the Mises Institute, if it’s such an important element of RP (or power analysis, why is it that they’ve never bothered to focus on the psychopath angle?

              Cheers from Amsterdam,

              * e.g. “The Corporate Psychopaths theory of the Global Financial Crisis”.

              • HomeRemedySupply says:

                I hear ya 100%. Big time.
                “Beware of the Psychopaths” is such a crucial message.

                Corbett is one of the few brave ones who keeps pounding the table about it.

              • Richard Ran says:

                Hi HRS,

                Okay, so you see things differently. That could make for an interesting discussion. Care to add a little to the conversation then and tell me why you say that you hear, yet don’t seem to think that James’ psychopath-meme distracts from the RP/Mises Institute analysis of the welfare/warfare state?

                Alas, no more room there for us to discuss these matters if you’d be willing (hope so). Perhaps you can open up with a fresh start in a new comment. That would give us (and others) some space.

                To further clarify my view by example, I’ve got another case in point for you to perhaps respond to. A somewhat analogous distraction/watering down (imho) of the Ron Paul message, in a particular “non-Mises Institute” version of the well-known “End the FED” meme.

              • HomeRemedySupply says:

                I must had misunderstood your statement.

                I am adamant that Psychopaths are the foundational problem for the world’s situation. Just like what James Corbett says here in a couple statements…

                I am not being obsequious towards Corbett. This is something which I feel very certain of.

                It is my contention that other situations or other problems could more easily be resolved if this “foundational Psychopathic aspect” was wildly recognized.
                Until what lies at the foundation is recognized, everything else becomes a patch on a tire that has gone flat many times.

    • PeaceFroggs says:

      My take Hotfoot, when it comes to aggressive foreign policy, is that I believe the Corbyn types of the world are the rule, and the exceptions are the Blair’s.

      Given that Corbyn is against Brexit, I’m assuming James is no fan of Corbyn.

      What’s funny is that some people here at the Corbett Report praise the fact that the British were…

      1-actually allowed to vote, and
      2-the majority of them voted to leave the EU (ie:Brexit)

      In other words, they used the system and voted for change, and in the same breath will say that the system is rigged, everyone that runs government are psychopaths, and that people who support them or people that simply vote are also psychopaths.

      Words fail me here.

      • HomeRemedySupply says:

        PeaceFroggs, In the last paragraph, you bring up an interesting aspect.
        As for me, I have to view things from “different hats”, from different perspectives.
        While I am no fan of government nor the rigged system, when there is progress in the right direction within the system, I am glad to see it.

        EX – I think our legal system sucks. But when Monsanto or a pedophile get nailed by the legal system, I smile.

        • wingsuitfreak says:

          Froggy, as a statist, you should know that not all people here are anarchists. The mentally ill slaves are allowed.

        • PeaceFroggs says:

          –“As for me, I have to view things from “different hats”, from different perspectives.”–

          HomeRemedySupply, it has nothing to do with perspective, it is what it is, it’s like pregnancy, either the girl is pregnant or she isn’t, there is no picking or choosing depending on which hat you decide to wear.

          You either abide by the Constitution of the country you live in or you don’t.

          What I’m getting at here, is that it seems to me that some at the Corbett Report aspire to live in a Utopian society where all forms of human association would be voluntary. Sounds nice, however they fail to realize that even anarchist societies would have rules and regulations, and these rules would have to be codified into law by people first and then approved by the majority of the population.

          The irony of it all, is that if this Utopia is to be created, anarchists will have to eventually come together at some point, and create their very own dream homeland somewhere, instead of squatting in the country they are currently living in, complaining about their socialist government, while they enjoy all the benefits of modern medicine, modern transportation, clean water etc…that their socialist country offers them.

          Simply put, Anarchists will have to organize (ie: create government), become the majority somehow, and then collectively agree to abolish all forms governments, including the very government which they had to create in order to implement anarchism.

          and don’t get me started on private property, and how that would need to be divide up someway somehow among the population, and say goodbye to all the national parks, animal protection like over fishing and hunting etc…

          I could go on and on.

          • HomeRemedySupply says:

            Okay. That’s your take.

            • PeaceFroggs says:

              Yeah, that’s my take, and here I am patiently awaiting the mass exodus of all Voluntaryists to some foreign land where they will unite and create a decentralized utopia free of all forms of corruption.

              I’d invest in a unbeatable defense strategy though, because we all know the American Empire simply won’t allow it.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                So you don’t understand anarchy. Hardly surprising given that you don’t understand so many other things. How do you even survive? You act as if authority is some kind of supreme deity that knows all and conquers all. It’s not. It’s a collective of idiots who are too lazy to think. Sort of like how I view you. Learn to think and grab those tiny marbles. Life will become a lot easier when you do so.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                By the way, I know you don’t understand principles, but real men don’t run away. I’m staying in a fascist country and living as an anarchist. They can change, but I won’t. This is a thought process which requires a spine; something you don’t seem to understand. You seem to think that everyone must think the same way, that if it isn’t ALREADY a certain system, then others shouldn’t be there. That is your problem. It is called cowardice and defeatism. I don’t suffer from your illnesses or limitations.

              • PeaceFroggs says:


                Attacking my manhood, seriously? How old are you, like 12?

                I may not know as much about anarchy as you, but what I do know, and I heard James say this many o times, is that anarchism does in fact require laws.

                Like for instance, even in an anarchist society people wouldn’t be allowed to murder people, or say offer their children up to pedophilia regardless of their moral upbringing.

                Therefore even anarchists would have to abide by certain laws and regulations that would be upheld and enforced by some sort of judicial system.

                You may consider yourself an anarchist, but in reality you’re currently just breaking the laws of the country you are currently living in, making you a criminal.

                So, I’m not suggesting you run away wingsuitfreak, what I’m suggesting is that anarchists grow their numbers, and move to a state, say Florida for example, and then when you guys believe you can secede from the Union and create your own anarchist utopia, you do so.

                This way, you can live the anarchist way legally, without having to worry and the DEA knocking down your door for those pot plants growing in your garden. Nor will you have to worry about the FBI arresting you for not having filed or paid any income tax, nor will you have to worry about your local law enforcement giving you a fine for not having paid property tax, or for not maintaining a pristine lawn this summer etc…

                You see, I’m actually trying to help you wingsuitfreak.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                pf. You are not a man. You are far less than a man. And you know nothing about anarchy. Or much of anything else as near as I can tell. You are simple a statistic. That was your choice when you embraced the collective. And statistics are still BS.

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                Just trying to help you wingsuitfreak, just trying to help.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Lying isn’t helping. It’s just cowardice. Your idiotic question was already answered earlier by me. You’re just too lazy to pay attention that long.

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                I don’t lie, but you’re an hypocrite, and that’s a fact.

                Pretending to live like an anarchist, when in fact you are just as much part of the system you pretend to rail against.

                Don’t come crying to mommy when you’re charged with tax evasion some day.

                Like I said, just trying to help.

            • wingsuitfreak says:

              That is called an ad hominem attack. It is used by the weak when they don’t have a real foundation for their argument. Which I have yet to see out of you on any of your comments.

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                ad hominem attack? Not at all, these types of message boards are heavily monitored by government agencies all over the world, including your own.

                They have our IP addresses, they know exactly who we are, where we live, what we do (or don’t do), and what we think.

                You my wingsuitfreak friend, are either lying about being a true and true anarchist, that pays no property tax, pays no income tax or you abide by the collective laws in the state and country you live in, and that makes you an hypocrite.

                And that’s a fact.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                All you said was that you don’t even know what an ad hominem attack is. That’s hilarious!
                Why should I even care about the government monitoring this board? You are so funny.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Another hilarious aspect of your last comment is that you think that I need to follow your rules on what an anarchist is when you don’t even know what anarchy is. Now if that isn’t hilarious, I don’t know what is. And I do know what is hilarious.

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                “Why should I even care about the government monitoring this board?”

                –Well now, it is you that is starting to sound like a statist.

                Honestly, you are so confused in your reasoning, I’m starting to believe you’re medicated, am I right?

                Here’s your dyslexic position in a nutshell.

                1- All governments are run by criminal psychopaths
                2- So what if these boards are monitor, to keep an eye on anyone that dares challenge the system
                3- I’m an anarchist
                4- Why should I worry about the government and what I say here?

                Good luck wingsuitfreak, good luck!

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Once again, you prove you don’t understand anything to date. You don’t even understand what I’ve written. And yet, you seem confused that I don’t bother answering your idiotic questions. Maybe it’s because they’ve already been answered. You really are a sad excuse for a human. Oh wait, you’re not a human. You’re a statistic.

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                I’m a “statistic” now? Haha!

                Ah man, I kinda feel sorry for you bro. Peace wingsuitfreak.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                I am not your brother. you left humanity, not I. And yes, you are a statist. You don’t even know what anarchy means, yet you insist I follow your rules on it. You also make up baseless accusations about me; either out of stupidity or willful deception I neither know nor care, it’s all the same. In short, you are an embarrassment. But now I’m done. You aren’t even a challenge. Might I suggest that you arm yourself if you are going to engage in a battle of wits. But do it with someone else; you’ve already proven yourself too ill-prepared to amuse me for long. in the meantime, please look up ad ahominem. Is there anything you aren’t ignorant on? As if you would know.

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                We are brothers whether you like it or not wingsuitfreak, that’s just the way it is. We are all in this thing together. (that’s the socialist speaking haha!)

                Yes it’s true I identify as a socialist, I won’t shy from it, but I also embrace aspects of liberalism or libertarianism. Liberty and Equality aren’t divorced from socialism, quite the contrary, I’d argue both go hand in hand with each other.

                You see, I don’t view the government as evil. I’m skeptical of it sure, since we are the government, and humans are flawed individuals susceptible to corruption, but I don’t view the institutions themselves as evil.

                Therefore, I have no problem paying my fair share of taxes, knowing that the money will be redistributed to help pay for services such as the judicial system/police, education, health care and other social services.

                Here’s my dilemma, the military also gets its funding from our taxes, and depending on who’s in charge in a particular time in history, I may or may not support a military excursion.

                But on the flip side, history show there are some real bad guys out there that will try to invade, rape and pillage, and a strong military will act as a deterrence.

                Surely even you would admit that the US military would not have been so Gung-ho had the Iraqi’s had a stronger military.

                But I’ve never once insisted that you follow my rules, not once. I’m just pointing out your hypocrisy mister individualist man, you are free to choose in whatever country you want to live in, and if you want abide to that country’s constitution or not, and if you pay for motor-vehicle insurance or not etc…

                All I’m saying is that you can’t have it both ways, its either or.

                1- You either have no problem paying taxes to the US government, which they will then use to fund government agencies like the FBI and the IRS, which have a mandate to uphold and enforce the laws of the United States.


                2- that you are a criminal under the eyes of US Constitution, since you refuse to pay taxes that fund these same agencies.

                Doesn’t take a genius to figure this dilemma out, pretty simple really.

              • Pablo de Boer says:

                Hola aloha Jim,

                Muchas gracias again for sharing the Academy of ideas channel. I already read and investigated a lot Jung’s thoughts about society, statist and individualist. For my person his thoughts were and still are very mind expanding . Jung’s view about collectivists is so ingenious and excellent. For me a theory is really worthy only when I can experience this thesis in reality among my fellow humans. And Jung’s description about what collectivists and materialists are missing, I observe and experience Jung’s thoughts each day when I’m surrounded with the members of Western societies. Not all of them are missing what Jung wrote, but most of them are missing that.

                Carl Jung and the Spiritual Problem of the Modern Individual

                I help addicted, alcohol and/or drugs, fellow humans to stay or become cold turkey and I read that Jung also helped the founder of the AA and Jung said this about addicted fellow humans:

                “Addiction has been understood in terms of a spiritual craving for wholeness, freedom, and transformation. It is not by coincidence that the Latin root of “addict” connotes the idea of a willing slave, or one who has become enslaved by so many acts of willing devotion.

                Once the pursuit of the special release from self, the self-transcendence, which comes with using a particular substance or activity, becomes the organizing principle of the person’s life, the hedonic habit takes on a life of its own. What initially promised freedom from the bondage of self or freedom to become someone else turns out to be a “rapacious creditor” bleeding the borrower of “all self-sufficiency and will to resist its demands” .

                The “habit” becomes obsession and eventually fragments the person until his or her will to resist is rendered impotent, or powerless. The admission of this powerlessness is an intensely personal event, which functions as the first step toward actual freedom.

                From this phenomenological interpretation of addiction, we can begin to see how it is linked to spirituality. This insight was captured well by the psychiatrist Carl Jung in his letter to Bill Wilson: “You see, Alcohol in Latin is ‘spiritus’ and you use the same word for the highest spiritual experience as well as for the most depraving poison. The helpful formula therefore is: spiritus contra spiritum.”

                In other words, the highest form of spiritual experience counters the– high spirit against low spirit.”

              • Pablo de Boer says:

                When a addicted fellow human comes for the first time to my person for help, I tell her or him always that everything is voluntarily, because when the help is like an involuntary commitment to a psych facility, this will never help and cure the needy ones. I also don’t ask money for helping them, because it is for my person very disgusting when you gain money with treating and helping sick people, this evil behavior is like the Obama care and Big Pharma toxic rituals, which both are repulsive behavior.

                In the shamanic societies the members of a tribe also don’t pay the shaman / curandero / healer, but they reward el curandero / la curandera with food, clothes and having a place to life and sleep. This all take place on a voluntarily basis. In those societies subversive people are being excluded and told that they have to go to the forest and that the forest will take care for them. This is how they maintain their peaceful and spiritual society. Subversive people are like cancer and the best remedy is to cut them away.

                Addicted people who don’t want voluntarily being cured behave also like collectivists and that’s why they are also very deceitful and manipulative. They have self the medicine to cure themselves. For collectivists this is very difficult to realize and be aware of, because they are accustomed and molded to be depended on others. Their socialist and collectivist behavior is their most depraving and toxic poison.

                What is also so ridiculous of their psychopathic and criminal behavior, they self always need others like psychopathic leaders to rule over their life and need a collective society to solve their own problems, but in the meanwhile they tell others how they must life. For me it is not a problem when they want to create their own collectivist psychopathic society as long they respect others and mine view of life.

                In South America the older generation always say, mi casa es tu casa aka you are always welcome in my house, but this they do not apply to deceitful people. The younger generation in South America is westernized and that has devastating consequences for them, they behave like zombies and socialists, together they are collectively destroying the life of others and of course also their own life.

                I also don’t like to lie, that’s why I tell señor James his amphibious socialist, that he is a psychopath just like the leaders he support and vote for.

                Saludos and good luck with the face eating zombies with their latex cycle clothes in Florida,

                Pablo de Boer

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                You are not a human. You are merely a statistic. While you claim that is a new charge, it isn’t. You’re just too lazy to read the posts you respond to. As such, I am returning that favor and not reading yours. You have had nothing of value to offer to date, so why bother. I have already told you that this is over because you are to boring. That is not to mention childishly deceptive. In short, you are the enemy this site discusses. In the immortal words of Andrew Jackson, “If you’re not with me, you’re against me.” You chose poorly. Now good-bye

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Aloha right back at ya! That video you linked to is amazing! The only problem I have with AA is they keep reinforcing that a person is an alcoholic. Of course, I’m a fan of Neurolinguistic programming, so to me it doesn’t help a person. But, if a person is ready to stop, such details won’t get in their way. Am glad to see you are working to help others less fortunate. Especially those who want to receive help. Those that don’t can’t be helped.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                That was an extremely enlightening post! While I have been around many addicted people (I DO live in Florida), I had not made that connection before. Probably too close to the problem. I am sorry to hear that South America has changed so much. I have such fond memories of Panama. A beautiful country. I do remember having to leave Mexico because of the cartel (the modern one, not the old one). Is there nothing the mindless cannot destroy? Have faith, dear friend. You are doing what is needed to win. Ten thousand strategies all centered around change without leaders can never be defeated. 🙂

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                Hey Pablo, very interesting anecdote, I really like the first part of your post, but then you kinda lost me when you brought up Obama and started twisting things a little, ah well.

                Anyways, you also said this …

                “For me it is not a problem when they want to create their own collectivist psychopathic society as long they respect others and mine view of life.”

                Curious, you live in Netherlands, am I right Pablo? And the Netherlands is ruled by a Monarchy, and governed by a parliamentary democracy, correct?

                Like I said, I’m curious, how do you feel about living in Netherlands since it has a socialist welfare system? Would you say that the government there insist you follow their rules, or would you say that they respect your view of life?

              • Pablo de Boer says:

                Hola aloha amigo Jim,

                I will never ever give up and always try to help voluntarily the people who ask for help.

                Addicted people have to stay far away from alcohol and drugs and liberty has to stay far away from socialists and collectivists 🙂 .

                Today I helped mentally a Bolivian amiga and at the end of the day she had a smile on her face and she also obtain faith again.

                I have to go now and we keep on touch amigo. I also wish you good luck with señor James his amphibious psychopathic socialist PF.



              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Glad you could help her. On pf, I have told him we’re done. I just delete his posts without reading them as he isn’t worth the effort. I don’t think he is a psycho though. Just another mindless willing drone. Good luck to you. Me? Today is housecleaning day. 🙁 So, I’m stalling a lot!

              • PeaceFroggs says:

                “On pf, I have told him we’re done. I just delete his posts without reading them as he isn’t worth the effort.”

                — Ha! I hope your a man of your word wingsuitfreak, because I’m gonna hold you to that.

                no need to reply, it’s understood.


              • HomeRemedySupply says:

                Pablo de Boer,
                Thanks for the insight above into drug/alcohol addiction. I got a lot out of it.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Aloha again, Pablo! Just thought I’d let you know that even though I normally delete my messages after I read them, I have not done so with yours concerning Jung. I have already read it several times because it is such an incredible message. It is always refreshing to read the words of people who are light years beyond me. It’s like a little window into God’s heart. Thanks again, Jim who is avoiding all those latex wearing zombies in Flouride-a!

              • Pablo de Boer says:

                Hola aloha Jim,

                Jung’s view of life is just like you wrote if somebody or something opens a little window and let you watch in the laboratory of the Creation. The human psyche is a little tinny part of this mysterious miracle and for the human mind incomprehensive wonder.

                I’m self a technician and I self am totally open minded when I work. Just like inventors create new structures, structures which never existed before aka thinking outside the box. That’s why I avoid in real life people who proclaim that something is not possible. But I’m aware that some things are impossible like the merge of anarchists with socialists, that is like fire and water. But never ever give up dreaming and Oh yes Carl’s interpretation of our dreams is also mind blowing dear Jim.

                Carl Jung The Wisdom of The Dream Vol 1 A Life of Dreams

                Carl Jung The Wisdom of The Dream Vol 2 Inheritance of Dreams

                Carl Jung The Wisdom of The Dream Vol 3 A World of Dreams

                Saludos y abrazos,


              • wingsuitfreak says:

                No! Not more Jung! How will I ever get my work done when I see more of him to explore? 🙂 Thank you so much for that link. I have never read his work on dreams, though I have always enjoyed manipulating my own and bringing my own (day)dreams into reality. They are so much more than the mere cleaning out of our mind’s junk. Now, I have a new video to download tomorrow (I have budgeted myself to a mere 3 gig of data a month or else I’d never get anything done!).

    • wingsuitfreak says:

      There is a channel on Youtube called Bombard’s body language. She did a video on Corbyn. Maybe more than one. She’s very good at body language. I suggest you check out her take on him. Hint: He’s a politician.

  11. anuttamadd says:

    Thank you James for this thought and for reposting your earlier video that does a wonderful job of explaining the consciousness of psychopaths.

    What I like about your commentary is that you discuss facts and leave it for the viewer/listener to draw conclusions. You seem to avoid spiritual matters, but actually this video and the psychopath video can be analyzed from a spiritual point of view. My question for you is: if the crux of the world’s problems are that psychopaths, who are devoid of moral tethers, have created the system we’re experiencing, wouldn’t the solution to all the problems be to cultivate the opposite consciousness from the psychopaths?

    In the earlier video, you briefly discussed that there are also sociopaths who, through choices, have effectively dimmed or eliminated that troublesome morality that would stand in the way of achieving objectives. If it is true that we can make choices that justify doing what we know to be morally wrong, aren’t we all, to some degree, a bit like fledgling sociopaths? Perhaps sociopathy isn’t a social disorder, but rather an ubiquitous condition we all have to varying degrees. This question becomes very similar to what religions discuss as the battle between good and evil; or God and Satan.

    An example might be a policeman who knows that it is wrong to kidnap someone who hasn’t harmed anyone, yet has no compunctions about kidnapping and imprisoning a person whose vehicle has a suspicious smell. Another example might be that while we know it is morally wrong to keep animals in torturous conditions, we can justify eating chickens who were raised in such cramped quarters that they had to have their beaks chopped off to keep them from cannibalizing their cagemates.

    I propose that the solution to injustice is to be brave enough to examine our own beliefs and to be willing to identify when we use moral justifications in our own lives. It is easy to point a finger at the bad being done by others, but finger pointing doesn’t make the world a better place. Being a better person makes the world a better place.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      anuttamadd, I enjoyed looking at many of the photos. Saw your nettle harvesting…I had nettle the other day.

      • wingsuitfreak says:

        I take nettle root every day so that I don’t have to get up in the middle of the night. It’s a miracle plant. One of many that I take every day. Let medicine by thy food, and tell big pharma to go to hell.

        • HomeRemedySupply says:

          I agree. The root is great for us older guys …and also Pygeum and Saw Palmetto too.

          The Nettle leaves have some very interesting properties and biological components. Our dogs which have allergies get nettle leaf.

  12. Murray says:

    One still plays the game by not-playing-the-game. This perspective was partially related to in James’ previous episode commenting on how no-one could run the economy.
    I like the adjective word “criminal”, it being a definitive attribute in an array of exogenous factors. Some obviously illogical, hence bad, moves by certain players have also been pointed out.
    I have my reservation about the emo-oriented lower denominator of psycho-terminology. In another person’s words, “too much baggage” like the letters conspiracy-theorist. Besides, the loosely defined non-mathematical “lack-of-empathy” trait has proven itself to be of considerable utility for social positions like surgeons, musicians etc. who have to execute with cool mind steady hands while observing and manipulating the physical presentations of their audience.

    • nosoapradio says:

      Hey there Murray,

      So this psychopathic society was built by both psychopaths and non-psychopaths? Psychopaths have made the hard decisions that allow mass populations to live together? They take the action that wimpy moral people could not? (in a world where non-psychopathic humans are not always moral and often act out of personal interest).

      On the whole psychopaths keep human energy contained in a largely creative way despite a little misplaced zeal resulting in some excessive death, torture and unqualifiable suffering? (human trafficking and child abuse/sacrifice)? Or perhaps these are also logistically necessary elements of the so-called “civilization”?

      So it’s hypocritical to “demonize” psychopaths through binary non-mathmatical “them” vs “us” reasoning?

      I’m not trying to be facetious, sarcastic or aggressive. Please do not feel aggressed – they are sincere questions.

      • Murray says:

        My understanding is that the flag of ponerology is an extremely broad subject by its stated guidelines and hence easy to be waved around:

        “Ponerology describes the genesis, existence, and spread of the macrosocial disease called evil. … Only a scientific understanding drawing from psychological, social, and moral concepts can approach the understanding necessary to prevent the emergence of mass madness seen so many times in the history of our planet.”

        It tries to confirm a direct cause-and-effect between neurological patterns and social behavior. Except the developing neuroscience itself is rather incomplete and inconclusive, and its parameters are evasively chaotic – Some psychopathy researchers, after studying brain-scans of alleged psychopaths for years, came to the conclusion that they themselves are psychopaths. Subsequently it’s a blank-filling game – and there’re many of them.
        Each individual’s endeavor to interact with one another in a society can only shift towards an optimal level by analyzing rigorously and mathematically with clearly defined physical parameters and exogenous utility factors. A person’s inner thoughts and emotions, however well-mapped by microscopic neuroscience, or how distasteful to other entities, should play no part in his/her societal evaluations except for the person’s materialized effort.
        Some of the human tragedies you’ve listed here have been logically concluded to be crimes committed or at least warrant a comprehensive and thorough investigation. And that falls strictly in the subcategory of criminology in game theory. Yes, one is facing powerful players. But the only way forward is by making the average person in society a better player, in that one could then argue for his/her own/collective benefits with a heftier bargain. That is, instead of fleeing from some demonic figure all too often invented to relieve the stress of feeling helpless.

        Now to answer your questions in their sequential order:
        1. All three terms are not well-defined. To answer rhetorically, human characteristics are vast. There will be other categories invented, simply because of current anemic standards in describing a psychopath, who have contributed to society.
        2. I don’t know how to relate “hard” to the current description of a psychopath.
        3. In a set game where all other player’s strategic profiles are known and put a probability value upon, it’s a homomorphism between different groups of social interests and the actions taken. So the answer is no.
        4. Deviated behaviors exist, and its pre-image involves all walks of life. Clearly these do not meet Nash-Equilibrium so it’s not a logical necessity.
        5. Zero-sum games have simple and unavoidable consequences, just by observing real life one would know it’s not in that genre. Whether it’s hypocritical depends on each individual’s axiomatic behavioral guidelines.

        • nosoapradio says:

          Hello Murray and Richard Ran;

          Thank you Murray for taking the time and energy to address my vast, imprecise questions in such a complete and methodical way.

          I agree that it is vitally important to define one’s terms when exploring and debating issues and perhaps that the definitions of various manifestations of psychopathy and the concept of ponerology are insufficient.

          Yesterday in a discussion with a student I believe I vaguely defined a “psychopath” as one whose sense of empathy, and thus his conscience – meaning innate notions of “right and wrong” – are absent and replaced by an arbiter of “personal interest”.

          In addition to the challenges and deficiencies of semantic definitions in this discussion, sadly I must say that I would be utterly incapable of participating in any debate employing mathmatical terms, algorithms or other algebraic representations. I fear this may prove an irreconcilable language barrier between us.

          I will nonetheless attempt to respond to your kind answer.

          You said:

          “…But the only way forward is by making the average person in society a better player, in that one could then argue for his/her own/collective benefits with a heftier bargain. That is, instead of fleeing from some demonic figure all too often invented to relieve the stress of feeling helpless…”

          It would appear that you would prone negotiating with “the system” rather than running from it. (and that the “demonic figure” of…the system? is often invented.)

          Perhaps this comes from your perspective as a game theorist and the Law of the Hammer (where every problem looks like a nail.) ‘If people could simply better model their desires into game theoretical terms they could better negotiate with… the social engineers,…TPTB … the system…? which would be more constructive than running from or attempting to circumvent it?’

          Interestingly, your preference for plying or playing the system rather than “fleeing it” is echoed in Richard Ran’s comment in reference to Ron Paul:

          “…The movement he inspired was a genuine threat to the state (and deep state), because the message was to de-legitimize and dismantle it. Compare that to the avoidance strategy of going voluntarist Hippie2.0 style and as such posing no meaningful threat to the state at all…”

          Creative pacifists will prone creative circumvention, statists will advocate using the system, technocrats will prefer turning power over to technology – can homomorphism resolve these differences?

          If Ron Paul’s goal was to educate people, it appears he succeeded. However, if it was to delegitimize and dismantle the state, we cannot cry “victory”.

          Indeed, at first glance, from my standpoint it would seem difficult to negotiate with a system that orchestrates “crashes of convenience” and “suicides” for people who seek to reveal or counter certain dynamics of said “system”.

          Perhaps these events are exceptional in your view? Or due to a lack of a common language for bargaining rather than systemic or as being an integral aspect of the system’s “Modus Operandi”?

          • Richard Ran says:

            I’ll let Murray go first 😉

          • Murray says:

            Thank you for your time and patience. In furthering the discussion:

            Given the fact that we are discussing strategic human interactions, not what constitutes a likeable/scary character or a good/bad person, one would choose to employ the most rigorous analytical tools ever built up from the axiomatic foundations of human interpretation of the objective world to derive concrete results upon being given concrete parameters of a situation. Hence game theory. A person can choose to write 10 pages of literature to substitute for a single formula but the logical essence of both are identical.

            The “demonic figure” refers to a player for whom a mythological background story has been made up to justify the designated payoff function for him/her. The motivation for doing so might be based on circumstantial anecdotal evidence, or simply the fact that the player’s strategic profile has identified him/her as a legally defined criminal. Given the fact that researchers are quite dependent on behavioral indicators for the identification of so-called psychopath, the background story is simply irrelevant. The “demonic figure” might as well be an automated wooden sculpture, it does not change the game.

            For the average person in society passively born to be a player in this theoretical model, running-away or not-playing-the-game is an element of his/her strategic profile. Choosing this option, however “away” is defined, does not warrant better outcome. My impression of the contextual meaning of “away” used here seems to suggest analyzing a strategic situation without recognizing a particular group of players’ existence whose concrete physical manifestation proves the fundamental logical flow in holding such opinion. Of course this does not necessitate bad strategies like “voting” as any decent statistical undergrad should be able prove such existing mechanism as fraudulent.

            Your intended definitions for “creative pacifists”, “statists” and “technocrats” refer to particular lines of reasoning, sound or not, that support different strategic profiles. In a homomorphism, a kernel of interests can have different representations and this particular coset points towards a single action sub-profile. This is where people wearing different hats dance in unison.

            Education is a constant process that must be sustained by all means possible. I don’t know how do you define “success” but I do not think this process could and should ever end. When one uses the term “delegitimize” and “dismantle” it assumes a near constant level of imperfect information throughout the extensive game of social evolution while people certainly could improve to achieve near Nash-Equilibriums at its every stage.

            So far I haven’t heard governmental assassination ops on mathematics, physics and chemistry students. And a proportion of these potentially powerful minds certainly will not be rushing into Wall Street with programs like the Corbett Report and much more to come.

            • nosoapradio says:

              Good Morning Murray,

              Please forgive me if I appear obtuse. I assure you it is not intentional.

              Are you saying that, from a Game Theorist’s point of view, ignoring another player’s strategy (by attempting circumvention) is simply not a strategy that maximizes the chances of achieving your own desired result (or a Nash equilibrium among players)?

              On another note, what I find intriguing in your “game of social evolution” is that it appears to be completely a-moral. Seeing human evolution as one big Game full of players seems to ignore fundamental human nature.

              Desires born of a sense of morals are coded into a profile and strategy.

              Immoral desires are as legitimate and treated in exactly the same way as moral ones.

              In fact, that’s what strikes me about the world today. A sort of “Game Theory” zeitgeist seems to have descended upon humanity:

              In the name of tolerance, a-morality and rigorous science, immorality is finding its legitimate place in human behavior.

              Using powerful analytical tools to predict outcomes and maximize the attainment of objectives is one thing.

              Transforming game theory into a lifestyle or into some sort of compass worthy of guiding humans who are naturally endowed with a sense of morals and with emotions (which I believe to be an integral aspect of intelligence) is robbing Humanity of what makes it human.

              Human behavior can be modeled but humans are not the sum of mathematical models.

              • Murray says:

                Ignoring the existence of other players will not guarantee a sustainable optimal level of payoff is what it means.
                A simple example is Jame’s comment in one previous episode questioning the productiveness of former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s UN 9/11 speech.
                It is an analogous example of how one could easily undermine his “noble” agenda thinking being “righteous” trumps all physics involved in sociology.

                The fact that different sub-strategy profiles could fall, under a well-defined common principle of “morality”, into different “moral” categories means the Nash-Equilibrium will shift by all players who recognize such classifications.

                After all, what “morality” could ever mount to be without its physical manifestation?
                It is necessarily a relative concept since a “moral”-relation involves at least two entities. The built-in Bayesian game subsequently adjusts the rigidity of the analysis by constantly refining the probability space to count for the uncertainty of the free human will, again by its inescapable physical presentations.

  13. HomeRemedySupply says:

    Corbett gives this link in the show notes…
    It is well worth clicking and reading some of the different sections.

    Here you can see the evolution of Corbett’s thought in July 2009 Reflections on Political Ponerology.

    (5 days after he wrote that, I was here… )

  14. Richard Ran says:

    Hi James,

    Bob Murphy isn’t discussing psychopathy, his main point is about the interventionism (home and abroad) of the welfare/warfare state.

    From (t)his perspective, the problem is the state and using the odd psychopath reference is just shorthand for criminal behaviour. People in positions of power who are well-intentioned can do just as much damage through the rotten system. This also goes for many NGOs. People feel great about their good intentions and very rarely study the results of their actions, which are quite often disastrous. So I’ll just repeat my main objections here about the “psychopaths-among-us-meme”:

    1) A rather minor point, but anyway: the 1 in 25 prevalence figure from earlier episodes is simply incorrect and hugely overestimates the actual number of psychopaths.

    2) Reducing systemic economical and political problems to psychopathology distracts from perfectly sound explanations (as provided by Bob Murphy and others from the Mises Institute) for all of the phenomena that have to do with the interventionism of the welfare/warfare state.

    3) Through the state, people who are well-intentioned can and will do terrible damage.

    Special mention:
    The so-called “Corporate psychopaths theory of the global financial crisis”, however interesting it may be in its own regard, is a very particular instance of a distraction from a thorough analysis of the economic crisis.

    Kind regs from Woodenshoesland,

    • wingsuitfreak says:

      Ah yes, why just the other day when I was jogging down the road to hell, I couldn’t help but admire what a good job they had done in paving it with good intentions. It has such a lovely sheen! 🙂

      • Richard Ran says:

        Yes, the road to hell. Travelled upon by a tiny bunch of “psychopaths” no doubt, but also a yuuuuuge crowd of state-sponsored do-gooders and voluntary servitudists (wow, is that proper English?). And what are we supposed to take home from the podcast with Bob Murphy? Not that the interventionism of the welfare/warfare state is central to all of these problems, no sir. It’s the psychopaths running the banks/corporations/government.

        So as a service to you and other CR subscribers, I’ve listened to the whole podcast with Bob Murphy until I found the moment where he supposedly addresses this big issue with “psychopaths” running the show, whether it be healthcare or foreign interventionism.

        It starts at 45:22, where Bob Murphy says:

        “I really understand that there are listeners of yours who are sceptical of big businessmen [..] I get that, I really do. But also by the same token [..] you gotta say.. the same group of people in Washington who have no trouble bombing foreign kids.. do you really want them in charge of your healthcare? Right? It’s the same group of people and they don’t all of a sudden switch to become completely moral and trustworthy [..] when it switches to domestic affairs. So for people who are very anti-war and don’t trust the US government when it comes to foreign policy, again, why would you want them in charge of whether your daughter gets a kidney transplant [..]?”

        So to sum it all up: no mention of or even allusion to psychopaths by Bob Murphy, that’s James’ addition/interpretation. Murphy’s point is about the state and about immoral people who aren’t worthy of one’s trust. Again, no psychopaths needed to account for the serious problems at hand. So the question then becomes, what’s the use of pushing this meme?

        Must confess that I’m getting pretty fed up with the “beware of the psychopaths”-distortion of an important overall message. I know I’m addressing JC here indirectly through my answer to you, so apologies for that. Stay cool 😉

        All the best from Amsterdam,

        • wingsuitfreak says:

          I agree. I also think that psychopathy has been over-played. As a whole, we are a lot like a first year psychology student who suddenly believes they have all of the neurosis’ they are studying. Superficial personalities? Certainly. Criminality? Obvious. But psychopathy is not the sole explanation for what is happening. As a society, we have been given the opportunity to advance as a species; but our laziness has been making this so much harder than it need be. Many of these people are nothing more than successful criminals. It is the laziness of the people that give them their power. If there is true psychopathy involved, it is from their followers who actually carry out their insane notions, not the criminals and lunatics who tell them what to do and think.
          By the way, when I was in college, one of my English professors said that our language was constantly evolving. He also said that this evolution was driven from the masses, not from the academics. Sorry to call you one of the masses, but what I meant to say was that your English is quite acceptable. It’s creativity is also admirable.
          I do think that if one delves into this as much as James must in order to create such stunning works, it is almost inconceivable to believe that anything other than psychopathy is the answer. This is one of the rare areas I disagree with him. I think that they suffer from out-dated belief systems and criminality instead. The real problem is not the leaders though; it is those that carry out their ravings. The leaders thirst for money, power, and sex. They are relentless in their pursuit of these goals, and they have been working on them for far too long for them to be psychopaths. Cheers, Jim of the face-eating zombie state of Flouride-a

          • wingsuitfreak says:

            I think I should clarify one of my points. When I talk about psychopathy of the masses; I probably should have used the word collectives. After all, just like the Borg, they are of one mind.

        • HomeRemedySupply says:

          I still feel that knowing about the Psychopaths is crucial. The system is built by psychopaths and their infected minions.
          In my opinion, this is foundational to understanding our situation.

          Here is a problem with the subject…
          There is a lot of data. And it is spread out, not tied into a concise synopsis, tied into a nice bow. People often have missing information.

          • wingsuitfreak says:

            That is true; psychopathy does play an important role. However, we are following one of Murphy’s rules of combat in that the enemy feint we are ignoring is actually their main offensive. At least that’s my opinion.

          • Richard Ran says:

            Hi HRS,

            Not sure if your post was directed at yours truly, but since there’s some space here, let’s continue our conversation by me saying that merely repeating the point JC is making doesn’t really constitute much of an argument, if you don’t mind me sayin’. Your claim is that..

            “The system is built by psychopaths and their infected minions.”

            How do you know that? How do you know that the psychopath angle is in any way relevant to the way the welfare/warfare state was established? My claim would be that countless works (available for free on on the “anatomy” of the state provide the necessary and sufficient arguments to explain how we arrived at the sorry state of affairs in today’s world. Can you refute that claim with proof or sound reasoning that no, the psychopath angle is absolutely necessary to explain today’s economical/political problems?

            I promised another case in point (watering down/distracting from the RP message). Remember the “End the FED” meme? That’s great, but only if one understands what a) the FED really is, and b) why ending the FED and replacing it with, say, direct govt. control of the money supply is a really bad idea.

            So when some alt-media outlet presents the FED as a problem insofar as that the main issue would be that it is “privately owned”, I’d say that this outlet is watering down what Ron Paul was all about when he argued for ending the FED.

            To end this on a psychopatic note, my point can be summarised by dragging a quote by wingsuitfreak into the conversation:

            “But psychopathy is not the sole explanation for what is happening.”

            Me thinks psychopathy is not at all an important factor that in any meaningful way complements the RP/ analysis of our predicament.

            Cheers from Amsterdam,

            • wingsuitfreak says:

              Richard, thanks for your help in clarifying a difficult subject. In front of me, I have three of my favorite books of all time. Meditations by MA (George Long trans.), The Prince, Sun Tzu’s Art of War (Sam. Griffiths trans.). All of these books are concerned with power (MA’s is power over the base self, but he wielded great power and waged a lot of war). Two are concerned with creating and maintaining power over others. Yet, they are hardly psychotic. Nor are they for the psychotic. The psychotic personality is not really capable of maintaining the long-range strategies with which these books are concerned.
              They are brutal, for that is the nature of the game they are playing. The game is power. While that is what a psychotic wants, that does not mean they are the sole possessors of that drug. Marcus most certainly was NOT a psychotic, in fact, he was the most brilliant and compassionate man I have ever studied. Yet, he successfully ruled in an extremely blood-thirsty time and place and he came out on top.
              The difference is motive. A psychopath is motivated differently than a person addicted to power. Both are weakened by these needs, but that does not mean they are the same. While I think Sun Tzu should be relevant to our wars, he is not. Other than the deception aspect of war, but that is the nature of war, not the nature of psychopathy.
              If you remember your Tolkein, then you may recall that Sam was the only one who was immune to the power of the One Ring. We have leaders who are addicted to power, but that is not the same as having psychopaths for leaders. This is important, because one needs to understand ones-self and their opponents; otherwise both are your enemies. This was probably insufficient for an explanation, but I don’t believe in fully explaining anything anyway. The mind that matters will be inspired to use the lesser explanation to find their own answers. Jim

              • Richard Ran says:

                Hi Jim,

                I concur, albeit with a certain nagging feeling about what I believe to be a pattern (hence the “End the FED” analogy in my answer to HRS), i.e. some kind of bending/watering down of the RP message, possibly leading to what I’d like to call “going Hippie 2.0”. Yes, it’s alternative with a techno-hipster (bitcoiny) twist, but what it mostly seems to amount to is avoiding, rather than opposing/dismantling, the state in libertarian-lite networks of voluntarism.

                I guess, what I’m saying is that I don’t believe in circumventing Sauron.

                Take care,

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Ah yes, Sauren! And I concur that we are being misled intentionally (of course!). While the money is important, though I don’t really worry about it very much; I think it’s important to realize the enemy is not a psychopath because only then can we understand that the enemy does understand fear. Because they fear us. A psychopath could conceptualize the emotion, but they would never truly experience it. In a very real sense, this makes the enemy far more dangerous than a mere shell of a person (which is all a psychopath is). But it also makes it easier to destroy once we know where to put the final bullet, so to speak.
                Our real enemy is an idea. It is the idea that the individual does not matter. That only the collective can achieve greatness. Even then, it is only for the select few.
                While I do concur that love is the weapon of choice, we must also rid ourselves of this notion that one person can do nothing. Strange how those people almost always vote for one person. It only takes one to begin anything.
                Only when we believe in ourselves, will we become free. Though FDR thought he put the last nail in the coffin of individualism, I think he was wrong. Which means they are capable of mistakes (which they constantly make). This means that we are all bound by duty to do what we are best suited for if we are to be free at last. Free at last! Another great individual.

            • HomeRemedySupply says:


              I think part of the problem is that there is a tremendous amount of data to Understanding Psychopathology. And not all of the information comes from professionals in Psychology / Psychiatry, because they too have a limited view.
              We at Corbett Report are fortunate, because we are aware of so many frauds and evil men. This gives us further insight.

              In my opinion, the infection from Psychopaths is almost ubiquitous.
              This is a sick ailing world.
              It is infected and slowly rots of gangrene.
              The psychopaths deliberately infect it.

          • HomeRemedySupply says:

            I am adamant that Psychopaths are the foundational problem for the world’s situation. Just like what James Corbett says here in a couple statements…

            I am not being obsequious towards Corbett. This is something which I feel very certain of.

            It is my contention that other situations or other problems could more easily be resolved if this “foundational Psychopathic aspect” was wildly recognized.
            Until what lies at the foundation is recognized, everything else becomes a patch on a tire that has gone flat many times.

            • Richard Ran says:

              Hi HRS,

              A question.
              Do you think that in the featured Scott Hornton podcast, Bob Murphy really makes the argument that it is the psychopaths who are in charge of US foreign policy and the health care system?

              I’ll catch up later. Cheers from over here,

              • HomeRemedySupply says:

                I contend that the entire system is designed by psychopaths.
                The psychopathic nature has infected the world, like a contagion of aberration.
                This makes the situations look muddy. The aberrations are embedded within society.

                One thing about psychopaths and their contaminated minions, is that they appear human. They often dress and act like regular people. Their social mask makes them difficult to spot. But they have no humanity.

                The psychopaths try to design a system which lets them do what they want. And what they want is not in the best interest of humanity.

                These soulless nuts migrate towards a psychopathic system because that system protects them and gives them more power.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                HRS, Psychopaths are not inherently evil. They lack empathy, and that’s it. That doesn’t make them evil, it just means their humanity is incomplete. Just like most people. Yet, they are just as capable of living a beneficial life as anyone else. Just one example of this, among many I am sure, was present on the Lionel show. This researcher is a certified psychopath, and does research on psychopaths. Yet, he is not evil, nor does he have any intention (that I can tell) of becoming evil. An excellent source to understand psychopathy at a layman’s level and from a psychopath is “Memoirs of a Sociopath”. She teaches law and runs some web forum for psychopaths. While her opening story may shock you, it is done for shock’s sake. While I obviously cannot vouch for its’ validity, it does ring true to me. So, besides psychopathy not being an indicator of evil; it also does not explain everything else as well as the addiction to power does. To me, the addiction to power is far scarier than some pathetic, and ultimately incomplete, shell of a person. As anyone who has spent any time around junkies knows, junkies cannot have friends. But a psychopath can. Have fun, Jim who is avoiding the psyhopathic zombies of Flouride-a still.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Good Morning again HRS! I’m a little more awake now (my first reply was before my first cup of coffee after waking up at 3:30). I would like to refine what I wrote earlier.
                One of the main reasons I don’t believe psychopaths created this system is because they are simply incapable of it from a biological standpoint. They lack empathy and many of the emotions that normal people have. This doesn’t make them evil, and many of them live good, productive lives because they have found systems which allow them to function normally. All systems (including the universe) are chaotic, yet seek order. The universe does so through mathematics. Psychopaths often do so through some code of ethics.
                However, the great (as defined by Machievelli being someone who desires to leave their mark on the world) must understand emotions in order to manipulate them. To master something, you must also possess them. Psychopaths don’t. At least not in the way we understand emotions. They can mimic them, but they can never master them because they don’t experience them. This is why psychopaths generally don’t rise very high in any field. They can reach a certain level, but in any field there is a need to be able to emote with others in order to do your job effectively. These are the top positions. The only way this can happen in a government position is through an inherited power structure, such as a monarchy.
                Even old man Rothschild isn’t a psychopath. I watched a documentary on him (it was friendly, and by the BBC, but that doesn’t mean you can’t learn from it anyway) once and found him to be a very curious man, which is a sign of great intelligence. I also noted how he has an extremely severe case of OCD. This seems to affect every aspect of his life. However, this doesn’t mean he is an evil person. I did not sense that at all.
                What I am saying is that a person of great power MUST have mastery of their emotions and their reasoning abilities in order to manipulate other people of power. This requires a fully functioning mind. Psychopaths simply lack that ability.
                What I am also saying is that the true enemy we are facing is far more dangerous than a mere psychopath. So don’t worry! We have even greater enemies to help us become even greater people ourselves! Now enjoy your morning cup of coffee, Jim who knows that cardio is very important when running from latex wearing zombies in Flouride-a

              • HomeRemedySupply says:

                I disagree.
                Psychopaths have evil intentions. They have no desire to benefit mankind.
                Psychopaths are soulless creatures with evil intent. Worms have a higher quality of humanity than psychopaths.

                There are only two fundamental directions of intent. Only two sides to the coin.
                The intent to better conditions and humanity.
                The intent not to better conditions and humanity.

                Like any type of character trait, there are many shades of grey.
                The Hare Test ranks them.

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Oh well, on this we will have to disagree. Remember, popular opinion is always wrong. This is today’s popular opinion. Simply lacking empathy is not evil, that requires intent. Lacking empathy is simply lacking empathy. I’ve met evil, and the worst ones are never psychopaths. Cheers, Jim

              • Richard Ran says:

                Okay HRS,

                You contend and that’s fine, but you didn’t answer my question.

                So here’s another one. Do you believe that someone who simply equates psychopathy with antisocial personality disorder is a person who knows what he’s talking about?

                Here’s James quoting from “The Sociopath Next Door”, by Martha Stout in Ep. 90, Our Leaders are Psychopaths:


                Notice that Stout equates sociopathy with antisocial personality disorder, a blunder of sorts because the two are quite distinct. She also uses sociopathy and psychopathy as labels that apparently apply to the same disorder. So we have antisocial personality, sociopathy and psychopathy, and it’s all the same thing according to Stout (but not according to the Hare test). Apart from that, she uses “prevalence” in the epidemiological sense when she sets the number at 4% but in the next paragraph, quoted by James, she suddenly uses “incidence” while referring to the same statistic. That’s rather sloppy if she’s using incidence in a broad non-epidemiological sense, and just plain wrong if she’s using it to describe the number of new cases of a given disorder.

                Cheers from Amsterdam,

              • wingsuitfreak says:

                Greetings Richard, I think that everyone is too emotional on this one for logic. To include Mr. Corbett. However, I think this is a dangerous emotion. One of the first steps of war is to demonize the enemy. How better to demonize someone that to call them a psychopath? Not all politicians are psychopaths any more than all Muslims are terrorists. Also, to call the institutions psychopathic in origin is to call every aspect of our civilization psychopathic. After all, they were created by the Greeks. They gave us Euclid Geometry (I was a history major and began my algebra studies right when they began the “new” and improved Algebra, so I don’t know what the hell it is) which Einstein called one of their greatest gifts. But lets just throw that away as a psychopathic culture invented it. Tragedies were born out of that society. This whole psychopathy rage is just simply a dangerous and childish over-simplification that doesn’t hold any water at all. We are dealing with people who are not psychotic. But they are far more dangerous than any psychotic could ever dream of being. The only person I am certain is a psychotic on the modern political scene (in Amerika) is Hillary. Note how out of touch she seemed to be? A classic case of a psychotic reaching beyond their grasp. I could go on, but I think it would be pointless. People confuse behavior with being. They are not the same. Cheers, Jim from the zombie state of Flouride-a

              • HomeRemedySupply says:

                Yes, I intentionally avoided some of your specific questions.

                Here is the deal from my perspective.
                There is a tremendous amount of data surrounding the topic of Psychopaths. (Both from ‘experts’ and from ‘experience’/’observation’.)

                To try to nutshell everything or to try to place it in a synopsis which includes the evolution of thought could require a book. And that book is one person’s take (and it doesn’t matter whether that person is an ‘authority’ or not). I sure as hell am not gonna write some book on this thread.

                Everyone is going to have to put the pieces together for themselves.

                I have tried to communicate my take on the subject. If others don’t agree, I am fine with that.

                We are very fortunate that James has consolidated and gleaned very important information about Psychopaths.

              • Richard Ran says:

                I can perhaps best clarify my take on things by invoking a CR episode from not so long ago.

                James and G. Edward Griffin about checking assumptions and acknowledging blind spots:


                At 24:55 G. Edward Griffin says:

                “Everybody makes these mistakes because we assume the information is correct because it comes from the right source. So we have to question authority.”

                James agrees:

                “Such an important point to make and this applies to everyone, including myself, including yourself, including every single person listening to this conversation. [..] It’s important to understand and acknowledge that blind spots exist and that we will all make mistakes and the best we can do is check and recheck our assumptions..”

                So when I ask a question, I’m simply checking assumptions.
                I found some of them wanting re psychopathy and the sources quoted in the CR episode. Of course you’ve every right to do as you please but still, why avoid a simple question? Why refrain from what James is wholeheartedly recommending here? But okay.

                Agree to disagree then? No problem. Like your style HRS (and yours too Jim), so..

                See you around,

  15. wingsuitfreak says:

    By the way, Since I’ve been ranting on about psychopathy; I suppose I should offer a solution. Well, a strategy. I borrow from Sun Tzu for that. We are facing a far superior force in almost every way excepting the thirst for personal freedom. To try to organize and confront the existing system head-on is a recipe for defeat. In this case, (though not militarily; such violence is also a recipe for defeat); if we all lived our lives in accordance with our beliefs, spurning the mechanisms of control; we would be victorious. Say what? I know, it’s convoluted.
    For example, in my own instance, I am in the process of patenting a device I invented. With those proceeds, I intend to not only use the funds to help fund other products; but to form a charity which grows (among other things) organic food to supply local food banks and soup kitchens. By itself, it does nothing. Yet, it is an act of defiance that if multiplied a few thousand-fold, would be victorious. I’m not saying that everyone do WHAT I am doing. I am saying everyone act in accordance with their principles. It is by living by example of your politics that this system can be defeated. And by the way, this strategy is not my idea. It is one that is on-going now by many others. Live your life to elevate others and no authority can conquer you. Of course, that doesn’t mean you don’t crush the collective. They voluntarily gave up their humanity when they gave up their individuality. Dang-blasted zombies!

  16. wingsuitfreak says:

    Just got my daily Activist Post. The second article was this one. The first was our lord and savior Tonald Dump is now going to take down the DarkNet. Congrats James! You are an inspiration to individualists everywhere!

  17. nawk says:

    Take a look at this : (Via

    “. . . journalist Benjamin Fulford has done. Going from the peak of his journalistic career, a massive salary and access to almost any door he wanted open, the former Asia-Pacific Bureau Chief of Forbes Magazine stepped away in disagreement of massive censoring and has since started reporting on geopolitical events that certain “elites” wish he would not. Blowing the whistle on a wide variety of topics, including 9/11 and Fukushima, Fulford has drawn the attention of many around the world and has even survived 5 assassination attempts.”

  18. HomeRemedySupply says:

    TruthStreamMedia – Melissa Dykes says: …It doesn’t matter who the President is. I wish people would get that. At least get that much….

  19. HomeRemedySupply says:

    James Corbett makes an extremely profound, perhaps controversial statement to many, at the 5:13 minute mark of the video Criminal Psychopaths Run The Government

    I encourage people to spend 15 minutes viewing this Corbett interview with Stefan VerstappenDefense Against the Psychopath

  20. mkey says:

    Smartphones making children borderline autistic

    Children struggle to read emotions and are less empathetic than a generation ago because they spend too much time using tablets and smartphones

    5 Ways Smart Phones Are Dumbing People Down

    If it is to be assumed people are going strange en masse, as it should, the reasons for this type of behavior should be considered as well. It’s not about lack of attention, but what we’re being programmed to pay attention to. It’s not about being docile or suffering from a lack of rage, but about the wrong things we get enraged over. Like the road rage or incorrectly-punched-ball-somewhere-10000-km-away rage. I’m not invoking mass rage nor violence, but if people would get angry over the important issues, which are aplenty, it could mean the difference of a tide turning scope.

    Well, I’m not going to leave you alone. I want you to get mad. I don’t want you to protest, I don’t want you to riot, I don’t want you to write to your congressmen because I wouldn’t know what to tell you to write. I don’t know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street. All I know is that first you got to get mad! You got to say “I’m a human being, goddamn it, my life has value!”

    What’s really scary here is that these changes get introduced quickly and with each generation problems accumulate REALLY quickly. Sane people are running out of supply and with them sane parents are going the way of the dodo. I don’t know if we have reached the critical point, but I’d say we’re damn close if not past the point of no return.

    • Ragnar says:

      I think one easy solution to a multitude of problems is for the US to legalize drugs. “Gasp!” Yes, I know.. When I first heard about it, in an interview with former Florida state trooper Peter Christ, I was repulsed and shocked, like many of you are. But as I listened to him, it began to make sense. A quote made during the interview said “you can’t legislate morality”. That made a lot of sense to me, as did what he said. The example of alcohol prohibition which gave rise to the gangsters, is so apt here. The “war on drugs” has allowed narco cartels to amass wealth and influence in both Mexico and the US, not to mention South America. It’s promoted the rise in viscous crime in northern Mexico, which causes the mass influx of illegals into the US. It’s allowed the prison industrial complex to thrive as well as the increase in prison populations for non violent drug offenses. It’s allowed the militarization of the police and the watering down of many laws and overly tightening others. Legalizing drugs would break the financial backs of the cartel’s. It would free what, 60% of the prison inmates and free up tremendous financial resources across the US. It would solve our financial crisis by the regulation and sale of drugs legally and cut back the number of agents and officers in federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. It’s so funny that no one in the media will address the similarity between our drug problems and the alcohol prohibition issues in the early 20th century.

      Let’s face it, as long as there is a demand for drugs, there will be suppliers. Whether black market or legal markets, people will get drugs. So why not solve our financial problems and eliminate the “us vs. them” mentality being fostered throughout the law enforcement community.

      • mkey says:

        I assure you, the first politician who makes strides toward drugs “legalization” is the next politician which will be buried alive in fresh concrete becoming a part of foundation of a shopping mall somewhere in the suburban area.

        To be completely honest and realistic, any drastic changes endangering the established status quo would lead to same. Shopping malls would start to be built with record low amounts of concrete.

        Of course you’re right there, drugs industry is a giant beast. There’s a lot of feedback in this process, stages of it feeding back into various other stages. Growth supporting growth, unnatural, cancer like.

  21. HomeRemedySupply says:

    RT News – July 31, 2017
    Money For Military: Trump appoints defense industry lobbyist as army secretary
    (3 minutes)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top