Тег: Psychopaths

Divide, conquer, and… smile with all 32 teeth!

We usually talk about violence in physical terms. But there is another type of aggression that is far more elegant from a biological perspective. It is not the club of a Neanderthal, but a surgeon’s scalpel. Or, to be more precise, a sweet poison. Recently, a great article by Winifred Rohl on this topic was published in Psychology Today. She raises the issue of exactly how psychopathic personalities break social bonds. If we look at the market of human relationships as a free exchange of values, then a psychopath is a monopolist-fraudster. And their primary currency is confusion. Let’s now examine this problem point by point.

First, psychopaths use charm as camouflage. Rohl writes: “For psychopaths, charm is their glitter.” Biologically, this is mimicry. A psychopath cannot feel empathy, so they simulate it. Example: you see a charismatic leader who says the right things. Your brain, tuned to search for an “alpha,” screams: “Oh, this is someone to follow!”. In reality, it is a predator who has simply learned in what tone to purr.

Second, they employ the “Wedge” tactic. The article gives a chilling example: a mother (a psychopath) tells her daughter over the phone: “Speak, darling, we are alone, this is private.” The daughter pours her heart out. Meanwhile, the mother winks at the second daughter, who is sitting nearby and listening to everything. Why? To create an artificial deficit of information and trust. While you are fighting among yourselves, you aren’t looking at the one pulling the strings. A classic of statecraft transferred to the kitchen.

Third, they “hack” the hierarchy. Research by Paul Babiak (author of “Snakes in Suits”) shows that psychopaths are promoted in corporations. Why? Because they perfectly hack vertical management systems. To the boss, they “sell” confidence and flattery (psychopaths do not experience anxiety, so they appear super-competent). Meanwhile, they terrorize, sabotage, and frame their colleagues and subordinates. The result: those at the top see an “effective manager,” while those at the bottom see scorched earth. By the time the information reaches the top, the psychopath has already gained their benefit and moved to another department.

Why did evolution leave us with such personalities (approximately 1% of the population)? It is a parasitism strategy. If everyone around is cooperating and trusting (cooperative strategy), then an individual appears who can exploit this trust for maximum personal gain. Without spending resources on conscience, reflection, or fear. Pure profit.

How to avoid becoming prey? The author of the article emphasizes: the main marker that a psychopath is nearby is your feeling of “I’m going crazy.” If person A tells you nasty things about person B in secret, and then you see them hugging—you experience cognitive dissonance. You begin to doubt your own sanity.

So what should be done? Look at actions, not glitter: charisma is cheap, reputation and adherence to contracts are expensive. Therefore, decentralize your fact-checking. If you are told, “The whole department thinks you’re an idiot,” do not take it on faith. Go and speak with the department directly. Psychopaths fear the direct communication of victims like fire, because lies only live in the dark. So protect your neurons and your boundaries. Freedom begins where manipulation ends!

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Why Psychopaths Are Not Needed by the Market

In popular culture (and in some business publications) for years an image of the “business shark” has been cultivated – a cold, calculating cynic in an expensive suit who steps on people’s heads, breaks rules, but brings super profits to shareholders. Sort of like Gordon Gecko or Patrick Bateman. Of course, many libertarians (and we among them) value rationality and the ability to disconnect unnecessary emotions when it comes to figures. But there is a fine line between rationality and pathology. And a new meta-study, published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, clearly highlights this line.

What is it about? Psychologists Lenke Roth and Ute-Kristine Klecke analyzed data from almost 50,000 people. Their results knock the Hollywood myth flat: psychopathic traits lead to terrible work performance! We’ve been used to thinking that a psychopath is such a brilliant manipulator who outsmarted everyone. In reality, statistics show something different.

Firstly, individuals with psychopathic traits simply have low productivity; they work worse than others. They also provide no help to colleagues. In a healthy private company, success is the sum of efforts. A psychopath won’t lend a shoulder, even if it depends on the fate of the project. Moreover, such people are prone to counterproductive behavior, which is the most interesting thing. Sabotage, bullying, theft, delaying deadlines – this is about them. From the perspective of a free market, an employee concludes a contract: time and skills in exchange for money. A psychopath de facto violates this contract. Instead of creating value, he engages in destroying the company’s social capital.

Individuals with so-called secondary psychopathy also “stood out” – they are impulsive, hostile, and unable to control their emotions. They are delayed-action bombs that explode the office from within.

What should employers do? Your business is your private property. You have full rights (and even an obligation before your wallet) to filter those you allow on your doorstep. Don’t be fooled by charisma and ostentatious self-confidence during interviews. HR screening, personality tests, and thorough reference checks are not bureaucracy but protection of your investments. One such “wolf from Wall Street” can scare half your productive department (high employee turnover is a typical result of psychopathic personalities among managers), and you’ll spend years clearing up the losses from a toxic atmosphere.

And now, seriously – if, reading the description of psychopathic traits (the absence of empathy and guilt for harming people, manipulative behavior, impulsivity), you suddenly recognized yourself… then there are news for you. You aren’t an “alpha-predator.” You are an inefficient economic agent. The market harshly punishes inadequacy. Your inability to fit into cooperation and work towards results makes you poorer in the long term. Being toxic is economically disadvantageous.

Libertarianism is built on the principle of non-aggression and voluntary collaboration. Psychopathy often pushes people to violate both. As long as you don’t initiate violence, no one should force you into treatment – your body, your business. But rational egoism suggests: if your “hardware” malfunctions and prevents you from earning, maybe it’s time to take some medication and fix the system? Consent to therapy is not weakness, but an investment in your human capital. Psychopathic individuals should think about this before they simply stop hiring them even as pizza delivery guys. Because the further along we go, the more widespread understanding will become that a psychopath is not a profitable employee, but a risk and source of damage.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

From heartlessness to brutality: psychopathy as a key to predicting violence

Modern science shows that violence – not just the result of influence on a person by society, environment, upbringing or simply their personal choice. Primarily, violence is a biological phenomenon – the result of dysfunction of the inhibition mechanism of violence and arising psychopathic predispositions due to this. And John Marshall, a forensic psychologist, writes quite well about the key role of psychopathy in committing violence in one of his articles, which we will now consider in more detail.

Firstly, he mentions the meta-analysis by Brittany Fox and Matt DeLisi from 2019, which considered 29 samples from various countries covering over 2600 murders. The correlation between psychopathy and committing murder was equal to 0.68. For comparison – in medicine a correlation of 0.3 between smoking and lung cancer is already considered significant enough not to be ignored. And the link between psychopathy and murder was twice as strong! What’s more, the more extreme or organized the form of killing is, the more manifestations of psychopathy there are in it.

Moving on to the most relevant studies published this year, Melissa Parker West and her colleagues conducted an analysis of 117 studies on the connection between psychopathy and sexual violence. The correlation was moderate, at a level of 0.35, however it is important to note that it remains stable across various samples, including prisoners in jails and public samples. In medicine, similarly strong will be the link between cholesterol and heart disease. Such results completely destroy the idea that psychopathy has nothing to do with sexual or non-sexual violence. The data indicates the opposite: features of psychopathy significantly increase the risk of violence.

Why is this important? Critics argue that psychopathy – a too vague, exaggerated and useless in practice construct. But the data says something different. Psychopathy predicts murders with an effect size that is very rarely found in social sciences. It predicts sexual aggression at a level comparable to well-established medical risk factors. This makes it one of the most powerful indicators of violence. And the fact that the “average” criminal who has committed murder shows moderate manifestations of psychopathy underlines that this is not just a rare subtype of killers, but a general tendency for all cases of lethal violence.

But what is the practical benefit of such knowledge? Of course its value is not purely academic; it’s useful in assessing and managing risks. For example, we need to understand what measures to take towards a criminal and how suitable he is for returning to society. And if we ignore the factor of psychopathy, we can easily make a wrong answer and issue a blind judgment.

Also, this knowledge is useful in preventing violence. Psychopathic traits don’t arise at one moment when a person turns 18 years old. They can be traced in the individual’s development even in childhood and adolescence, observing their callousness and lack of emotion, absence of empathy and a tendency to manipulative or abusive behavior. It is very important to identify and intervene in the problem as early as possible. Combating these traits before they turn into ingrained adult personality models is one of the ways to reduce the number of future abusers.

Finally, psychopathy doesn’t limit itself to prisons or громкие дела (loud cases) about murders. Many people discover psychopathy in personal life: with partners, colleagues, friends or bosses. The ability to recognize emotional superficiality, pathological lies, manipulation and lack of empathy can protect a person from violence. It is necessary to raise public awareness, which will help people avoid psychopaths and the danger they represent, as well as take the right actions when encountering them!

Волюнтарист, Битарх

The world is hostile by its nature, and everyone around is an enemy?

Let’s immediately give a short answer for those who don’t have time to read the whole post: those who think this way almost certainly are psychopathic individuals and probably also suffer from a dysfunction of the mechanism of violence inhibition. We will then analyze in more detail why this is so based on a scientific publication.

Some people tend to hold such a view of the world – that it’s inherently hostile. They also tend to consider other people’s actions as being more aimed at causing harm than they actually are. Thus, they can see threats even where none actually exist. All of this is described by the concept called “hostile attribution bias”.

Of course, no one is obliged to carelessly treat other people, and in many situations checking each person for potential hostile and harmful intentions is perfectly normal. But we must understand – this is done because some people *do* want to cause harm, and you can run into them. At the time same, labeling people as bad and the world in general is unlikely to be an adequate view. And perhaps some personality traits are significantly linked with such a view.

Research conducted by the University of Alabama examined the link between hostile attribution bias and psychopathic predispositions. As a result, this link turned out to be moderately expressed. So, it’s quite possible that people with high overall scores on psychopathy, as well as, in particular, such a factor as impulsivity control impairment (indicating problems with controlling impulsive reactions), would be more inclined to perceive the actions of others in situations they don’t understand as hostile than others. Furthermore, hostile attribution bias was moderately linked with all forms of aggression – both proactive (intentional) and reactive (impulsive). This shows that individuals with elevated levels are prone to respond to perceived hostility by resorting to aggressive actions of various types, including the observation of a link with the manifestation of physical aggression. Don’t forget that all forms of aggression are also significantly linked with psychopathic predispositions.

As we see, individuals who have psychopathic predispositions and are prone to manifesting any forms of aggression often perceive a threat where one simply doesn’t exist. The world seems more hostile to them, and everyone around them – those who undoubtedly want to harm them. Of course, there really do exist psychopathic individuals among us who can easily, without experiencing any psychological discomfort or internal resistance, even commit murders, and it is quite reasonable to be wary of them. But most people are still non-violent and don’t seek to harm anyone. And if someone thinks otherwise, if someone labels people as inherently hostile and aggressive creatures, then it’s perfectly justified to think whether this person is judging others according to themselves.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Which moral values are psychopaths more prone to reject

According to the definition by psychologist Jonathan Haidt, morality is a set of interrelated values, virtues, norms, practices, identities, institutions, technologies, and evolutionarily developed psychological (neurobiological) mechanisms that work together to constrain or regulate personal interests and make cooperative communities possible. Haidt also identifies five distinct moral foundations:

1) Harm/care — this foundation represents concerns about the violence and suffering of others, including compassion and care;
2) Fairness/reciprocity — represents norms of reciprocal relationships, equality, rights, and justice;
3) In-group/loyalty — covers moral obligations associated with group membership, such as loyalty, betrayal, and preferential treatment of in-group members compared to out-group members;
4) Authority/respect — represents moral obligations associated with hierarchical relationships, such as obedience, duty, respect for authority, and the protection of subordinates;
5) Purity/sanctity — represents the moral ideal of a sublime, noble, and less carnal life, based on an intuition of divinity, a sense of moral disgust, and the purity of body, mind, and soul.

The first two foundations can be called individualizing, as they are aimed at protecting the well-being and interests of separate individuals. The remaining foundations are binding, as they are primarily aimed at some group interest. And what is important for us to know now is how psychopaths—more specifically, individuals with high scores in primary psychopathy, consisting of traits such as callousness, indifference, and a lack of empathy toward others, and a tendency to manipulate and harm them in pursuit of their own interests—relate to various moral foundations.

Regarding the connection between binding foundations and psychopathic predispositions, research usually shows either a positive correlation or no correlation at all, which is not a definitive result. However, what can be said for certain about psychopathic individuals is that they have a relatively greater preference for binding moral foundations than for individualizing ones. Empathic motivation lies at the heart of individualizing moral foundations. Psychopathic individuals, naturally, have problems with this—they are little concerned with things like causing harm and suffering to people, reciprocity in relationships, etc. Accordingly, research shows that high psychopathic predispositions are followed by a decrease in a person’s preference for individualizing foundations.

This is very important to consider when promoting ideas aimed at expanding human freedoms and reducing harm to people, such as libertarianism. Psychopathic individuals are less likely to embrace such ideas; or, if they do, it will be only in extremely distorted forms that allow for violent attacks on people, intentional harm, and the violation of their rights in the pursuit of certain interests (primarily their own). Again, psychologically, they are not particularly concerned with the problem of causing harm to people, and their morality will be structured accordingly, permitting such behavior.

Sources:

  1. Kirrane, M., Farqan, A., Cloak, E. (2024). Exploring a paradox: Psychopathy, Morality and Organisational Citizenship Behaviour.
  2. Glenn, A. L., Iyer, R., Graham, J., Koleva, S., Haidt, J. (2009). Are All Types of Morality Compromised in Psychopathy?
  3. Esser, M. (2022). An Investigation into whether psychopathic traits negatively contribute to moral judgements.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Corporate Psychopathy – the Cause of the Global Economic Crisis

There is a theory developed by researcher Clive Boddy, according to which psychopaths working in corporations, particularly financial ones, played a significant role in the emergence of the 2008 global economic crisis. As is well known, not all managers are inclined to work for the benefit of the company that hired them. Some of them are dysfunctional leaders who literally destroy the company with their actions. One important type of such leaders are psychopathic personalities, which we will now discuss in more detail.

As we know, psychopaths in literature are defined as personalities who have problems manifesting empathy and sympathy toward other people, behave coldly and ruthlessly toward them, lack a conscience, and feel no guilt for causing harm to anyone. In turn, corporate psychopaths are individuals with similar characteristics who engage in organizational activities. They usually present themselves as pleasant, attractive, and successful individuals, but in reality, they merely manipulate everyone around them, usually to their detriment, to achieve purely personal goals.

Such individuals often receive rapid promotions and become leaders due to their charm and confidence, while they are prone to ignoring the needs of others, deceiving them, or even engaging in bullying. Furthermore, there is evidence that in some companies, including international financial corporations, psychopaths were even specifically selected for leadership positions due to the belief that such personalities are best suited for such work.

Usually, such individuals brought short-term success to companies through mass cost-cutting and employee layoffs. However, they were in no way concerned about the potential long-term harm of the strategies they chose, and in general pursued exclusively their own benefits, discarding their obligations and responsibility, striving to obtain as many personal “bonuses” as possible while everyone else was in the midst of financial litigation. From the actions of such “effective managers,” one can well expect that they will ultimately receive a large check for their efforts to “save” the company, after which it will simply go bankrupt.

Now imagine what would happen if, due to certain global changes in the corporate environment—such as increasingly frequent company mergers, the tendency of employees to change jobs more often and move to companies previously completely unknown to them, changes in the technological environment and others, which became common practice on the eve of the global crisis—psychopathic personalities received far more opportunities to occupy high positions, using not their actual work skills, but manipulation and political skills? In such a situation of growing corporate psychopathy, a corporate and social catastrophe can be expected, which is precisely what authors studying this problem warned about in their materials as early as 2005.

Such a problem has still not been given proper attention, which puts the very future of capitalism at risk. Of course, this problem is far from the only one in economic matters, but it deserves more detailed study and the application of appropriate measures.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Social movements as conduits of the dark ego and antisemitism

Various studies show that public and activist movements of various kinds, including eco-activists, feminist movements, and even movements against sexual violence, suffer from one problem – they are often represented by individuals with certain dark personality traits. Particular emphasis should be placed on grandiose narcissism, which is characterized by an inflated sense of superiority and self-importance, as well as an obsessive need for recognition. In addition, such individuals often suffer from psychopathy – a lack of empathy toward other people, an absence of guilt for causing them harm, etc. In general, it is assumed that people with dark personality traits tend to “hijack” pro-social movements to use them as a vehicle for their own selfish needs.

One example of this, which we have already considered several times in previous materials, is the seizure of leadership in social and political movements by psychopaths. This process is well described by psychiatrist Andrzej Lobaczewski in the book “Political Ponerology: The Science of the Nature of Evil Applied to Politics.” Psychopathic personalities, being at the bottom of a movement at the start of their careers, do the dirty work for it that others would not undertake, earn a reputation within it, rise through the hierarchy by resorting to various kinds of manipulation, and displace everyone else from leadership positions. And when these individuals gain real power in society, they inevitably create large-scale catastrophes, such as repression, genocide, and wars.

In one of the current studies on this topic, researchers decided to examine the problem of antisemitism. Such an ideology also often serves as a vehicle for the dark ego. Participants in this study were 3,981 people from the USA and Britain. They underwent various tests for dark personality traits, as well as a predisposition to dark needs, such as aggressiveness, a desire to dominate others, sensation seeking, fake virtue (public demonstration of moral virtue without genuine moral conviction), and selfishness (lack of altruism). They also completed several questionnaires on adherence to various forms of antisemitism, ranging from a tendency toward prejudice against Jews (for example, viewing them as dishonest and greedy people) to radical anti-Zionist views that justify violence.

As a result, it was found that antisemitism is closely linked to dark personality traits – more than 94% of the indicators of these traits were positively associated with it. A particularly strong link to antisemitism is observed in the previously mentioned narcissism and psychopathy. And this applies to all investigated forms of antisemitism, from traditional to radical. Furthermore, the presence of dark needs in an individual was also linked to antisemitism.

Researchers believe that any ideology, prejudice, and activism that can help satisfy dark needs are attractive to people with high scores in dark personality traits. For example, according to research, both left-wing and right-wing authoritarianism are linked to them. At the same time, exactly which ideological tools people with a dark ego use depends on which ideas and narratives they encounter in their specific life circumstances and whether they recognize the possibility of satisfying their dark needs.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Why it is often useless to threaten psychopathic individuals with punishment

Social orders are often built on the assumption that potential punishments for their violation should deter a significant portion of individuals who would otherwise boldly commit any crime. To some extent, this is indeed true; however, the degree to which a person is susceptible to the threat of punishment also depends on what kind of personality they have.

As was recently found, individuals with psychopathic predispositions demonstrate reduced sensitivity to pain, which affects their ability to learn from painful consequences. In one experiment, while performing a task in which participants could receive either a reward or an electric shock, possessing more pronounced psychopathic traits led to a poorer ability to learn from painful experience. Due to the more rapid development of pain tolerance, participants with high psychopathy scores quickly returned to their initial expectations and did not change their behavior.

Earlier studies show that if psychopathic individuals are asked to learn how to navigate a maze using various levers, while simultaneously avoiding those that cause painful shocks, they handle only the first task well. And in the case of a gambling experiment, in which two decks contained cards leading to high wins but also high losses, making long-term winning impossible, while the other two decks led to small wins but also small losses, making long-term winning possible, psychopathic individuals were poor at learning not to choose cards from the first two decks, whereas ordinary participants had no such problem. Apparently, they easily concentrate on faster and larger gains, ignoring the accompanying risks. Additionally, one MRI study showed that the brains of violent offenders with high psychopathy scores process punishment stimuli in an atypical way, which may lead to an inadequate assessment of benefits and punishments.

There is also a suggestion that psychopaths may actually derive pleasure from experiencing fear and deliberately place themselves in situations that induce it. This is supported by one study in which individuals with higher psychopathy scores, and especially its primary factor (traits such as lack of empathy and superficial charm), expressed more pleasure from watching videos with content aimed at inducing fear than participants with lower scores. Furthermore, researchers of corporate psychopathy studying information security in the banking sector note that fear of immediate or direct punishment is unable to prevent unethical behavior on the part of psychopathic people. Therefore, they, among others, propose conducting screening for psychopathic predispositions before hiring anyone.

It can be observed that individuals with psychopathic predispositions tend to inadequately assess the benefits and negative consequences of their behavior, and threatening them with punishment is often simply pointless. Therefore, in their case, instead of punishment, it is certainly worth considering a therapeutic approach that corrects the dysfunction of the violence inhibition mechanism, because of which they possess high psychopathy scores.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

How psychopaths manifest themselves in relationships

It would be quite obvious to say that maintaining any personal relationship with a person who can easily be ruthless, heartless, manipulative, deceitful, and unempathetic toward others is an extremely questionable venture. However, it is important to list specifically how psychopathic individuals manifest in relationships, as well as highlight some of their characteristics to support such a claim.

  1. Psychopathic individuals skillfully manipulate the feelings of others. To enter into relationships, they tend to resort to deception, demonstrating good qualities that they do not actually possess. Of course, to some extent many people are inclined to act this way, but psychopaths do so more intensely than others. They skillfully present themselves as attractive romantic partners, even if they are absolutely uninterested in “committed” relationships.
  2. Once psychopathic individuals get what they want, they can easily begin to behave cruelly. Psychopathic predispositions in a partner are the strongest predictor of long-term abuse in a relationship. Due to a dysfunctional violence inhibition mechanism, psychopaths easily ignore the suffering of their partners, except in cases where they can use it for their own manipulative purposes. For example, by manipulating fear, they may intimidate their partner, coerce them into sexual contact, or substance use. All of this easily leads to psychological trauma in victims of such treatment.
  3. In terms of relationships, psychopathic individuals more often prefer quantity over quality. On average, they have three times as many partners, but this occurs because their typical relationships are short-term, turbulent, filled with infidelity and jealousy; to keep partners, they resort to deception, manipulation, and aggression, which, of course, is hardly a strategy capable of leading to stable long-term relationships. Naturally, they are prone to risky sexual behavior, and their mental state is the root of a number of sexual crimes, including rape and serial killings on a sexual basis.
  4. Relationships with psychopathic individuals are usually rated as unsatisfactory. Among other things, their partners are more likely to indicate sexual dissatisfaction. Given that psychopaths often deceive, manipulate, cheat, or even commit violence against their partners, this is not surprising.
  5. As is well known, some people cannot easily leave psychopathic partners, even if they are completely dissatisfied with the relationship. This occurs primarily due to manipulation, suggestion, and threats. A person’s tendency to become attached to others over time may also play a role. Furthermore, a syndrome such as hyper-empathy can influence the situation, causing a person to feel sorry for their partner regardless of their behavior.
  6. Psychopathic individuals are prone to a form of relationship known as “sugar dating.” In these, one partner, who is wealthier and typically significantly older than the second, provides the other with money, privileges, status, and other material benefits in exchange for company or intimacy. Moreover, a willingness to engage in such relationships is linked to psychopathy regardless of which role the person plays in them. It was also found that dissatisfaction in relationships is caused not so much by the presence, but by the difference in psychopathic predispositions between partners. Obviously, a non-psychopathic individual will be dissatisfied with a relationship with a psychopath. But this can work the same way for the psychopath themselves. As researchers believe, people with high scores in “dark traits” (psychopathy, narcissism, Machiavellianism) are more satisfied in relationships with individuals like themselves.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

The problem of psychopathy in special forces

Some researchers are convinced that members of elite or special forces possess significant psychopathic predispositions. For example, as Kevin Dutton writes in his book “The Wisdom of Psychopaths,” selection for the SAS (UK Special Air Service) is brutal and savage. He cites one of the selection stages where a person, already exhausted by other trials, has a bag placed over their head, after which a truck drives up close to them and simulates a situation in which there is an alleged threat that their head might be accidentally run over. During such tests, candidates are specifically screened for qualities inherent to psychopaths. Individuals with these qualities are useful because they are capable of killing easily, without feeling even the slightest regret. Meanwhile, for a person without them, even mere participation in such selection would likely haunt their nightmares for a very long time.

One can also refer to an article by journalist Courtney Werleman. While in Israel and the Palestinian territories, he wanted to find out what psychological impact the first experience of killing at close range has on a soldier. And although for a number of reasons his study was never written, based on the evidence collected and materials from other researchers, he concludes that members of elite or special forces are “high-functioning” psychopaths.

Werleman gives an example of his communication with a former member of the US “Delta” special forces, who recounted that in Afghanistan he stabbed a 14-year-old boy, grabbing him and covering his mouth so that he would not make noise and disrupt the operation. When asked about his feelings afterward, he replied that he felt no regret because “it’s war and the operation was successful.” And judging by leaks of secret materials, such killings of civilians were not unusual for American special forces. One can also cite the example of special forces from Australia who, while in Afghanistan, openly demonstrated Nazi views and drove a patrol vehicle with a swastika. Of course, a person’s views are one thing, but killing innocent people who are not involved in hostilities and pose no threat to you is quite another. But as revealed by the leak of secret documents from the Australian Defence Force, the views of their special forces members corresponded to their actions—they deliberately killed unarmed men, women, and children, and then left weapons on their bodies to cover up their crimes.

Werleman also raises the topic of tyrannical and authoritarian regimes. Referring to the works of Professor Timothy Snyder, he notes that it is precisely people accustomed to committing violence abroad that such regimes later recruit to commit violence against the population within the country. Militarized formations consisting of psychopaths can be used, for example, for the brutal suppression of those protesting against corrupt authorities. It should be noted here that a “culture of impunity” is very common in such formations, and they treat the civilian population with complete cold-bloodedness.

The existence of such a problem once again raises the question of how we should view cold-blooded, heartless, and ruthless individuals capable of easily harming others—that is, individuals with a clear dysfunction of the violence inhibition mechanism and psychopathic predispositions. Obviously, they represent an incredibly high danger to society. People with malevolent intentions, such as corrupt politicians, can use them to carry out violence against ordinary, innocent people as efficiently as possible. This shows once again that we must unequivocally treat such a state of the individual as a pathology and a disease that must be eradicated.

Voluntarist, Bitarch