What is to be done with sociopaths and people with anti-personality traits under a socialism and or communism?

Do you realize how hard it is to treat psychopaths? Largely because they don't feel like anything is wrong. They intellectually know what a conscience is, but they wouldn't want one because they know it involves vulnerability. This is largely what psychopaths take advantage of in other people.

I'm aware of that. It doesn't mean they shouldn't at least be able to live with some dignity while being kept out of the general population.

There's a quick solution to this problem, comrade.

Because empathy isn't required for socialism and it doesn't matter that they have the will to dominate because they'll lack the ability.

The mentally ill aren't going to make the best laborers fam

Do you think socialism is gonna magic itself into existence? Psychopaths are pretty much default lumpen.

I don't see what that has to do with anything.

Don't act like people with antisocial personality disorders are on the same level as schizophrenics and people with chronic depression.

That you're okay with lumpenproles who would probably go full reactionary because it would more likely benefit them.

But okay, when you're revolutionary band degenerates into banditry, don't say I didn't warn you.

Thank you. My brain might be fucked up, but at least I'm capable of empathy.

I will admit, though, that my depression makes me a shitty worker because it zaps my energy and most of my focus goes toward trying to not kill myself.

I'd prefer you to a high functioning psychopath, at least you aren't trying to actively hurt people and if you do so, you actually feel remorse.

A psychopath isn't just going to randomly hurt people.
You think they get off on violence?

I'd say empathy is pretty God Damned important if you want a socialist state that, I dunno, works.

Psychos would settle in to mid-level bureaucratic positions and steal everyone's shit.

Hence, PRACTICAL socialism requires everyone involved to exhibit some sort of conscience and empathy.

They are going to exploit others if it benefits them, though and not give a shit about the consequences.

I remember reading something of Mao's that remarked that failed revolutionary groups often become bandit bands. I wonder if what I'm talking about probably played a role.

We're all exploiting eachother. Don't fool yourself.
And they obviously care about consequences.

We live in a capitalist system, we're not consciously trying to fuck each other over (well, most of us).

Yeah, but only concerning themselves. Why do you try to absolve psychopaths of personal choice?

And why do you think psychopaths will continue fucking others over under communism if others wont? It's all about the incentives the system gives us.
I'm trying to absolve everyone of personal choice. We're all constrained by our material conditions - free will is the rotten corpse of our arrogance.

Sure. I think many socialist revolutions fail in the long run because either: the previous power structure worked well enough that people recognized that a revolution wouldn't be worth it, or the revolution itself turns into a costly war of attrition that only one side can win, or if the revolution does somehow succeed the (almost always) already poor nation lacks the resources to keep itself together and fed. Then, what you've got is a military force built upon disruptive tactics and striking first, than must then transform into a peacekeeping moral group whose main challenge would be NOT robbing the people they are assigned to protect. Everyone starves and the honor system goes right out the window.

I'm arguing that they are inherently reactionary and will cause disruption in a leftist revolutionary environment.

They still hanged at Nuremberg.

I hope you're only pic related.

How are they reactionary? Don't they also share our class interests? Why would they work against that?
I'd even argue that they are more likely to better revolutionaries than others. Psychopaths tend to be extremely concerned with the respect of their peers, and would thus likely work much harder than your average joe.

Of course they "meant to gas jews".
They were just conditioned to wanting to gas jews by the dialectical process of history.

Dosen't make them 'guilty' or whatever. It just means they're rabid dogs that need to be put down.

Working with porky is an easier way to get what they want.

It's superficial, like everything a psychopath does in society. It's to gain a short-term temporary advantage.

So what does a psychopath want that a normal person doesn't want? =)

You know absolutely nothing about psychopathy.

Personally, I want to fuck and then be eaten by this guy.

They have a strong need for power and control and often place others in the role of "loser," even those who demonstrate loyalty, trust and love toward them. Psychopathic individuals usually have a "use" for those they keep close. They consider some people puppets, who will defend them, agree with them, or sacrifice their reputation to protect them. It is often their preference to have numerous puppets.

I wonder if you're on the defensive because you have those traits and you use nihilism as a shield.

I haven't kept up with that show, though I really like the Silence of the Lambs (book more so than movie).

pic related would probably be happy to accommodate you if you have a dick.

Same thing cops are seeking by becoming cops: Power trip, which they literally can't find in anarchist society. A consequence is that they will always try to undermine such society, which should be the main focus of the discussion.

Also, what about BPD?

Not him, but I have a few friends with BPD and they're all kind people. They periodically have moments when their mental health takes a nosedive, but it's far more harmful to them than anyone else and they save their destructive behavior for themselves. None have been malicious or manipulative in the years I've known them, and one person I've been close friends with for upwards of 10 years. With my experience, I can't see treating people with BPD as a threat, even though they're symptoms sound scary on paper.

It was canceled after the third season and left with a more or less satisfying cliffhanger. Like you I prefer the book it's adapted from, Red Dragon, but haven't really gotten around to reading SotL or any other in the series.

That's for me to know and you… well, don't worry about it.

To get back on topic though, this impulse to sort people based on psychopathology's relation to environmental engagements seems pretty capitalistic…

So tbh any other sociopath nihilist posters ITT? I know that I feel no empathy and enjoy manipulating people. That's why I advocate literally murdering any innocent proleterians in the way with reckless abandon and conspiring against Holla Forums with post-left anarchist lifestylism and idpol.

We kill the reactionaries. That's already established.

You were talking about what to do with sociopaths in socialism.

Execution.

You have socialism confused with Stalinism again.

Yes, that's basically my sole purpose.

Don't you feel that sociopathy inherently leads to reaction?

Is this what happens when people read Stirnir and think everything he said was "lol fuck laws 420blazeit"?

This is like fedora-levels of cringe.

Caring for others is pure cancer! The upholding an idea of person you want other people to be and prever to change others to sutch idea by helping/improving/caring for them. Like for example the care to get rid of drugs for people to use cause its bad or helping others understand the message of God. Or bothering others on how they make their own lawn cause you care for your neighbourhood.

Please leave me alone and let me embrace my own downfall wich you wanted to help me get rid of.

pls no bully

Honestly, do you do anything but shitpost here?

Why do you care so mutch about my posting

No.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if a sizable number of sociopaths joined our side.

famrade pls, pure negation retains nothing, not even the Ego. There is nothing that is safe from the purifying black flame of nihilism.

tbh caring for anyone is idpol. Unless you care about someone on the basis of their proletarian identity, you are L I T E R A L L Y a liberal shill grounding your politics in your emotions instead of Reason.

Indeed, just look at the nihilist posters ITT

Holla Forums was right again.

Caring for other is evolutionnary strategy, not some superior moral obligation.

famrade pls

Why the fuck do you want Dark Triads types on our side? Don't you realize people with false intentions derail leftist movements?

This.

...

Trust me, you don't want to get on our bad side…

Well done, enjoy your free sticker of autism.

Please don't use words you do not understand.

m8 I will literally burn Holla Forums to the ground and then rape your mum in front of you…

...

So you think sociopathy/psychopathy means false intentions? Why? You don't think they can see the vast amounts of personal gain they could enjoy from the establishment of socialism?

lol fuckin pussy ass bitch fight me irl I'm trained in ninjutsu…

Key word is

You also forget their tendency to impulsivity. .

Lemme guess…you have a 9 tailed demon fox stored inside you too?

shit taste tbh fuckin idpoler :^)))

get in IRC kat

Everyone actually is a containment of an cute 2d girl wich they become at death.

I hate both those things.

k

...

Guess it's just too hardcore for you kiddo…

More like it took itself way too seriously while also relying heavily on nudity and gore, and ultimately its "deep" plot was just a rehash of Frankenstein but with magical catgirls.

Expedient treatment via transoccipital lead implants.

Works like a charm on 100% of cases and 100% of conditions.

Nothing, because personality disorders are memes and you're a fucking retard for believing in them. Why does someone need to be empathic?

...

EDGY
D
G
Y

...

WEEHHHH IT'S NOT REAL SOCIALISM YOU BOURGEOIS FAGGOT REEEEE

Well, then socialism is retarded

How is that retarded?

...

Yeah, it is retarded because the superior takes what he wants, basic Darwinism bro

...

What do you mean?
Are you saying whoever is in control is inherently better?

Stop being autistic, the ones one can dominate you or get the group to fucking dominate you then aka "the fittest"

Yes, indirectly

What do you mean?

Indirectly, as he has characteristics that let him dominate others, charisma, strength, cunning, basically everything you can find in machiavelli the prince

So people with the will to dominate others have the right to dominate others because they have the means?
That amoral consequentialism, though.

So?

Oh i got it, you believe that capitalism is meritocraty, oh boy.

Xubb will likely claim that such things are okay because the person who does them had the means to do so.
Capitalist apologists are amoral consequentialists.

Monarchist, I like some aspects of capitalism because it is quite efficient and generates wealth, but I know that the capitalist is fucked without a monarch that won't crush other monarchs or communists(of any flavor)

Cronyism and inheritance are also valids objection to monarchism. Even more so.

Why does a monarch have the right to rule?
What powers should he have?
What happens if the bloodline is weak, the monarch incompetent or the throne is undermined by one or more individuals or interest groups?

yeah that is why you often get a new monarch.
i.e.

He will break you on the wheel if you object
He decides, if he is a retard(see the Louis XVI example) another monarch will take power
See the Louis XVI example

Amoral consequentialism, yet again.
Are you autistic? Just curious.
And if his decision turns out to be a bad one?
Charles II of Spain was never deposed. His reign and its bloody aftermath is a perfect example of why Monarchism is retarded.
So instead of a relatively stable constitutional republic, we should have an autocracy that's only as strong as the autocrat and implodes when he's a useless degenerate?
Good idea.
10/10 ideology; would overthrow by force

Capitalism is good at one thing: generating profit. Under every other aspect it's inefficient as fuck:
It wouldn't be that bad if ressources were infinite, unfortunately they're not.

But bourgeois democracy ended up crushing monarchies, so that would mean they were fitter than monarchies.

so?
probably on the spectrum, but it is fun to take atheism to its logical conclusions to Marxists and see their reaction. Btw its 2016, you're a commie and you are calling me autistic. Top lel and people call white nationalist LARPers
What happened in Russia 1917?
Yeah, he had a good counsel ruling in his stead, but he more or less marked the downfall of Spain and her empire
…have you like… read anything on the french revolution and the situation in France?
But to summarize Napoleon made France Great again #makefrancegreatagain1801

Well at least it is producing food, unlike a certain other ideology ;^)
A schizo homeless person doesn't deserve a fucking house, he deserves to die in the street and gtfo of our gene pool. Housing requires water, electricity, maintenance etc, not only an empty house

Yup, definitly on the spectrum.

Yes that ended so well in Waterloo…

Not really.

Generating profit for capitalists - yes.
But not simply "generating profit".

That goes without saying

He made a huge mistake and he paid for it with Waterloo and another king took power
Look at this fucking poster for instance
He can't go one minute without sperging about Marxist economy. Now tell me again that communism isn't intulectual LARPing

Well, that's a new one!

Well most people experience a thing called empathy and have these concepts called morals. These people would take issue with your simplistic "might makes right muh dik" ideology.
Which are?
I'm not a Marxist. One can have a Marxian view of economics without being an acolyte of St Karl's gospel of gommunism
You're proving my point. A shitty, incompetent regime was overthrown in a massive bloodbath that ruined the country. This example, along with ones like Charles II and Louis XVI show how stupid an idea Monarchism is.
You missed the point completely. Monarchy inevitably leads to inbred degenerates heading up rotting regimes. It's a shitty way to run a society that we've finally started to move away from.
You're ignoring the fact that the most powerful countries on earth are bourgeois constitutional republics, constitutional monarchies where the inbred simpleton is a mere figurehead and authoritarian regimes that have some democratic or oligarchal characteristics. You're pointing to one datapoint because you don't have very good critical thinking skills.

And after the restauration came the 2nd republic, and after that Napoleon 3 and after that the 3rd Republic under wich France became a world superpower.

So what are you a level nintynine Maoist with a skill cape of trotskyism or are you a level 64 Leninst with the book of Das Kapital
Face it you're fucking LARPing with all of your sub-categories of communism
youtube.com/watch?v=vUTV93RM8UU

…and now they are in full social decline, it took them what four generation

Welp if we have an inbred hereditary autocrat this will cease completely. I'd better not crack open a history book because that might contradict my video game tier worldview.

Do you… do you even get the point of dicussing things?
So i guess Holla Forums is LARPing when they discussing comics
Holla Forums is LARPing when discussing videogames
/k/ is LARPing when discussing guns.

And monarchic restauration collapsed in one generation. Your point?

do you believe in the lord and savior as well Jesus Christ as well?
Hierarchy and monarchy
mhm
And then Lenin took absolute control, then Stalin…. and now Putin who wants to restore the Tsar, face it Hierarchy is part of human nature and Monarchy will always re-arise
My point is that another monarch will eventually take control when the bloodline starts to suck, nut with the knowledge of genetics this will be a more or less a non-issue by simply telling people "hey don't fuck you cousin bro, bad for the lineage n shit"
So you're saying monarchy is superior since they managed to fuck France up the Arse after they lost their monarch.

A monarch may collapse but the nation/civilization will not, unless they are conquered from beyond by another monarch which still makes them part of a monarchy. If a republic/democratic society conquers something… well look at Iraq and that entire mess or Europe after Woodrow Wilson fucked us over and removed the monarchies

So when monarchy crush democracy, it's human nature but when the opposite happens it's some kind of an accident? Nice double standard

The ones who rekt France the most in History were the English who were waaay ahead on French when it come to democracy. And i say that as a frog.

No, that's absurd. Experiencing empathy and believing in religion are two completely different things. You're either a low IQ socio/psychopath or full on autistic.
How? Not believing in a god has nothing to do with how society is ordered.
Again, you're ignoring the great number of very successful republics and non-hereditary oligarchies that have existed and do exist. Furthermore, Lenin, Stalin and Putin aren't hereditary autocrats, which is what a monarch is by definition.
Exactly. This is often an incredibly bloody and chaotic process that can ruin a country. We could avoid it by, you know, not having monarchies.
Nod really.
Another example;
Your bullshit "might makes right" paradigm doesn't even support your preferred system of government.

Why would you become a leftist sociopath? The current capitalist system is perfectly sociopath.

But they didn't conquer shit you fucking retard. Neither Irak nor Europe are American territories.

anarcho-nihilist shitposter strikes again and ruins this thread.

As to the OP's question, there is nothing wrong with humane clinical mental treatment, people just swallow the Foucauldian kool-aid and just argue that all mental clinical institutions are run by people like nurse Ratched, but the truth is in Europe such institutions have advanced miles ahead in contrast to the prisons they once were.

Good luck getting them capital to even begin son, without inheritance or some luck you wont get to be part of the upperclas.

Why submit to an abstract idea for its might instead of only your might?

Spain.
The monarchy remained until the empire was non existent and the country was a poverty stricken backwater.

Because my might requires a philosophical and intetllectual animus, or it's simple hedonistic barbarism.

You and the second poster you responded to are made for each other.

...

...

Egoism is a spook.

Only if you praise me peasant. :^)

Wat

Is Anarcho-Nihilist flag a tranny, twink or woman?
That feel when no edgy, political gf.

I just realized xxed was responding to the Monarchist-Autist.
fuck.

If anything they should be the ones running the gulags

Thanks for putting words in my post, but no one has to feel this when that happens to be considered a proper person. Why do I have to be 'normal' to not be 'mentally ill'?

Stirnerfags are the biggest cancer on this board, to be honest.

We're at least 3 nihilist posters in this thread
Also OC 4 u

Holy shit are you serious? They get off on power over others. Torturing animals as a kid is a hallmark of psychopathy.

...

Congrats, you are the worst poster on this board and one of the most embarrasingly pretentious people I have ever seen on the internet.

brb killing myself

please hurry

Capitalism has nothing to do with Darwinism. There is no state, law, property or wage labor in the wild.

Confirmed for never having read Machiavelli.

Machiavelli suggested the Prince maintain something of a wholesome and respectable appearance, but never suggested the Prince was some sort of ubermensch.

Yes, monarchism and feudalism, where only the strongest and fittest rule.

ayy
Literally Ayncrap tier.

The first two look like king Derp the Imbecile, but who are the other two?
Also, post inbred European monarchs.

Well, yeah. Trying to do something and actually doing that thing are completely different. Does this really need to be explained.
Worker ownership of the means of production isn't an "ideal". It's a literal definition of socialism. I'll be willing to admit that any system that has this is socialist, but most of the systems brought up by you faggots don't have this at all.

Good healthcare could help prevent some of them from escalating to more dangerous levels.Also using strong reasoning on them that caters to their self-interests will help keep them in check.

ITT: A bunch of anons failing to understand human psychology.

Rehabilitate them, what else?

What about a good citizens award and prize to turn being good into a self gaining action? A good person can become famous so being bad would no longer be the only way to get attention and praise.A small number of sociopaths might seek to do this.

Modern Psychological definitions are a spook, user.

It's essentially a cult. Mental abnormality is a part of evolution & adaptations.

You can't fix people that aren't broken, even if they are in part fundamentally lacking something.

Regardless, LSD and psychedelic therapy is a suitable course of treatment.

But in the broader sense, psychology is just a tool for indoctrinating people back into societal norms.