Interestingly enough, Wikipedia has an entry to this term, Malignant Narcissist, and I link to it as a start to this post:
in there was this, “Malignant narcissism can be distinguished from psychopathy, according to Kernberg, because of the malignant narcissist’s capacity to internalize “both aggressive and idealized superego precursors, leading to the idealization of the aggressive, sadistic features of the pathological grandiose self of these patients”. According to Kernberg, the psychopath’s paranoid stance against external influences makes him or her unwilling to internalize even the values of the “aggressor”, while malignant narcissists “have the capacity to admire powerful people, and can depend on sadistic and powerful but reliable parental images”. Malignant narcissists, in contrast to psychopaths, are also said to be capable of developing “some identification with other powerful idealized figures as part of a cohesive ‘gang‘…which permits at least some loyalty and good object relations to be internalized”. “Some of them may present rationalized antisocial behavior – for example, as leaders of sadistic gangs or terrorist groups…with the capacity for loyalty to their own comrades”.“
I like to try to keep it as simple as possible, as keeping to the language of the psychiatrist alone makes it a bit confusing, as well as incoherent at times to the average reader, and that is who my audience is for this post at least.
I still think the narcissist inherently can’t go over the top and alienate everyone in his audience, as that is the basis to the narcissist, needing an audience. But, the antisocial, inherently needs a captive to prey on, but even if the captive can get free, the antisocial is not lost. Perhaps the antisocial will seek out more captives, but it is so much about the need to do whatever he/she wants/needs, an audience be damned. Unfortunately, the antisocial can’t satisfy all his/her needs without a society or culture to feed these needs, so I sense the antisocial can’t live on an island. Perhaps a narcissist could not survive isolation, but, if I had to bet on which personality disorder could handle isolation for some period of time, I would bet on the narcissist. Maybe I am wrong.
Anyway, my point to this post after watching the posturing, pontificating, and sheer idiot rhetoric by the extremist zealots trying to spin their partisan agendas on the various issues is just mind boggling. I wake up today to learn two police officers were assassinated by some scum bag who felt lives had to be taken after the death of Mr Garner last summer, and already the defenders and apologists come out like the roaches do, except these roaches seek out the light.
I would like to end this post by relating to what I wrote about over a year ago in my postulating what is the difference between a principle versus an agenda, and I hope readers might want to read it, while it is focused about Obamacare, I think there is a greater relationship to those terms defined at the beginning:
I note this is just my opinion, but, when you think about what personality disordered people do in their arguments to make you believe their point of view, they don’t quote responsible and inherently honest principles, but, want you to think their agenda trumps healthy reality.
Like, we should accept torture. Or, health care should be paid for by some and not all. Or, my favorite of late, anything that hurts anyone else but a white person is racist. Feel free to add your own that shocks and outrages…
Again, Happy Holidaze…