Hi Laura
Thank you for writing and the kind words about the video.
Let me explain first that the video is taken from 15 pages of a short chapter from my book The Art of Urban Survival. This book is a glorified self-defense manual and was written in response to the many questions I received from my students during the many years I taught martial arts. The most common question was about defending oneself realistically, and while they always expected an answer that involved breaking someone’s neck, the answers I gave them were quite a disappointment to them. You see I have been around the block a few times and I know the true key to being safe is being smart, and especially street smart. However, I could never teach them much about street smarts in the context of a ten minute Q&A at the end of class. So I wrote this book in an attempt to give young people, those still the most naïve and vulnerable, a fighting chance.
Because of my many years of readings into psychopathy, I thought it essential to begin any book on self-defense with an examination of our most common predators, in the same way that, if rabbits conducted self-defense courses, their first subject would be the recognition and understanding of foxes.
The study of psychopathy is of course much too complicated to cover in detail in the context of a safety manual, so I created a Reader’s Digest version combining the key points from all the authors you mentioned, and filtered slightly through my own experience.
For example, I took the terms, partial psychopath, sub-clinical psychopath, sub-criminal psychopath, created psychopath, and several other terms I don’t even remember now, and used the phrase Secondary Psychopaths to describe those general principles. Again, it is not my intent to offer a debate on the semantics and definitions of these terms, but to give new readers to the subject a general idea of what is going on. I also taught First Aid and CPR and I could have explained to my students the anatomy and mechanics of arterial bleeding, or I could tell them to put direct pressure on a deep cut.
My purpose in writing about psychopathy in this book to is to address the subject outside the clinical context as though it were common knowledge to know these things, in a similar way that first aid and CPR should be common knowledge even outside the medical profession.
I know you agree that the study of this subject is vital for our survival as a species. My aim was to introduce this subject into the general discourse through the venue of self-defense and crime prevention, rather than the usual channels of psychology and sociology. The more often people come into contact with this subject, through whatever channel, the better our chances of warning humanity.
If it sounds as though I have borrowed words you have written I can only say that is was accidental or coincidental. I have not personally read your writings however, I do know of them. My wife and I often read to each and I know she has read to me from your website. She was always telling me to go to your website, but having so many interests and so little time I never got around to it. She councils child abuse victims and is my co-researcher on psychopaths so I may have absorbed something she read to me from your pages and I used similar phrases in writing the chapter, that’s quite possible.
As to lifting entire body of ideas from Lobaczewski’s "Political Ponerology" that I did not do. I arrived at similar conclusions long before I even heard of Mr. Lobaczewski.
When I was researching my first published book, The Thirty Six Strategies of Ancient China, my research took me through Machiavelli and Clausewitz to Sun Tzu and Miyamoto Musashi. I began to realize that I would have made a terrible general because I did not have the ruthlessness and lack of conscience needed to rule. In looking for historical anecdotes to illustrate the various strategies, I read the complete histories of China, Japan, and as counter balance, ancient Rome. Throughout their histories, the same pattern repeated itself, dynasty after dynasty, emperor after emperor, always the biggest psychopath won. (With a few rare exceptions)
This spurred further research into psychopathy and it wasn’t long before I concluded that our entire culture is infected. As I said, I’m street smart and I recognize propaganda when I see it. Now I clearly see all the subtle cues urging everyone to idolize psychopaths and to try to become a psychopath too. I recognized the impossibility of ordinary people competing against ruthless psychopaths and how psychopaths would end up ruling the world. Personally, I think this is the logical conclusion most intelligent people would come to on their own after studying the subject for a couple of years.
I began making notes for a manuscript I tentatively titled Narcissus Rex, or Psychopath the King, in which I go through major historical figures from varied times and cultures, and assess them according to the psychopathy checklist. I had planned to show how these same psychopaths would devise devious systems of control and manipulation to feed off their populace.
It was only after I had written the current chapter; Defense Against the Psychopath, which included my thoughts from Narcissus Rex as well as a chapter on group and mob mentality, which I wrote, but left out of the final edit, that I read two articles about Mr. Lobaczewski. I could see that his ideas matched my own, and that he provided a clinical explanation, whereas my ideas were based on history and street smarts. I have included Mr. Lobaczewski’s Political Phonerology in my bibliography, although I have not actually read his book. I did so to provide supportive evidence to my own ideas and to promote his book as well, since I do feel that it is an important book for people to read.
In making the video, I merely read the chapter, but added my own counter-propaganda to send a secondary message as well. I am so sick of seeing these narcissists and psychopaths lionized by the media so I decided to use their very own propaganda against them. Same images, but now under the light of truth. It has been a very interesting experiment to see how people respond to the hidden meaning.
I hope you do not see me as being in competition with you, that we are on the same side, and that I did not intentionally plagiarize either yours or Lobaczewski’s works, but rather I’ve shown you how I came to these overall thoughts independently.
Finally, I never personally take credit for these ideas, but rather in my references, bibliography, and blog posts, I readily admit that the source material comes from smarter men than I and that further study should be directed to professionals such as Hare and Checkley et al.
I’ve attached a word doc of the offending chapter, where you can see that I reference everyone you mentioned except Mr. Lobaczewski since I had already completed the chapter by the time I read about his work. I was able to list his book in the bibliography however.
It never occurred to me to reference the video itself, and I don’t recall seeing any other video that does either.
While I have never proposed a theory or taken credit for any of my thoughts, because I believe in the scientific principle of providing the clinical research to back up any such theory which I do not have, and because I feel my ideas are frankly unremarkable, and easily discoverable, I will not, however, stand accused of plagiarism because that’s simply not true.
Perhaps great minds think alike, or maybe it’s because I’m half Polish?
I hope this letter answers your questions and feel free to write me with any thoughts or concerns,
Stefan
