Throughout history, throughout most of the world, psychopaths have gotten a bad rap.That is quite understandable since almost all of the world’s religious and social philosophies have little use for the individual except as a tool to be placed in service to their notion of something else: “God,” or the “collective,” or the “higher good” or some other equally undefinable term. Only rarely, such as in Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, and some schools of Existentialism, is the individual considered primal.Here, finally, is a book which celebrates, encourages and educates the best part of ourselves – the Psychopath.
“Be warned!This book not only bites, it will chew off your fingers and claw out your eyeballs.”- Phil Hine, author of Condensed Chaos
“Inspires both insight and paranoia… A book that provides useful techniques and reveals what techniques others may be using on you.”- Douglas Grant, Dagon Productions
“Do not takeanything in this book literally!Wait, on second thought, take it all literally!”- Joseph Matheny, author of Ong’s Hat the Beginningan d Game Over?
Christopher S. Hyatt, Ph.D. was trained in experimental and clinical psychology and practiced as a psychotherapist for many years. Today he is known as the world-famous author of books on self-transformation, psychology, and Western magic; among them: Undoing Yourself With Energized Meditation; Secrets of Western Tantra; Urban Voodoo; and Rebels & Devils. Dr. Jack Willis has graduate degrees in biochemistry, psychology and chiropractic medicine.He has been a practicing psychotherapist for over 30 years.He is passionately an individual, a limited-government libertarian, and a fallen soul bound for perdition.
Psychopath: A person with an antisocial personality disorder, especially one manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior. - The American Heritage Dictionary It’s good to be the king. - Mel Brooks For years the market has been flooded with books filled with “sweetness and light.”This is not one of them.Most people will characterize this book as evil, malevolent, unprincipled, wicked and pessimistic.It is all of that— and worse. It is an “evil” book with “evil” ideas.This is necessarily so because this book tells the truth.Truth is always characterized as “evil.” In some ways this is a book of social philosophy, in other ways it is a book of technique.Which it is for you may depend more on your attitude than anything else. The average person will not even finish the Introduction.After a page or two most will put it down and return to the mush of the TV set.We recommend that you do so.This book is toxic.
Most people will be appalled by this book.Many will ignore or dismiss its message as too horrifying even to acknowledge.This is exactly what we want: it advances the Work.(Indeed, if you are one of the rare few who do not see it thus, we congratulate you as you are probably already a Master and you arealready advancing the Work.)
We can state with confidence that most people will be appalled (or worse) because we have already seen it happen.We have noticed that quite a few of the brave souls who read through the original edition (which was titled The Toxic Magician), and those who helped “test drive” this greatly expanded version, have remarked that the first chapters seemed rather easy to take—despite our dire warnings.Indeed, it seemed to them that these first chapters seemed rather light-hearted, even amusing.And then, sometimes quite suddenly, they would remark that they felt something change within themselves, that it seemed that the tone of the book itself changed and that they began to feel disturbed—sometimesver y disturbed.Whether it was the reader or the book itself that changed we leave for you to decide. You might even do this experiment for yourself:read the first five chapters or so.See if they seem “easy to take.”Then keep reading and see if you feel a difference, perhaps a greater sense of dread and malevolence.If you do, go back and reread those first chapters again.Do they still seem easy to take?
Many writers claim to be concerned with the lamentable conditions of the human species and purport to present the means to bring man to a “higher state” of consciousness or evolution or some such.Dr. Hyatt claims nothing of the sort.Rather, this book is intended as an instruction book for the psychopath,2 the sort of person who cares nothing for the “advancement” of the species.
Much has been writtenabout the psychopath but very little has been writtenfor the psychopath.Perhaps the best known is Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince (1532), written for the political psychopath.(Indeed, at one time we considered titling this book The New Prince: Machiavelli Revisited in homage to Machiavelli’s work even though we personally despise all those in and around the political field.4) Though (probably) not written specifically for the psychopath, Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (1951) is essential reading for the practitioner. We are aware of few other useful titles in the non-fiction arena—not in psychology or even in political “science”—except for a few books classified in the “salesmanship” category.Some of Robert J. Ringer’s work, such as Winning Through Intimidation and Looking Out for No. 1 (both reissued in 1993) are particularly useful.(As Mr. Ringer so clearly points out, these are not salesmanship books at all. Nonetheless, hardly anyone seems to believe him.To us, this is an indication that Mr. Ringer is a great master.One of the axioms of life is this:even if you tell the truth—perhapsb eca u se you tell the truth—no one will believe you.)
Most commonly the psychopath has been depicted in a positive way only in fiction—the popularity of which emphasizes the moth-to-the-flame fascination most people have for the breed.(Though we focus mainly on movies, if you like to read you might want to keep in mind that many of the movies we mention—here and in the Appendix—were derived from books, some good, some bad.Further some useful books have not been made into movies at all; Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, 1957 is an excellent example.) You can find a few comedies (mostly among older British films); these include School for Scoundrels, 1960 and The Captain’s Paradise, 1954). You can also find a few comedy/dramas (notably The Sting, 1973 and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, 1969—which may be the best-loved psychopath movie ever made).However, most works which depict psychopaths are straight dramas.Among these are such excellent movies as Point Break (in our view, one of the purest and best of its kind) and the ever- popular Silence of the Lambs.
We believe that probably the most significant quality which makes many of these works so appealing is that the hero-psychopath is, at least to a large extent,conscious of his values andd elib er a te in his actions. (Contrast the unconsciously driven nut-cases in suspense/terror/horror movies likeThe Hand that Rocks the Cradle, 1992 and its numerous clones; these characters seem to inspire little or no sympathy with the audience.)
Throughout history, throughout most of the world, real, live psychopaths have gotten a bad rap.That is quite understandable since almost all of the world’s religious and social philosophies have little use for the individual except as a tool to be placed in service to their notion of something else: “God,” or the “collective,” or the “higher good,” or some other equally undefinable term.Only rarely, such as in Zen, some aspects of Tibetan Buddhism and Hinduism, and some schools of Existentialism, is the truly autonomous individual considered primal. To most of the world, anyone who holds himself apart from the herd (especially in the psychological sense) is, at least, highly suspect and probably blasphemous, heretical and criminal.(Almost every definition of the term psychopath includes the word “criminal” as one of its key characteristics.)
Who are held up to the world as archetypal examples of psychopaths? Almost without exception they are of the violent criminal variety: “crazed loners,” “terrorists,” “spree killers,” “mass murderers” and “serial killers” are popular characterizations today. (“Satanists,” “witches” and their ilk get a play from time to time but haven’t really caught on.) People in the political and propaganda (i.e. news) business love examples of this kind: it gives them a golden opportunity to rabble-rouse and pontificate.
Frequently they will describe the actions of these “terrible people” as “incomprehensible.”When motivations are considered at all, such people are usually seen as demented, clinically insane, sexually frustrated, plitically fanatical or incompetent malcontents.Then comes the litany of assertions of “explanations” for their behavior—books, music, video games, movies, the Internet (or any relatively new technology), Satanism, “society,” etc., etc.ad nauseam. Historically, certain conquerors and political figures (e.g., Hitler, Napoleon, Stalin) and competitors to “legitimate governments” (e.g., organized crime figures such as Jesse James, Al Capone, John Dillinger and John Gotti8) have been characterized as psychopaths.
This focus on the violent psychopath may be dramatic, but it is also rather narrow.In a sense, to isolate on figures such as these is like saying that “Christians” are typified by Torquemáada and Jim Jones.(Come to think of it, there are millions—perhaps billions—of people on this planet who would agree with such a characterization of Christianity.Us included.
Come to think of it, there are millions—perhaps billions—of people on this planet who would agree with such a characterization of Christianity.(Us included.) In reality, there are many operating psychopaths who never reach the public eye.Some are never identified as such because they are so successful at what they do (i.e., they don’t get caught).Many more are never characterized as psychopaths because they do not exercise unacceptable criminal behavior (remember, criminal behavior—especially violent criminal behavior—is usually considered one of the essential defining characteristics of the psychopath) and are thus considered acceptable, even valuable, members of society.Many businessmen, lawyers, doctors, and politicians fall into this group.(It has often been said that Al Capone would have been a great success in the “legitimate” business world if he had not become involved in “criminal” activities.This should come as no great surprise considering that many of the businesses in which Capone and others of his time were engaged—for example, the sale of alcohol and other chemicals, gambling and prostitution—were then, and are today, defined as “legitimate” or “criminal” only by the circumstances of geography.)
Considering the amount of focus that is expended on the violent psychopath, it appears interesting to us that there really seem to be very few operating psychopaths in these traditionally accepted “nut” group categories. For example, according to the FBI, there are probably no more than thirty- five “serial killers” operating in the U.S. at any given time.9 Also, according to the FBI, virtually all assertions of the existence of any organized violent “Satanic” conspiracies have proven to be unfounded. Even more significant to us, however, is the rare occurrence of relatively large-scale violent acts initiated by individuals or small groups: “terrorist” acts like the bombings of the World Trade Center in New York and the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, “mass murders,” airplane bombings, etc, seem to us rather rare (and often rather incompetently carried out).Indeed, with all the hype about the power, determination, organization and resources of certain “terrorist groups,” it seems particularly strange to us that no one has done somethingreally dramatic: for example, setting off a nuclear bomb in Washington, D.C.Are all these “psychopaths” really so incompetent? It is worthy noting that some people have suggested that, because we have written about the violent psychopath, we are somehow encouraging such behavior.Nothing could be further from the truth!! We wish to make it absolutely clear that we do not condone the initiation of violence to achieve any end, by any one, at any time, in any place, in any way.For us, the fundamental rule of all interpersonal behavior is that it is absolutely unacceptable to initiate violence under any circumstance.
Now that that’s out of the way, what does the academic world say about the psychopath?Here are some “accepted” definitions. From the American Heritage Dictionary: Psychopath: “A person with an antisocial personality disorder, especially one manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior.”[Emphasis added] “Antisocial personality disorder” is a technical term in psychiatry which we will soon consider. Note that all of the other adjectives are normative: “aggressive” (as compared to passive and compliant?), and “perverted, criminal, or amoral” which are all defined by what is “socially accepted.”13 In the U.S., The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, (DSM-IV™) 4th Edition, American Psychiatric Association, 1994 is the “bible” of psychiatry.14 So, what does DSM-IV™ say about “antisocial personality disorder”?[Emphasis added.]
The essential feature of Antisocial Personality Disorder is a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood. This pattern has also been referred to as psychopathy, sociopathy, or dyssocial personality disorder.…Deceit and manipulation are central features… …the individual must be at least age 18 years and must have had a history of some symptoms of Conduct Disorder before age 15 years. Conduct Disorder involves a repetitive and persistent pattern of behaviour in which the basic rights of others or major age-appropriate societal norms or rules are violated.The specific behaviours characteristic of Conduct Disorder fall into one of four categories: aggression to people and animals, destruction of property, deceitfulness or theft, or serious violation of rules. The pattern of antisocial behaviour continues into adulthood.[They] fail to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviour. …may repeatedly perform acts that are grounds for arrest…such as destroying property, harassing others, stealing, or pursuing illegal occupations. [They] disregard the wishes, rights, or feelings of others. …frequently deceitful and manipulative…to gain personal profit or pleasure…They may repeatedly lie, use an alias, con others, or malinger. A pattern of impulsivity…[They] tend to be irritable and aggressive and may repeatedly get into physical fights or commit acts of physical assault……also display a reckless disregard for the safety of themselves or others. …tend to be consistently and extremely irresponsible.…[They] show little remorse for the consequences of their acts.They may be indifferent to…having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from someone. …[They] may blame the victims [sic] for being foolish, helpless, or deserving their fate; they may minimize the harmful consequences of their actions; or they may simply indicate complete indifference. They generally fail to compensate or make amends for their behaviour.They may believe that everyone is out to “help numbene” and that one should stop at nothing to avoid being pushed around. Diagnostic Criteria A.There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights19 of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by three (or more) of the following: 1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviours as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest 2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure 3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead 4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults 5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others 6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations 7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another B. The individual is at least age 18 years. C. There is evidence of Conduct Disorder with onset before age 15 years. D. The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia or a Maniac Episode. DSM-IV™ goes on with a list of “Associated Features and Disorders” including: “inflated and arrogant self-appraisal,” “excessively opinionated, self-assured, or cocky” (i.e., it’s OK to have high self-esteem but don’t exhibit more than the shrink considers acceptable).Also the psychopath “may receive dishonourable discharges from the armed services, may fail to be self-supporting, may become impoverished or even homeless, or may spend many years in penal institutions” and are “more likely than people in the general population to die prematurely by violent means” (these are some of the downsides if the psychopath doesn’t do it well). Personally, I find the lesser-known definition of the World Health Organization (often used outside in the U.S.) more interesting and concise:
From the ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders, World Health Organization, Geneva, 1992; F60.2 Dissocial (Antisocial) Personality Disorder: Personality disorder, usually coming to attention because of agross disparity between behaviour and the prevailing social norms, and characterized by at least 3 of the following: (a) callous unconcern for the feelings of others; (b) gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations; (c) incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, though having no difficulty in establishing them; (d) very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence; (e) incapacity to experience guilt and to profit from experience, particularly punishment; (f) marked proneness to blame others, or to offer plausible rationalizations, for the behaviour that has brought the patient into conflict with society. There may also be persistent irritability as an associated feature. Conduct disorder during childhood and adolescence, through not invariably present, may further support the diagnosis.20
With all these definitions and remarks behind us, it’s time to get back to why this book was written.This book was written to applaud, encourage and counsel the best among this wretched, sheeplike species called “man.” It pulls no punches, it makes no apologies, it minces no words.It applauds the rare individual who writes his own song, plays his own tune and lives his own life. In particular it speaks to a particular breed of psychopath which we call interchangeably the “Toxick Magician,”21 the “Practitioner,” or the “Manipulator.”The most effective of these we refer to simply and reverentially as the “Master.” 20 DSM-IV™ seems to consider Conduct Disorder more significant to the definition. 21 The (mis)spelling is deliberate to emphasize the mindful nature and quality of the practitioner.
As with all psychopaths, he (or she) recognizes the pathetic nature of the human condition and takes from it what he can.But he goes further: he encourages homo normalis to live life according to his nature, the life Thomas Hobbes characterized as “brutish, nasty and short.”He encourages the human race to the precipice.He does what he can to help the species destroy itself and let nature get on with something(s) different. He is a “magician” because he works his own will to achieve his own ends; he is “toxick” because destruction is his goal. He is not afraid to be deliberately malicious and malevolent.From society’s standpoint, he is the worst of the psychopaths because he does his Work intentionally.As such, he stands apart from their definitions—definitions which would like to emphasize the inability of the psychopath to control himself.The Toxic Magician is conscious of his actions and of his feelings.This makes him especially dangerous. Most Toxick Magicians are made, not born. (Note from EH- we know that essential psychopaths indeed are born -just a reminder so that no one confuses terms here within this schizoidal rant )So why would anyone want to become one?There are many disadvantages.To name just a few:He requires immense concentration and years of ruthless work.He will probably not see the long-term results of his work.It can be a lonely life. Still, it has its rewards.More than anything else, the Manipulator isfr ee. He is free from the hallucinations that homo normalis insists we adopt and which men have so treasured all their lives: his eyes see only what is.He is free from the myths of safety and security: he knows that death awaits him. He is free from the delusion of the supremacy of the species: at his best, man is still pathetic and weak.He is free from the delusion of the supremacy of the species: at his best, man is still pathetic and weak.He is free from the illusions of language, especially “cause and effect” and “randomness”:he can use words as tools when and where he chooses.He is free from the mirage of relationships:he knows where he is on the food chain.He is free from the pragmatic burdens the world insists on placing in the way of enjoyment:he laughs at the sheep and those in power alike and plots their downfall.
We do not expect to hear from many true, mature, operating, successful Masters since anonymity is essential to the success of his action.Some sole practitioners may want to come in for a checkup; some, perhaps, for companionship, a break from the tedium of dealing with common man.We want to hear from those who wish to become Practitioners, of course, but take care: it will cost you a lot, perhaps much more than you are willing or prepared to pay.Like those who seek “enlightenment” we know that very few will “make it.”As the wise man said, no more than 5% of you will get anything from it; the rest of you are food.If you dare to spit at the odds come ahead, but we advise against it.We suggest that you get rid of this booknow before you are poisoned further.You have been warned. If you are going to go ahead despite our warnings, we have a few suggestions for both the aspiring and practicing Toxick Magician: first, buy two copies of this book.One, of course, is for your personal use.You should put the other away for your offspring or for future generations since, like Hoffer’s The True Believer, this first public edition will go out of print all too soon; and perhaps the book itself might be forced out since it is so “dangerous.” Also, please note that we are currently working on a companion volume to this book, The Psychopath’s Workbook will be in a question and answer format.Here is an opportunity to participate in a worthwhile project; submit your questions now!(your anonymity will, of course, be protected.By you. We recommend that when you submit your questions that you not include your name, address, fingerprints or anything else that might be traced back to you.Big brother could be watching!) If you forgot everything else, remember this:Everyone is a Psychopath. -- Nicholas Tharcher
Somewhere in Southwest Ethiopia
March, 2025
