Paul Craig Roberts on Ponerology
- Thread starter Approaching Infinity
- Start date
anart
A Disturbance in the Force
Very, very interesting information, and at this point I have to agree completely. A while back we had someone leave the forum in a huff because we wouldn't come out and say P.C. Roberts was the 'be all and end all' of 'alternative authors'. I think there is a reason that his later pieces sound a lot like what we write - a honey trap. I also think his earlier pieces give a more clear view into who he really is instead of who he has been crafted to be to serve his purpose for the PTB - especially those pieces from before and shortly after 9/11 - and the one you posted above is a doozy - but that's just my take on it.Laura said:
notanothermonday
Padawan Learner
He seems very smug in his assessments of the functioning of the U.S. Government. He comes across as having all the answers, as do most suffering from hubris, yet he raises no new questions. In fact in all of his commentaries he does not engage the reader as much as he tells the reader what to think about some rather insignificant issues. He does not compel the reader to move forward he just continues to blast the reader with a lot of fiery rhetoric that is quite distracting from what is really going on around us, this is witnessed in the article "Criminalizing Masculinity" where he goes off about the woes of the white man.
His own sense of prevailing self importance is highly evident in the article 'Who Will Save America?' when he goes on for a couple of paragraphs about the great economic policy he crafted and his noble efforts to save America. This was unnecessary and arbitrary to the rest of the article.
In the article 'Bush's Real Reason for Invading Iraq Is A National Security Secret' he comes across as if no one before now or at least recently has even questioned the credibility of this administration and their ability to make sound decisions. This clearly is not true and for Roberts to come forward now without any sense for what has already been stated, many months prior to going into Iraq, is a sign of his own pathology.
He may very well have dismissed the book because it challenges his own world view and from reading what he has wrote I get the sense that how he appears is his main concern. He is continually writing about the marginalization of the white male and how this is a movement that is destroying America. This may very well be true but it is not the sole cause, it is not even a major issue yet he has dedicated much time and space to such thinking. This is not a voice to be trusted - and those are my thoughts on the matter. Thank you again for the space to do this.
His own sense of prevailing self importance is highly evident in the article 'Who Will Save America?' when he goes on for a couple of paragraphs about the great economic policy he crafted and his noble efforts to save America. This was unnecessary and arbitrary to the rest of the article.
In the article 'Bush's Real Reason for Invading Iraq Is A National Security Secret' he comes across as if no one before now or at least recently has even questioned the credibility of this administration and their ability to make sound decisions. This clearly is not true and for Roberts to come forward now without any sense for what has already been stated, many months prior to going into Iraq, is a sign of his own pathology.
He may very well have dismissed the book because it challenges his own world view and from reading what he has wrote I get the sense that how he appears is his main concern. He is continually writing about the marginalization of the white male and how this is a movement that is destroying America. This may very well be true but it is not the sole cause, it is not even a major issue yet he has dedicated much time and space to such thinking. This is not a voice to be trusted - and those are my thoughts on the matter. Thank you again for the space to do this.
Ha! That might be it. It would be pretty presumptuous of him to make a jab like that, not having corresponded with me about the topic.GRiM said:
OCKHAM
Jedi
http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/articles/show/136633
Reading the latest posted article from Paul Craig Roberts got me thinking that we may need to back up and see a different picture in time to understand his complete position.
With all the rhetoric about an impending attack, this may only be there for distraction.
One thought that came to mind is this. Is it possible that both Bush and Cheney are capable of being bought and paid for? Is there someone above them with more power and money that has a bigger plan? If that was the case, what would the strategy of that person be? Would it be to have a false flag operation this year while Bush and Cheney are still in office, or would it be better [for a longer term control method] to keep the public literally on their toes in fear with false propaganda until Bush and Cheney had time enough to get out of town [1.5 yrs], and then bringing in a new puppet master who will then quickly implement [within a year] the original status to move forward.
In putting your mind into that person, it would lead to believe that having another attack right at this moment would result in fierce breakdowns in the systems that literally hold everything together. It also seems their timelines are more stretched out then we realize as we focus on the moments. Also, the military is literally falling apart right now, so if we factor in these thoughts into the position of Roberts, his ploy can be seen differently for a different purpose, and maybe a better understanding.
This last article is so clean, I can’t seen to pick out any variations other than a new perspective. If this doesn’t make any sense, then just ignore it. fwiw
Reading the latest posted article from Paul Craig Roberts got me thinking that we may need to back up and see a different picture in time to understand his complete position.
With all the rhetoric about an impending attack, this may only be there for distraction.
One thought that came to mind is this. Is it possible that both Bush and Cheney are capable of being bought and paid for? Is there someone above them with more power and money that has a bigger plan? If that was the case, what would the strategy of that person be? Would it be to have a false flag operation this year while Bush and Cheney are still in office, or would it be better [for a longer term control method] to keep the public literally on their toes in fear with false propaganda until Bush and Cheney had time enough to get out of town [1.5 yrs], and then bringing in a new puppet master who will then quickly implement [within a year] the original status to move forward.
In putting your mind into that person, it would lead to believe that having another attack right at this moment would result in fierce breakdowns in the systems that literally hold everything together. It also seems their timelines are more stretched out then we realize as we focus on the moments. Also, the military is literally falling apart right now, so if we factor in these thoughts into the position of Roberts, his ploy can be seen differently for a different purpose, and maybe a better understanding.
This last article is so clean, I can’t seen to pick out any variations other than a new perspective. If this doesn’t make any sense, then just ignore it. fwiw
L
Locksmith
Guest
I am brand new to the Forum, and as such did not intend to start off posts with a thread that is so counter to my own thinking. I have just recently received Political Ponerology and Laura’s book on 911. Also, I have only cursory knowledge of psychology and of Ponerology from visiting here for a few months. But, the subject of Ponerology does interest me very much.
Paul Craig Roberts is a writer that I have followed for about 20 years, in print and then on the Internet. I’ve found him to be true to his core belief in U.S. Constitutional conservatism, something I also strongly believe in. This thread has caused me to be conflicted when visiting the past few days.
As has been pointed out, Roberts did have a short career in the Reagan’s first administration as an undersecretary of the U.S. Treasury Department, but that ended in the mid-1980s. I know from my following his writing that he was also a loyal Republican. For the record I have been independent of the two part of our one-party system.
Roberts had an awakening about three years ago, and it has steadily been getting stronger and deeper. At first he wrote mostly about how the Republican Party had been hijacked by the Neocons, but has since broadened his understanding of the deception, his writing has come to encompass the whole Government and our kowtowing to Israel’s wishes. I know how all that feels as I had an awakening just after 2001. But I also had a longer distrust of our Government, and its blind allegiance with Israel, and for that matter the world’s ultra-elite, going back to the early 1990s.
I’d like to believe that Roberts is still somewhat in shock over discovering just how rotten things truly are. I well know how that feels and still carry some with me to this day. I’d also like to believe that he is courageous in writing about things that could, and probably have, ended many paths in what is left of his career.
It just may be that PCR quickly skimmed the book, that Red Pill Press sent to him, and came away with an interpretation of it being clinical; and much the same as he wouldn’t want those not specifically trained in economics offering opinions, responded in the manner that he did.
But, I respect the intellect that I’ve observed in this Forum. And, I do believe in be cautious and suspicious when dealing with those in and around the any power center. Investigation and sharing ideas is a very good thing. But, could it be that this thread is jumping to conclusions too fast by labeling Roberts a psychopath for his abbreviated reply to the query Mr. Koehli sent to him?
And, it may be that Roberts did not even answer the query, but rather one of his staff did.
Paul Craig Roberts is a writer that I have followed for about 20 years, in print and then on the Internet. I’ve found him to be true to his core belief in U.S. Constitutional conservatism, something I also strongly believe in. This thread has caused me to be conflicted when visiting the past few days.
As has been pointed out, Roberts did have a short career in the Reagan’s first administration as an undersecretary of the U.S. Treasury Department, but that ended in the mid-1980s. I know from my following his writing that he was also a loyal Republican. For the record I have been independent of the two part of our one-party system.
Roberts had an awakening about three years ago, and it has steadily been getting stronger and deeper. At first he wrote mostly about how the Republican Party had been hijacked by the Neocons, but has since broadened his understanding of the deception, his writing has come to encompass the whole Government and our kowtowing to Israel’s wishes. I know how all that feels as I had an awakening just after 2001. But I also had a longer distrust of our Government, and its blind allegiance with Israel, and for that matter the world’s ultra-elite, going back to the early 1990s.
I’d like to believe that Roberts is still somewhat in shock over discovering just how rotten things truly are. I well know how that feels and still carry some with me to this day. I’d also like to believe that he is courageous in writing about things that could, and probably have, ended many paths in what is left of his career.
It just may be that PCR quickly skimmed the book, that Red Pill Press sent to him, and came away with an interpretation of it being clinical; and much the same as he wouldn’t want those not specifically trained in economics offering opinions, responded in the manner that he did.
But, I respect the intellect that I’ve observed in this Forum. And, I do believe in be cautious and suspicious when dealing with those in and around the any power center. Investigation and sharing ideas is a very good thing. But, could it be that this thread is jumping to conclusions too fast by labeling Roberts a psychopath for his abbreviated reply to the query Mr. Koehli sent to him?
And, it may be that Roberts did not even answer the query, but rather one of his staff did.
OCKHAM
Jedi
To answer your question anart, no, I don’t think that, but in our everyday life we may tend to be pulled to believe they do, and thereby make incorrect judgments about other people because of their rhetoric. Everyone talks about Bush attacking Iran, and seeing the build up in the Gulf, one immediately begins to wonder.
Imagine for a minute also that if America was attacked, the economy is in question, but a way to solve that problem is to have a counter attack system in place where within a week, great rhetoric can be presented by the media of this counter attack that was successful. If that was the case, you could attack in the beginning of December [even save xmas], and thereby give yourself a couple of years to clean up the Iraq mess, rebuild the military with expendable psychos, etc.
The comments made since my last post also seem to be a possibility in determining his true position.
Imagine for a minute also that if America was attacked, the economy is in question, but a way to solve that problem is to have a counter attack system in place where within a week, great rhetoric can be presented by the media of this counter attack that was successful. If that was the case, you could attack in the beginning of December [even save xmas], and thereby give yourself a couple of years to clean up the Iraq mess, rebuild the military with expendable psychos, etc.
The comments made since my last post also seem to be a possibility in determining his true position.
Cyre2067
The Living Force
I don't think any conclusions have been reached, infact we're still in the early data-gathering stage, now some hypothesis have popped up, and they mostly correlate with his earlier work. If you haven't read Ponerology in full, I'd suggest you do so, and that way you'd see why he's getting 'hits' on various types of psychopathies.Locksmith said:
I would agree with you thou, I do not think he read the book (assuming he is an honest truth seeker). It's a tough read and to really 'get it' you have to put some energy into reading and comprehending the info presented. It's not something you can skim and understand.
So either possibility is still likely imho.
OCKHAM
Jedi
http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/articles/show/139683-9-11%2C+Six+Years+Later
Putting all predictions aside, is it just me, or is Paul Craig Roberts using quite a few negative word groups for an article that is supposedly on our side of the fence so to speak?
Here are all the word groups that stuck out at me listed below. I first noticed these reading the last two articles posted here by him as I sometimes read them before looking at the author’s name. When you do that with his articles, well, at least for me, it stopped me in my tracks about the third paragraph, and I think I said, “Who the hell is this…” The word groups were shutting down something, osit.
I think we need to realize people who do not believe 911 was anything other than a terror attack may perceive his articles much differently than we would based on negative word groups that may block them from believing anything other than he is on their side and over here on this side of the fence doing some interesting [curious] work since there is so much of it, and it IS a threat while making it look like it’s a permanent camp. That last little bit there is speculative, but take a look.
Muslims in the Middle East
beyond the imagination - that there could be any substance to these beliefs
undesirable result of removing guilt
here in the U.S., most people have little doubt about what happened during the 2001 attacks
official 9-11 story is the final word
New Yorkers lack confidence
lost relatives in the attacks
U.S. media untroubled
rules governing preservation
conspiracy theorists
kooks
the official line is so correct and defensible
iron curtain
protect the official line
explains the collapse of the Twin Towers as a result of airliner impact and fire
zero possibility
If one looks at the credentials of skeptics
many people with strong imaginations on the Internet
serious skeptics stick to known facts
complete failure of government agencies
ranks of distinguished skeptics
Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida
Americans might concede
U.S. airport security would fail
U.S. air defenses would fail across the board
hijacked airliners
Still, there is some possibility
Allah could have blessed the hijackers with unbelievable luck
But when we come to the explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers
fire were present throughout the towers sufficient to cause steel to weaken and suddenly collapse
when their tops were in virtual free fall, is not answered
absence of any evidence
Is this guy a seamstress or what? These are in order. This is not a conclusion, but observation, fwiw.
If it’s possible, read the articles before looking to see who wrote them to remove the rapport programming to see if the investigative analyst brain operates differently and if word groups stand out and raise flags that you would not normally be able to sense or feel.
Tell me if I’m crazy. :)
Putting all predictions aside, is it just me, or is Paul Craig Roberts using quite a few negative word groups for an article that is supposedly on our side of the fence so to speak?
Here are all the word groups that stuck out at me listed below. I first noticed these reading the last two articles posted here by him as I sometimes read them before looking at the author’s name. When you do that with his articles, well, at least for me, it stopped me in my tracks about the third paragraph, and I think I said, “Who the hell is this…” The word groups were shutting down something, osit.
I think we need to realize people who do not believe 911 was anything other than a terror attack may perceive his articles much differently than we would based on negative word groups that may block them from believing anything other than he is on their side and over here on this side of the fence doing some interesting [curious] work since there is so much of it, and it IS a threat while making it look like it’s a permanent camp. That last little bit there is speculative, but take a look.
Muslims in the Middle East
beyond the imagination - that there could be any substance to these beliefs
undesirable result of removing guilt
here in the U.S., most people have little doubt about what happened during the 2001 attacks
official 9-11 story is the final word
New Yorkers lack confidence
lost relatives in the attacks
U.S. media untroubled
rules governing preservation
conspiracy theorists
kooks
the official line is so correct and defensible
iron curtain
protect the official line
explains the collapse of the Twin Towers as a result of airliner impact and fire
zero possibility
If one looks at the credentials of skeptics
many people with strong imaginations on the Internet
serious skeptics stick to known facts
complete failure of government agencies
ranks of distinguished skeptics
Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida
Americans might concede
U.S. airport security would fail
U.S. air defenses would fail across the board
hijacked airliners
Still, there is some possibility
Allah could have blessed the hijackers with unbelievable luck
But when we come to the explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers
fire were present throughout the towers sufficient to cause steel to weaken and suddenly collapse
when their tops were in virtual free fall, is not answered
absence of any evidence
Is this guy a seamstress or what? These are in order. This is not a conclusion, but observation, fwiw.
If it’s possible, read the articles before looking to see who wrote them to remove the rapport programming to see if the investigative analyst brain operates differently and if word groups stand out and raise flags that you would not normally be able to sense or feel.
Tell me if I’m crazy. :)
