Politics

September 30, 2025

28 Cognitive Distortions

Sometimes our minds play tricks on us. They can convince us that untrue things are true, or vice versa.

Cognitive distortions are bad mental habits. They’re patterns of thinking that tend to be negatively slanted, inaccurate, and often repetitive — the very opposite of healthy, critical thinking.

These unhelpful ways of thinking can limit one’s ability to function and excel in the world. Cognitive distortions are linked to anxiety, depression, addiction, and eating disorders. They reinforce negative thinking loops, which tend to compound and worsen over time.

Irrational thinking: And how to counter it

Every day, our minds take shortcuts to process the overwhelming amount of information we encounter. These shortcuts—cognitive distortions—helped our ancestors survive in environments where quick judgments meant the difference between life and death. But in today’s complex world, where we’re making decisions about careers, relationships, investments, and strategy, these same mental patterns can systematically lead us astray.

Cognitive distortions are systematic patterns of thought that can lead to inaccurate or irrational conclusions. These distortions often serve as mental traps, skewing our perception of reality and affecting our emotional well-being.

The good news? Simply knowing these distortions (as well as other common psychological biases) exist makes you a better thinker. Research in metacognition shows that awareness is the first step toward correction. You can’t debug code you don’t know is buggy, and you can’t fix thinking patterns you can’t see.

Here’s the hard truth: everyone experiences these distortions. The difference between mediocre and exceptional decision-makers isn’t that one group never falls into these traps—it’s that they’ve trained themselves to spot the patterns, pause, and course-correct. They’ve built systems to counteract their brain’s default programming.

Types of cognitive distortion

What types of cognitive distortion should we be aware of? Let’s delve into three common types: emotional reasoning, counterfactual thinking, and catastrophizing.

Emotional Reasoning: This distortion involves using one’s emotions as a barometer for truth. For example, if you feel anxious, you might conclude that something bad is going to happen, even if there’s no objective evidence to support that belief. Emotional reasoning can create a self-perpetuating cycle: your emotions validate your distorted thoughts, which in turn intensify your emotions.
Counterfactual Thinking: This involves imagining alternative scenarios that could have occurred but didn’t. While this can be useful for problem-solving and learning, it becomes a cognitive distortion when it leads to excessive rumination and regret. For instance, thinking “If only I had done X, then Y wouldn’t have happened” can make you stuck in a loop of what-ifs, preventing you from moving forward.
Catastrophizing: This is the tendency to imagine the worst possible outcome in any given situation. It’s like always expecting a minor stumble to turn into a catastrophic fall. This distortion can lead to heightened stress and anxiety, as you’re constantly bracing for disaster.

But there are many more mental pitfalls to watch out for besides just these 3. The table below catalogues some of the most common cognitive distortions that shape (and warp) human thinking. As you read through them, you’ll likely recognize patterns from your own mental habits. That moment of recognition isn’t a weakness—it’s the beginning of cognitive sovereignty. The path to better decisions starts with knowing when your brain is trying to take shortcuts, and choosing to think deliberately instead.

Consider this your debugging toolkit for the most important software you’ll ever run: your own mind.

Cognitive distortions list

Cognitive distortion	Explanation	Example
all-or-nothing thinking	viewing everything in absolute and extremely polarized terms	“nothing good ever happens” or “I’m always behind”
blaming	focusing on other people as source of your negative feelings, & refusing to take responsibility for changing yourself; or conversely, blaming yourself harshly for things that were out of your control	“It’s my boss’s fault I’m always stressed at work, or conversely, “It’s all my fault that the project failed, even though I had no control over the budget cuts.”
catastrophizing	belief that disaster will strike no matter what, and that what will happen will be too awful to bear	If I don’t get this promotion, my life will be ruined and I’ll end up homeless.
counterfactual thinking	A kind of mental bargaining or longing to live in the alternate timeline where one had made a different decision	If only I had studied harder for that exam, I wouldn’t be in this situation now.
dichotomous thinking	viewing events or people in all-or-nothing terms	“If I don’t get a perfect score on this test, then I’m a complete failure.”
discounting positives	claiming that positive things you or others do are trivial, or ignoring good things that have happened to you	“I got a promotion, but it’s not a big deal; anyone could have done it.”
emotional reasoning	letting feelings guide interpretation of reality; a way of judging yourself or your circumstances based on your emotions	“I feel like a failure, so I must be one.”
filtering	mentally “filters out” the positive aspects of a situation while magnifying the negative aspects	Even though I got a promotion and a raise, I can’t stop thinking about the one negative comment my boss made during my performance review.
fortune-telling	predicting the future negatively	I just know I’m going to fail this test, even though I’ve studied for weeks.
framing effects	tendency for decisions to be shaped by inconsequential features of choice problems	Choosing the “90% fat-free” yogurt over the “10% fat” yogurt, even though they are nutritionally identical, because the positive framing sounds healthier.
halo effect	belief that one’s success in a domain automagically qualifies them to have skills and expertise in other areas	Because someone is a successful actor, I assume they must also be a brilliant political commentator.
illusory correlation	tendency to perceive a relationship between two variables when no relation exists	Every time I wash my car, it rains, so I must be causing the rain.
inability to disconfirm	reject any evidence or arguments that might contradict negative thoughts	Despite being shown evidence of her good work, she clung to the belief that she was incompetent.
intuitive heuristics	tendency when faced with a difficult question of answering an easier question instead, typically without noticing the substitution	When asked if they are a happy person, someone might answer if they are happy right now, instead of considering their overall happiness.
just-world hypothesis	belief that good things tend to happen to good people, while bad things tend to happen to bad people	She believes that because she works hard and is a good person, she is guaranteed to win the lottery, while bad things only happen to those who deserve it.
labeling	assigning global negative traits to self & others; making a judgment about yourself or someone else as a person, versus seeing the behavior as something they did that doesn’t define them as an individual	“I’m a complete idiot for making that mistake,” instead of “I made a mistake.”
ludic fallacy	in assessing the potential amount of risk in a system or decision, mistaking the real randomness of life for the well-defined risk of casinos	A gambler believes that since a roulette wheel has landed on red five times in a row, it’s more likely to land on black next, mistaking the independent probability of each spin for a predictable pattern.
magical thinking	a way of imagining you can wish reality into existence through the sheer force of your mind. Part of a child developmental phase that not everyone grows out of.	If I just wish hard enough, I can make my dream job appear without applying for it.
magnification	exaggerating the importance of flaws and problems while minimizing the impact of desirable qualities and achievements	Even though I successfully completed the complex project, I can’t stop focusing on the minor typo I made in one email.
mind reading	assuming what someone is thinking w/o sufficient evidence; jumping to conclusions	My boss didn’t say good morning, so she must be angry with me.
negative filtering	focusing exclusively on negatives & ignoring positives	Even after receiving a glowing performance review, she could only dwell on the one minor suggestion for improvement.
nominal realism	child development phase where names of objects aren’t just symbols but intrinsic parts of the objects. Sometimes called word realism, and related to magical thinking	A child believing that if you call a dog a “cat,” it will actually become a cat, demonstrates nominal realism.
overgeneralizing	making a rule or predicting globally negative patterns on the basis of single incident	Because I tripped on the sidewalk today, I know it’s going to be a terrible week.
projection	attributing qualities to external actors or forces that one feels within and either a) wishes to promote and have echoed back to onself, or b) eradicate or squelch from oneself by believing that the quality exists elsewhere, in others, but not in oneself	He accused his coworker of being lazy, when in reality, he was struggling with his own motivation.
provincialism	the tendency to see things only from the point of view of those in charge of our immediate in-groups	She couldn’t understand why anyone would disagree with her team’s strategy, assuming their way was the only correct approach because it’s what her superiors believed.
shoulds	a list of ironclad rules one lives and punishes oneself by	“I should always be perfect, and if I’m not, I’m a complete failure.”
teleological fallacy	illusion that you know exactly where you’re going, knew exactly where you were going in the past, & that others have succeeded in the past by knowing where they were going	I always knew I would become a successful entrepreneur because every step I took, even the detours, perfectly led me to this point.
what if?	keep asking series of ?s on prospective events & being unsatisfied with any answers	What if I fail the exam, and what if that means I’ll never get into college, and what if my whole future is ruined because of this one test?

More related to cognitive distortions:

30 Common psychological biases ↗

These systematic errors in our thinking and logic affect our everyday choices, behaviors, and evaluations of others.

Top Mental Models for Thinkers ↗

Model thinking is an excellent way of improving our cognition and decision making abilities.

24 Logical fallacies list ↗

Recognizing and avoiding logical fallacies is essential for critical thinking and effective communication.

September 28, 2025

Black and White Thinking

Black and white thinking is the tendency to see things in extremes, viewing the world through a very polarized lens. Even complex moral issues are seen as clearcut, with simple right and wrong answers and no gray areas in between.

Also referred to as all-or-nothing thinking or dichotomous thinking, black and white thinking is a very rigid and binary way of looking at the world. Black and white thinkers tend to categorize things, events, people, and experiences as either completely good or completely bad, without acknowledging any nuance or shades of gray. This can manifest in various aspects of their lives including relationships, decision-making, and self-evaluation. Black and white thinking can be a defense mechanism, as it provides a sense of certainty and control in situations that are complex, uncertain, or anxiety-provoking.

For example, a person who engages in black and white thinking may view their work performance as either completely successful or a complete failure, without considering any middle ground. They may view themselves as either a “good” or “bad” person, based on a single action or mistake. This type of extreme thinking can lead to feelings of extreme anxiety, depression, and self-doubt, as well as difficulties in personal and professional relationships.

Black and white thinking in political psychology

Black and white thinking can also be seen in political or social contexts, where individuals categorize people or groups as either completely good or completely bad, without acknowledging any nuances or complexities. This type of thinking can lead to polarizing beliefs, rigid ideologies, and an unwillingness to engage in constructive dialogue or compromise.

The origins of black and white thinking are complex and multifaceted, but it can stem from a variety of factors, including childhood experiences, cultural and societal influences, and psychological disorders including personality disorder. For example, individuals who have experienced trauma or abuse may engage in black and white thinking as a way to cope with the complexity and ambiguity of their experiences. Similarly, cultural or societal influences that promote a strict adherence to binary categories can also contribute to black and white thinking.

Psychological disorders such as borderline personality disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and eating disorders are also associated with black and white thinking. For example, individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) may see themselves or others as either completely good or completely bad, without any middle ground. This type of thinking can lead to unstable relationships, impulsive behavior, and emotional dysregulation.

Narcissists too, especially malignant narcissists, tend to exhibit black and white thinking, with the frequent framing of any narrative as being primarily about themselves (good/The Hero) and everyone else (bad/The Other).

Black and White Thinking: Understanding binary cognition in the modern era

The Digital Amplification of Binary Thinking

The modern information ecosystem has created unprecedented conditions for black and white thinking to flourish. Social media algorithms, designed to maximize engagement, systematically promote content that evokes strong emotional responses—often content that presents complex issues in oversimplified, polarizing terms.

Algorithmic Reinforcement Mechanisms

Contemporary digital platforms operate on engagement metrics that inadvertently reward binary thinking:

Filter Bubble Formation: Recommendation algorithms create echo chambers where users primarily encounter information that confirms their existing beliefs
Engagement Optimization: Content that provokes outrage or strong agreement receives higher distribution (and ultimately, revenue), marginalizing nuanced perspectives
Attention Economy Dynamics: The competition for limited attention spans incentivizes simplified, emotionally charged messaging over complex analysis — going straight for the jugular of common mental heuristics works

Information Processing Under Cognitive Load

Research in cognitive psychology demonstrates that when individuals experience high cognitive load—a common state in our information-saturated environment—they default to simplified decision-making heuristics. This neurological tendency combines with digital information delivery systems to create systematic biases toward binary categorization.

Contemporary Political Manifestations

Black and white thinking has become increasingly prominent in political discourse, with profound implications for democratic institutions and social cohesion.

Institutional Polarization Patterns

Recent decades have witnessed unprecedented levels of political polarization across multiple institutional domains:

Legislative Dynamics: Congressional voting patterns show dramatic increases in party-line voting, with bipartisan legislation becoming increasingly rare. This reflects not just strategic positioning but fundamental shifts in how political actors conceptualize policy problems and solutions.

Media Ecosystem Fragmentation: The proliferation of ideologically aligned media sources enables individuals to construct information diets that reinforce binary worldviews. Traditional journalistic ethics of objectivity and balance in a fundamentally evidentiary role have been challenged by partisan media models that explicitly advocate for particular political perspectives.

Electoral Coalition Building: Political campaigns increasingly rely on mobilizing base supporters through appeals to fundamental differences with opponents, rather than building broad coalitions through compromise and incremental policy development.

Identity-Based Political Cognition

Modern political psychology research reveals how black and white thinking intersects with identity formation:

Social Identity Theory: Individuals derive significant psychological satisfaction from in-group membership and out-group differentiation
Motivated Reasoning: People process political information in ways that protect their group identities and existing belief systems
Moral Foundations: Different political coalitions emphasize different moral frameworks, creating seemingly irreconcilable worldview differences

Systemic Analysis: Institutional Impacts

Black and white thinking creates cascade effects across multiple institutional systems:

Democratic Governance Challenges

Compromise Mechanisms: Effective democratic governance requires negotiation and compromise between competing interests. Binary thinking undermines these processes by framing compromise as betrayal of fundamental principles.

Policy Implementation: Complex policy challenges—from healthcare to climate change to economic inequality—require nuanced, multifaceted solutions. Binary thinking promotes oversimplified policy approaches that often fail to address underlying systemic issues.

Constitutional Design: Democratic institutions assume citizens capable of evaluating competing claims and making informed choices. Black and white thinking can undermine these foundational assumptions necessary to making democracy work.

Economic System Implications

Market Dynamics: Binary thinking in economic contexts can create boom-bust cycles, as investors and consumers oscillate between extreme optimism and pessimism without recognizing gradual trends and mixed signals.

Innovation Ecosystems: Complex technological and business model innovation requires tolerance for ambiguity and iterative development. Binary thinking can stifle innovation by demanding immediate, clear success metrics. It turns out that diversity is good to the bottom line, actually.

Labor Relations: Effective workplace dynamics require ongoing negotiation between competing interests. Binary thinking can transform routine workplace disagreements into fundamental conflicts.

Mental Model Frameworks for Analysis

Understanding black and white thinking requires sophisticated analytical frameworks:

The Cognitive Bias Cascade Model

Black and white thinking rarely operates in isolation but typically forms part of broader cognitive bias patterns:

Confirmation Bias: Seeking information that confirms existing beliefs
Availability Heuristic: Overweighting easily recalled examples
Fundamental Attribution Error: Attributing others’ behavior to character rather than circumstances
Group Attribution Error: Assuming individual group members represent entire groups

Systems Thinking Applications

Effective analysis of black and white thinking requires systems-level perspective:

Feedback Loops: How binary thinking creates self-reinforcing cycles that become increasingly difficult to break

Emergence Properties: How individual cognitive patterns create collective social and political dynamics

Leverage Points: Identifying where interventions might most effectively disrupt binary thinking patterns

Historical Pattern Recognition

Historical analysis reveals recurring patterns in how societies navigate between binary and nuanced thinking:

Crisis Periods: Times of social stress typically increase binary thinking as individuals seek certainty and clear action frameworks

Institutional Adaptation: How democratic institutions evolve mechanisms to manage polarization and maintain governance capacity

Cultural Evolution: How societies develop norms and practices that promote or discourage binary thinking

Contemporary Case Studies

Social Media Discourse Patterns

Analysis of millions of social media posts reveals systematic patterns in how binary thinking spreads:

Viral Content Characteristics: Posts that go viral disproportionately feature binary framing of complex issues
Engagement Metrics: Binary content generates higher levels of shares, comments, and emotional reactions
Network Effects: Binary thinking spreads through social networks more rapidly than nuanced analysis

Political Movement Dynamics

Examination of contemporary political movements reveals how binary thinking shapes organizational development:

Movement Mobilization: Binary framing helps movements build initial coalition support by clarifying friend-enemy distinctions

Strategic Communication: Binary messaging dominates political advertising and fundraising appeals

Coalition Maintenance: Binary thinking can help maintain group cohesion but may limit strategic flexibility

black and white thinking as a tool of dictators around the world

Crisis Response Patterns

Analysis of responses to major crises—from pandemics to economic disruptions to international conflicts—demonstrates how binary thinking affects collective decision-making:

Policy Development: Crisis conditions often promote binary policy choices that may not address underlying complexity

Public Communication: Crisis communication frequently relies on binary framing to motivate public compliance with policy measures

International Relations: Crisis situations can push diplomatic relations toward binary alliance structures

Neurological and Psychological Foundations

Understanding black and white thinking requires examining its neurological and psychological foundations:

Cognitive Processing Systems

System 1 vs System 2 Thinking: Daniel Kahneman’s research demonstrates how automatic, intuitive thinking (System 1) tends toward binary categorization, while deliberative thinking (System 2) enables more nuanced analysis.

Threat Detection Mechanisms: Evolutionary psychology suggests that binary thinking may have adaptive advantages in environments requiring quick threat assessment, but becomes maladaptive in complex modern contexts.

Cognitive Load Theory: When individuals experience high cognitive load, they default to simplified decision-making processes that favor binary categorization.

Developmental Psychology Perspectives

Moral Development Stages: Lawrence Kohlberg’s research on moral development shows how individuals progress from binary moral thinking toward more sophisticated ethical reasoning frameworks.

Identity Formation: Erik Erikson’s work on identity development demonstrates how binary thinking can serve important functions during identity formation periods but may become problematic if it persists into adulthood.

Attachment Theory: Insecure attachment patterns can promote binary thinking about relationships and social situations as defensive mechanisms.

Organizational and Institutional Responses

Educational System Adaptations

Educational institutions increasingly recognize the need to develop students’ capacity for nuanced thinking:

Critical Thinking Curricula: Programs specifically designed to help students recognize and resist binary thinking patterns

Media Literacy: Training students to recognize how information systems promote simplified thinking

Interdisciplinary Approaches: Educational approaches that demonstrate how complex problems require multiple perspectives and methodological approaches

Democratic Institution Reforms

Various proposals aim to reduce the institutional incentives for binary thinking:

Electoral System Design: Ranked-choice voting and other electoral innovations that reward coalition-building over polarization

Deliberative Democracy: Institutional mechanisms that bring citizens together for structured discussion of complex policy issues

Legislative Process Reform: Procedural changes that incentivize negotiation and compromise over partisan positioning

Technology Platform Governance

Growing recognition of how digital platforms shape thinking patterns has led to various reform proposals:

Algorithm Transparency: Requiring platforms to disclose how their algorithms prioritize content

Engagement Metric Alternatives: Developing metrics beyond simple engagement that reward constructive discourse

Digital Literacy: Public education initiatives to help users recognize and resist algorithmic manipulation

Constructive Frameworks for Addressing Binary Thinking

Individual-Level Interventions

Mindfulness Practices: Regular mindfulness meditation has been shown to increase tolerance for ambiguity and reduce automatic binary categorization.

Cognitive Behavioral Techniques: Specific therapeutic approaches for identifying and challenging binary thought patterns.

Exposure to Complexity: Deliberately seeking out information sources and experiences that present complex, nuanced perspectives on important issues.

Perspective-Taking Exercises: Structured practices for understanding how situations appear from multiple viewpoints.

Community-Level Initiatives

Dialogue and Deliberation Programs: Community-based initiatives that bring together people with different perspectives for structured conversation about local issues.

Collaborative Problem-Solving: Community projects that require cooperation across different groups and perspectives.

Civic Education: Educational programs that help citizens understand how democratic institutions work and why compromise is essential for effective governance.

Cross-Cutting Social Connections: Initiatives that help people form relationships across traditional dividing lines.

Institutional Design Principles

Procedural Safeguards: Institutional mechanisms that slow down decision-making processes to allow for more deliberative consideration of complex issues.

Stakeholder Inclusion: Decision-making processes that systematically include multiple perspectives and interests.

Transparency and Accountability: Mechanisms that make decision-making processes visible and subject to public scrutiny.

Adaptive Management: Institutional frameworks that allow for policy adjustment based on evidence and changing circumstances.

Implications for Democratic Resilience

The prevalence of black and white thinking poses significant challenges for democratic governance:

Representation and Legitimacy

Electoral Representation: Binary thinking can undermine representative democracy by making it difficult for elected officials to represent diverse constituencies with complex, sometimes conflicting interests.

Institutional Legitimacy: When citizens view political institutions through binary lenses, it becomes difficult to maintain the shared commitment to democratic norms necessary for effective governance.

Minority Rights: Binary thinking can threaten minority rights by reducing complex questions of individual liberty and collective welfare to simple majority-minority power dynamics.

Policy Development and Implementation

Evidence-Based Policy: Effective policy development requires careful consideration of evidence, trade-offs, and unintended consequences—all of which are undermined by binary thinking.

Policy Adaptation: Democratic institutions must be able to adapt policies based on new evidence and changing circumstances, which requires tolerance for complexity and ambiguity.

Cross-Sector Coordination: Modern policy challenges often require coordination across different levels of government and between public and private sectors, which is complicated by binary thinking.

Future Research Directions

Understanding and addressing black and white thinking requires ongoing research across multiple disciplines:

Technology and Cognition

AI and Decision-Making: How artificial intelligence systems might be designed to promote nuanced rather than binary thinking.

Digital Environment Design: Research on how different digital interface designs affect cognitive processing and decision-making.

Virtual Reality and Perspective-Taking: How immersive technologies might be used to help individuals understand complex situations from multiple perspectives.

Political Psychology and Behavior

Motivation and Binary Thinking: Research on what motivates individuals to adopt or resist binary thinking patterns in political contexts.

Group Dynamics: How binary thinking spreads through social networks and political organizations.

Leadership and Framing: How political leaders can effectively communicate about complex issues without resorting to binary framing.

Institutional Design and Reform

Comparative Democratic Systems: Analysis of how different democratic institutions manage polarization and promote constructive political discourse.

Experimental Governance: Small-scale experiments with different institutional designs that might reduce incentives for binary thinking.

Technology Governance: Research on how to regulate digital platforms in ways that promote constructive rather than polarizing discourse.

Toward cognitive complexity

Black and white thinking represents a fundamental challenge to effective individual decision-making, social cooperation, and democratic governance. While binary thinking may have served adaptive functions in simpler environments, the complexity of modern challenges requires more sophisticated cognitive frameworks.

Addressing this challenge requires coordinated efforts across multiple levels—from individual practices that promote cognitive flexibility to institutional reforms that reduce incentives for polarization. The stakes are particularly high for democratic societies, which depend on citizens’ capacity to engage constructively with complexity and difference.

The path forward requires neither naive optimism nor cynical resignation, but rather sustained commitment to developing our collective capacity for nuanced thinking about complex problems. This involves both protecting democratic institutions from the corrosive effects of extreme polarization and actively building new capabilities for constructive engagement across difference — knowing that some will disagree and continuously fight us on reforms.

Understanding black and white thinking is not merely an academic exercise but an urgent practical necessity for navigating the challenges of the 21st century. By developing more sophisticated analytical frameworks and practical interventions, we can work toward societies that are both more thoughtful and more effective at solving complex collective problems.

Establishment of a police state

The second terrible rationale for taking the US further into debt is to create a police state in America, with literal concentration camps. Despite campaigning on deporting the alleged set of violent criminals within the undocumented immigrant demographic, Trump and his slavering goon squad have been picking up fathers, landscapers, students who posted things they don’t like on social media, random South Koreans, and anyone Tom Homan thinks looks a little bit too brown. In other words, the government is spending billions and billions of your tax dollars to get rid of hardworking taxpayers — a hateful Dunning-Kruger approach that is toxic both politically and economically.

This GOP tax and spending bill will also empower the federal government to take over Democratic cities — despite the fact that red states have more crime. And to deploy America’s federal law enforcement staff away from national and international crimes like sex trafficking and fraud, and turning them towards’ providing photo ops in DC. Because appearances are all that matter to this particular president and his regime.

All this to create the kind of police state with standing army that the Founders would have laughed out of the room — because they had just fought a bloody war to defeat that kind of autocratic nonsense. With its cash infusion of an eye-popping $171 billion across federal agencies and other new border security and detention facility funding, ICE is poised to become the 4th largest branch of the military — but deployed on home soil, increasingly against Americans.

The GOP Budget Bill in 7 Minutes

Ask the Bill: An HR1 NotebookLM

But you don’t have to take my word for it — here you can talk directly to the bill in natural language, in NotebookLM:

the HR1 GOP tax and spending budget bill for fiscal year 2026, in an interactive NotebookLM

GOP budget bill winners

See a full table of the winners and the new lay of the land and the immense growth of the administrative state that the GOP claims it is trying to eradicate:

August 28, 2025

Black Swan

It was March 12, 2020. The Dow Jones plummeted 2,352 points in a single day – the largest point drop in history at the time. Within weeks, entire industries ground to a halt, governments printed trillions of dollars, and the world fundamentally shifted in ways no forecasting model had predicted. That was a Black Swan event.

Sound familiar? It should. Because while COVID-19 dominated headlines, it’s just the latest in a long line of events that “nobody could have seen coming” – yet somehow always seem obvious in hindsight.

These aren’t just random bad luck. They’re what mathematician and former Wall Street trader Nassim Nicholas Taleb calls “Black Swan events” – and understanding them might be the most important mental model you’re not using.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Your brain is evolutionarily wired to miss the very events that will have the biggest impact on your life, career, and financial future.

We’re pattern-seeking machines living in a world where the most consequential changes don’t follow patterns. We build models based on what we’ve seen, then get blindsided by what we haven’t. We mistake the absence of evidence for evidence of absence. And we consistently underestimate the role of extreme, unpredictable events in shaping everything from economic markets to geopolitics to technological breakthroughs.

But what if I told you there’s a way to not just survive these unpredictable events, but actually benefit from them?

In the 5-minute video below, we dive deep into Taleb’s groundbreaking framework for navigating uncertainty. You’ll discover why COVID-19 wasn’t actually a Black Swan (according to Taleb himself), learn about the “Turkey Problem” that explains our collective blindness to risk, and most importantly – walk away with practical strategies to build what Taleb calls “antifragile” systems that grow stronger from disorder.

Because while you can’t predict the next crisis, you can absolutely prepare for it. And in a world increasingly dominated by AI breakthroughs, geopolitical shifts, and technological disruption, that preparation isn’t just smart – it’s essential.

Ready to rewire how you think about uncertainty? Let’s dive in.

July 18, 2025

Alexei Navalny: It’s the corruption, stupid

Alexei Navalny, anti-corruption crusader in Russia against Vladimir PUtin

That’s a paraphrase. But it’s descriptive — Alexei Navalny skewered Putin’s Russia for its corruption. And paid a price with his life — because that’s what authoritarian regimes demand: your loyalty or your life. Yet a Russian-style mafia state is the end goal of Trump and his cronies.

Navalny — like the U.S. Founding Fathers did before him — believed in human rights and the dignity of all souls equally before God and rational thought. But Putin — like the Confederates and Nazis before him — believed that some men were better than others, and that people like him should rule over all the rest. They wanted a return to essentially monarchy — but with the modern power and technology of the state of the 21st century, making it an authoritarian political philosophy.

These two ideologies are battling it out in today’s geopolitical landscape. The rise of nationalist and right-wing parties of all stripes across the globe has been unsettling yet unmistakable over these past number of years. Upset victories and near misses have dotted the landscape, as left-wing parties still are (perhaps rightfully) reeling over the idea that anyone could abandon the conviction that societies thrive best when the laws are applied equally, or that it’s probably a bad thing to concentrate too much power into one person’s hands, or that concentration camps are wrong — to name but a few.

Alexei Navalny, anti-corruption crusader in Russia against Vladimir

The right-wing moral universe seems to see the vague suggestion that Hunter Biden once tried (and failed) to broker a meeting with his VP dad as an impeachable offense while Trump hawking his own line of egregiously priced perfumes from the White House, or shilling Teslas on the lawn, or inking multi-billion dollar deals with Saudi Arabia while in office is just business as usual. Nothing to see here.

That’s how the system works — they normalize corruption and bad behavior when it’s a Republican doing it, and criminalize it if a Democrat does. Selective enforcement of the law means there really is no law anymore — it’s just the President’s whim that day. Or should I say, the King’s.

Alexei Navalny: Human rights is the goal of politics

This is the stuff they don’t want anybody to see. This is the very basic demands of a civilized society that we ought to expect — ideas so powerful that men like Vladimir Putin have to kill him in a desperate attempt to make the dangerous idea of self-worth more widely known. They really do not want you to have rights — and this is how far they are willing to go:

July 9, 2025

What’s in the massive Republican spending bill?

US Republican Senators cavorting with military personnel, drinking and laughing and celebrating the orgy of money they are rolling in

The GOP just passed their budget reconciliation bill for FY2026 — a squeaker, but over the line and now signed into law. Looking at this staggering compilation of budget line items, we’re witnessing what can only be described as the construction of an unprecedented domestic security apparatus that should alarm anyone who values civil liberties and fiscal responsibility. What’s in the Republican spending bill? A massive financial allocation to create a new branch of the military — essentially a militarized standing army of the type the Founders feared most deeply (for example Hamilton, in Federalist No. 29).

This Republican budget bill represents a breathtaking $300+ billion commitment to militarizing America’s borders and expanding the surveillance state under the guise of “national security.” The numbers tell a chilling story: nearly $57 billion for border walls and barriers, $45 billion for immigrant detention facilities that will rival the size of the entire prison system, and almost $30 billion to supercharge ICE into a paramilitary force with expanded powers to raid communities nationwide.

What we’re seeing here isn’t border security—it’s the systematic transformation of immigration enforcement into a militarized occupation force. The bill allocates billions for “family detention centers” (a euphemism for camps where children will be imprisoned), grants to states for building more walls, and funding for “relocation of unlawfully present aliens” that sounds disturbingly like it will require the use of violent force.

Perhaps most troubling is how this massive expansion of domestic enforcement capabilities comes wrapped in the flag of military spending. Hundreds of billions flow to weapons manufacturers and defense contractors while basic human services are starved of funding. The message is clear: this administration views immigrants not as people seeking opportunity, but as enemy combatants requiring a military response.

The infrastructure being built here—the surveillance technology, detention facilities, militarized personnel, and coordination between local and federal enforcement—creates the scaffolding for authoritarianism that could easily be turned against any group deemed “undesirable” by future administrations. Once you’ve normalized this level of militarized domestic enforcement, the definition of who deserves to be targeted has a way of expanding.

This isn’t about border security—it’s about power, control, and the profits that flow to contractors building America’s emerging police state.

Here is a comprehensive list of all the line items in the bill that add budget to law enforcement, border protection, national security, or military-related functions or agencies, ranked by size descending, drawing directly from the text of the bill:

$46,550,000,000 appropriated to the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection for the Border Infrastructure and Wall System, including construction, installation, or improvement of new or replacement primary, waterborne, and secondary barriers; access roads; barrier system attributes (cameras, lights, sensors, detection technology); and any work necessary to prepare the ground at or near the border to allow U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct its operations.
$45,000,000,000 appropriated to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for single adult alien detention capacity and family residential center capacity. A “family residential center” is defined as a facility used by the Department of Homeland Security to detain alien family units, including children who are not unaccompanied, encountered or apprehended by the Department.
$29,850,000,000 appropriated to the Secretary of Homeland Security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for fiscal year 2025, to remain available through September 30, 2029. These funds are designated for: hiring and training additional ICE personnel (officers, agents, investigators, and support staff), prioritizing and streamlining the hiring of retired ICE personnel; providing performance, retention, and signing bonuses to qualified ICE personnel; facilitating recruitment, hiring, and onboarding of additional ICE personnel (including investing in IT, recruitment, and marketing); transportation costs and related costs for alien departure or removal operations; information technology investments to support enforcement and removal operations (including fee collections); facility upgrades to support enforcement and removal operations; fleet modernization to support enforcement and removal operations; promoting family unity by maintaining care and custody of aliens charged only with a misdemeanor offense who entered with their child under 18 and detaining such an alien with their child; expanding, facilitating, and implementing 287(g) agreements; hiring and training additional staff for the Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement Office and providing nonfinancial assistance to victims of crimes perpetrated by unauthorized aliens; and hiring additional attorneys and support staff within the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor to represent DHS in immigration enforcement and removal proceedings.
$10,000,000,000 appropriated to the Department of Homeland Security for the State Border Security Reinforcement Fund. These funds are for grants to eligible States and units of local government for purposes including: construction or installation of a border wall, border fencing, other barriers, or buoys along the southern border of the United States (including planning, procurement of materials, and personnel costs); any work necessary to prepare the ground at or near land borders to allow construction and maintenance of a border wall or other barrier fencing; detection and interdiction of illicit substances and aliens who have unlawfully entered the United States and committed a crime, and their transfer or referral to DHS; and relocation of unlawfully present aliens from small population centers to other domestic locations.
$10,000,000,000 appropriated to the Secretary of Homeland Security for reimbursement of costs incurred in undertaking activities in support of the Department of Homeland Security’s mission to safeguard the borders of the United States.

July 3, 2025

Trickle Down Economics

Reagonomics as illustrated by Ronald Reagan sitting atop a huge pile of money

Trickle down economics is known by a number of names: supply side economics, Reaganomics, the Laffer Curve, voodoo economics, deregulation, Libertarianism, Mudsill Theory, Two Santa Claus theory, horse and sparrow theory, and the Trump tax cuts, to name a few. It has been espoused by everyone from Ayn Rand to Milton Friedman to Alan Greenspan to Gordon Gecko.

Trickle down economics involves focusing the brunt of government effort on helping the wealthy, at the expense of the middle class and the poor. The theory says that the wealthy elites of the country have proven themselves capable patricians for stewarding the lives of the masses through myth and fairytale in the name of patriotic duty. The “supply” in supply side are the rich, who will create companies that sell products to people who didn’t even realize they needed them. If we give enough of our collective tax pool to them, they say, they’ll create jobs and prosperity for everyone else.

The problem for trickle down economics is that that isn’t true at all. It simply doesn’t happen. Time and time again over the past approximately 200 years, the ideology of rewarding the wealthy for being wealthy has proven its premises to be completely false. Deregulation and starving the government don’t produce a prosperous utopia — they produce recessions and depressions. They produce conglomerates too big to fail, that get rewarded for their brazenly irresponsible speculation with Main Street’s money, and flaunt their ability to simply capture government in our collective faces.

Trickle down economics since the 1970s

In its most recent incarnation as trickle-down, supply-side, or Reagonomics, tax cuts are pitched as paying for themselves when they have in actual fact succeeded in blowing up the deficit and the national debt. The work of Arthur Laffer and Jude Wanniski at a fateful meeting with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld in 1974, trickle-down economic theory was put into practice during the Reagan years and has been failing to produce the promised results of paying down the debt for almost half a century.

Jude Wanniski’s “Two Santa Claus” strategy laid the political groundwork for what would soon be branded as supply-side, or trickle-down, economics. Observing in the 1970s that Democrats played “Santa” by expanding popular social programs, Wanniski warned Republicans that positioning themselves as the party of spending cuts cast them as the “anti-Santa.” His fix was simple but potent: become a second Santa by promising sweeping tax cuts. Republicans, he argued, could shower voters with fiscal “gifts” while leaving beloved programs intact, sidestepping the backlash that traditionally followed austerity talk.

This tactical reframing meshed perfectly with the emerging supply-side creed. By asserting that lower taxes on corporations and high earners spur investment, production, and ultimately broad prosperity, Republicans could claim that their giveaways weren’t merely political theater—they were an economic necessity. The brilliance (and cynicism) of the scheme was its indifference to short-term deficits: ballooning red ink would corner future Democratic administrations into either raising taxes or cutting spending, both politically toxic options.

In practice, the Two Santa Claus playbook flipped classical, demand-driven thinking on its head. Rather than boosting middle-class wages to stoke consumption, it poured resources into the top of the income ladder and trusted prosperity to “trickle down.” The approach reached full throttle in the Reagan era—taxes slashed, spending still high—and its legacy endures: chronic deficits, rising inequality, and an ongoing partisan tug-of-war over who pays the bill.

increasing national debt ratio thanks to trickle down economics scam

The Big, Beautiful, Debt-Ballooning Bill

Look no further than the monstrosity of a bill the Republicans are trying to jam through the reconciliation process. Expected to make the 2017 Trump tax cuts a permanent welfare handout to the wealthiest billionaires on the planet, the so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill” is also slated to add $4 trillion to the national debt.

We can’t keep going on this way.

It’s long past time we undertake the difficult work of educating the population more broadly about this GOP economics scam that’s been running for the past 50 years and running up the till while nurturing a truly nasty partisan political divide as insult to injury.

Trickle down doesn’t work. Tax cuts to billionaires doesn’t work — at least, not for anyone other than the billionaires and political elite class. We need an economic system that works broadly for everyone, otherwise sooner or later it all comes crashing down and we are in for a (literal) world of hurt.

Related concepts:

property vs. people
wealth cult
Jude Wanniski — Two Santa Claus Theory
James Henry Hammond — Mudsill Theory
Horse and sparrow theory
The Austrian School — Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman
Reaganomics
The Laffer Curve
deregulation
“drown it in the bathtub” — Grover Norquist
inequality
The Gilded Age
robber barons
Citizens United

Fierce realness on the destructive effects of Republican trickle down economics policy/conspiracy theory over the past decades. https://t.co/Y7E9Lp4Ldn
— barb dybwad (@doctorparadox) May 18, 2022

June 10, 2025

DOGE Days: Why are people protesting Elon Musk?

Elon Musk wearing a t-shirt that says "Steal Your Data"

When Elon Musk assumed his role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in the second Trump administration, he claimed his goal was to slash wasteful spending and eliminate government fraud. Yet a damning new report from Senator Elizabeth Warren reveals a starkly different reality: Musk’s 130 days in the White House appear to have been very little about serving the public interest and more about engineering one of the most audacious wealth transfers from taxpayers to a single individual in modern American history. Why are people protesting Elon Musk? In short: everybody hates corruption. And during his time with DOGE, Musk’s net worth soared by over $100 billion and his companies secured billions in new federal contracts, regulatory approvals, and policy changes that directly benefited his sprawling business empire.

The Warren report exposes how Musk’s anti-fraud rhetoric served as convenient cover for systematically dismantling the very agencies responsible for investigating his companies’ workplace safety violations, environmental damage, and discriminatory practices. Under the guise of “efficiency,” DOGE targeted the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) that would regulate his planned X Money venture, gutted OSHA while it investigated Tesla’s worker safety record, and fired inspectors general who had been scrutinizing his companies. Meanwhile, agencies that provide essential services to working families—from the Department of Labor to social safety net programs—faced devastating cuts that threaten to leave the most vulnerable Americans without crucial protections. What emerges is a troubling pattern: Musk’s government role functioned less as public service and more as a strategic position to eliminate oversight of his businesses while redirecting taxpayer resources into his own coffers.

The Massachusetts Senator and champion of the CFPB kept an eagle eye on Musk as he burrowed his way through the federal government with his 20-somethings alt-right goon squad. She compiled this exhaustive report on Elon Musk’s corrupt dealings during his time in the White House — and these are just the ones we know about thanks to intrepid investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and other patriotic informants. A full accounting of the heist will likely not be known for some time, if at all — given the Trump administration’s power (and proclivity) to memory hole theoretically anything they wish.

Grok's rendition of a boxing match between Senator Elizabeth Warren and tech billionaire Elon Musk — Maybe not the best rendering… blame Musk’s Grok!

The report, “Special Interests Over the Public Interest: Elon Musk’s 130 Days in the Trump Administration (PDF),” details numerous instances where the tech megabillionaire and richest man on earth, serving as a “Special Government Employee” while leading DOGE, engaged in actions that allegedly benefited his private financial interests. On top of a net worth increase of $100 billion+ since Election Day, his companies (Tesla, SpaceX, X and xAI, the Boring Company, and Neuralink) had extensive financial conflicts of interest that were completely disregarded.

Here are the highlights from the report, followed by a timeline and cast of characters.

List of Elon Musk’s corrupt activities inside the White House

This is a comprehensive list of examples from the report illustrating how Musk allegedly used his power to further his personal interests, as of June 2025:

1. Government Resources to Promote Musk’s Businesses

Trump and Musk turned the White House lawn into a Tesla showroom.
Commerce Secretary Lutnick, reportedly “close to Elon Musk,” appeared on Fox News telling viewers to “buy Tesla”.

2. Federal Contracts for Musk’s Businesses

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) explored a contract to use Starlink technology in surveillance towers to monitor the border.
The Commerce Department changed terms of the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program to allow Starlink to apply, despite warnings of inferior service and higher costs.
The White House called for 13% more spending for the Department of Defense (DoD), and SpaceX is considered likely to be the top recipient of new Pentagon funding.
Reports show SpaceX became a frontrunner for the Golden Dome missile shield.
DOGE sought changes to DoD contracts, a clear conflict of interest given SpaceX has made over $7 billion in DoD contracts.

June 7, 2025

Trump corruption tracker

For years, Republican lawmakers and right-wing media outlets frothed at the mouth over Hunter Biden’s laptop and fabricated tales of Burisma “corruption” — stories so thoroughly debunked that the FBI informant who invented them, Alexander Smirnov, is now serving six years in prison for his lies. The GOP knew the Burisma bribes were fake Russian disinformation from the start, yet they weaponized these fabrications to launch impeachment proceedings and relentlessly smear the Biden family. Meanwhile, they’ve maintained a deafening silence about the brazen, documented, and ongoing Trump corruption stench emanating from the convicted fraudster‘s second presidency.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking in its audacity. While Republicans manufactured outrage over phantom millions supposedly flowing to the Bidens — money that never existed, deals that never happened, corruption that was entirely fictional — they’ve turned a blind eye to the very real, very documented flood of cash pouring into Trump’s coffers from foreign governments, cryptocurrency schemes, and pay-to-play access deals that would make a banana republic dictator blush. Maryland Representative and House Judiciary ranking member Jamie Raskin called it a “gangster state” in a recent interview with MSNBC‘s Chris Hayes.

What follows is not speculation, not innuendo, not the fever dreams of political opponents. This is a meticulously documented catalog of corruption so vast and shameless that it dwarfs anything previously seen in American presidential history. From $346 million in inaugural slush funds to $5.5 billion foreign real estate deals, from cryptocurrency pump-and-dump schemes netting nearly a billion dollars to a $400 million plane gift from Qatar — the Trump administration has transformed the presidency into a personal ATM with all the subtlety of a smash-and-grab robbery.

The Teapot Dome Scandal of the 1920s served as the quintessential symbol of government corruption for decades — over a mere $7 million worth of bribes to Interior Secretary Albert Fall. It was eclipsed and replaced by Watergate, shortly preceded by the resignation of Vice President Spiro Agnew over the discovery of his $300,000 operation that funneled cash stuffed into plain envelopes by bag men into the White House. Trump’s corruption represents a quantum leap beyond even these watershed moments in terms of sheer orders of magnitude, as well as the brazen manner in which the heists are being conducted in broad daylight.

The same party that spent years screaming about imaginary Ukrainian energy company bribes and fantasy Chinese business deals has remained conspicuously silent as their standard-bearer openly auctions off American foreign policy, drops federal investigations for donors, and literally sells dinner invitations for millions of dollars. The cognitive dissonance would be comical if it weren’t so dangerous to our democracy.

What is an example of political corruption in the United States? You cannot find a bigger collection of brazen examples. This is the story they don’t want you to focus on — the real corruption, the documented grift, the unprecedented monetization of the American presidency happening right before our eyes. I’ll be aiming to keep this list updated with the inevitable additions to come.

Financial Gains from Inaugural Funds and Campaign Donations

Donald Trump’s two inaugural committees raised an astounding $346 million, which is more than all other inaugural committees combined since Richard Nixon’s in 1973. There is no oversight on how Trump uses the money that was not spent on festivities, although allies claim it will go to projects like his presidential library (…for the guy who doesn’t read.).
Companies and executives who donated heavily to Trump’s inaugural fund have seen direct benefits in return. For example, the Trump administration withdrew a Biden-era rule requiring poultry companies to keep salmonella bacteria levels below a certain level. Pilgrim’s Pride, which gave $5 million to Trump’s inaugural committee (making it the largest donor to that effort), had two executives on the board of the National Chicken Council, which celebrated the reversal.
The Trump administration has dropped federal investigations and lawsuits against 89 corporations, many of whose leaders donated heavily to Trump’s inaugural fund.
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, the CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman, and AI search startup Perplexity each planned or did donate $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund, while Trump has refused to sign paperwork requiring him to disclose the donors. The fund has been described as a “slush fund” due to a lack of required accounting for how the money is spent.

June 7, 2025

Christian Nationalist Organizations and Groups

The term Christian nationalists brings together a number of radical religious sects seeking to overthrow the democratic republic of the United States and installing a strict theocracy, from dominionists to orthodox Catholics to Evangelicals and many more. Christian nationalist organizations work to increase the influence of religion on politics, under the invented mythology that the largely Deist founders meant to establish a Christian state.

Who are the Christian nationalists? They are people, groups, and congregations who tend to believe in Strict Father Morality, and Christian nationalist leaders desire to establish some sort of Christian fascist theocratic state in America. Nevermind that religious freedom and the ability to worship as one pleases was precisely one of the major founding ideals of the United States, as we know from the many, many outside writings of the founders at that time — these folks consider that context “irrelevant” to the literal text of the founding documents.

Getting “separation of state” backwards

Prominent Christian nationalist David Barton re-interprets the famous 1802 Thomas Jefferson letter to the Danbury Baptists to allege support for a “one-way wall” between church and state. Barton contends that Jefferson’s metaphor of a “wall of separation” was intended to protect religious institutions from government interference rather than ensuring the government’s secular nature. By advocating for this one-directional barrier, Barton seeks to justify the integration of religious principles into public policy and government actions — improbably, given the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Barton and his fellow Christian nationalists are either intentionally or unfathomably not taking the logical next step in the chain of power and authority: if the government is informed, infused, or even consumed by religious dogma and doctrine, then is that government not by definition infringing on the rights of any citizens that happens not to believe in that code or creed?

The answer, as we well know from the colonization of America itself, is YES. We left the Church of England in large part to worship of our own accord — and to make money, of course. Madison, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and Washington were especially concerned about religious liberty and the neutrality of government in religious matters.

Thus, in large part, the ideas of the Christian nationalists are misinterpretations at best, and willful invention at worst. In some it is clearly a naked power grab and not much more — think of Trump holding an upside-down Bible in Lafayette Square. In general, Christian nationalism doesn’t actually seem very Christian at all.

Whether they are True Believers or Opportunistic Cynics, the Christian nationalist organizations and right wing groups on this list — as well as a number of prominent individuals within these organizations — represent a threat to democracy as we know it — especially with Project 2025 so close to coming to fruition in a second Trump administration. Best we get a look at who they are.

June 1, 2025

NPD: Narcissistic Personality Disorder

Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is a mental health condition characterized by (as the name implies) narcissism, including a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, a lack of empathy for others, and a need for admiration. People with NPD often have an inflated sense of self-importance and believe they are special or unique in some way. They may be preoccupied with fantasies of power, success, beauty, or ideal love. However, behind their grandiose façade, they often have fragile self-esteem and are highly sensitive to criticism or rejection.

NPD is part of the Cluster B family of personality disorders. People with NPD tend to exhibit odd, sometimes bizarre behaviors — including word salad, emotional abuse, and other tactics of emotional predators — that are offputting to others and tend to have serious effects on the individual’s life.

NPD diagnosis

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) outlines the following diagnostic criteria for NPD:

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity, characterized by a sense of self-importance and an exaggerated sense of achievements and talents.
Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited power, success, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
Belief that they are special and unique and can only be understood by other high-status people or institutions.
Need for excessive admiration.
Sense of entitlement, expecting to be treated in a special way or given priority.
Exploitation of others for personal gain; using the tactics of emotional predators; narcissistic abuse.
Lack of empathy, an inability to recognize or care about the feelings and needs of others.
Envy of others or a belief that others are envious of them.
Arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

The symptoms of NPD may vary in intensity and presentation, but they are typically stable and longstanding. The condition may start in early adulthood and may be diagnosed only after adolescence, as it is difficult to differentiate between normal developmental narcissism and pathological narcissism in childhood.

A helpful mnemonic to help conceptualize and remember the traits of people with narcissistic personality disorder is “SPECIAL ME”3:

Letter	Trait
S	Sense of self-importance
P	Preoccupation with power, beauty, success
E	Entitled
C	Can only be around special people
I	Interpersonally exploitative
A	Arrogant
L	Lack empathy
M	Must be admired
E	Envious of others

NPD: Lack of empathy

People with NPD may have difficulty in maintaining close relationships because of their lack of empathy and preoccupation with themselves. They may feel entitled to special treatment and have unrealistic expectations of others. They may exploit others for personal gain and may become angry or hostile when their expectations are not met. Additionally, they may struggle with criticism or rejection and may react with narcissistic rage or humiliation.

NPD is often co-occurring with other mental health conditions, such as depression, anxiety, and substance abuse. It may also be comorbid with other personality disorders, particularly Borderline Personality Disorder, as individuals with BPD may exhibit traits of NPD, such as a need for attention and admiration.

Treatment for NPD often involves psychotherapy, particularly psychoanalytic or psychodynamic therapies, which aim to explore the underlying psychological factors contributing to the disorder. Cognitive-behavioral therapy may also be effective in addressing maladaptive beliefs and behaviors associated with NPD. However, individuals with NPD may be resistant to therapy, as they may not recognize the need for treatment or may be unwilling to acknowledge their role in the dysfunction.

Types of Narcissistic Personality Disorder

Grandiose Narcissism: This form is characterized by arrogance, dominance, and a need for admiration. Individuals may appear self-confident and assertive but are often preoccupied with fantasies of success and power. This is the classic version of the narcissist that most people think of when they think of NPD.
Vulnerable Narcissism: Unlike the grandiose type, vulnerable narcissists are sensitive and insecure, often feeling unrecognized and inadequate. They may harbor intense envy and resentment towards others and are prone to feeling victimized.
Malignant Narcissism: Malignant narcissists combine aspects of NPD with antisocial behavior, aggression, and sometimes even sadism. This type can be dangerous, as they lack empathy and remorse and may exploit or manipulate others without concern.
Covert Narcissism: This type manifests as hidden or masked narcissism, where individuals may not outwardly display arrogance but still harbor grandiose fantasies and exhibit a lack of empathy. They often feel misunderstood and neglected, leading to passive-aggressive behavior.
Communal Narcissism: Communal narcissists see themselves as especially caring or altruistic, often emphasizing their contributions to others. However, these acts are driven by a desire for recognition and praise rather than genuine empathy or compassion.

Examples of Public Figures Behaving Narcissistically

Numerous public figures throughout history and in contemporary culture have exhibited behaviors commonly associated with narcissism—such as grandiosity, a need for admiration, lack of empathy, and a sense of entitlement. Below is a list of just some of the notable examples, along with brief descriptions of their narcissistic behaviors.

Historical Figures

Adolf Hitler: Demonstrated extreme grandiosity, cultivated a personality cult, rejected criticism, and showed a complete disregard for the suffering of others. His belief in his own infallibility and ruthless pursuit of power are classic narcissistic traits.
Napoleon Bonaparte: Known for his grandiose self-image, insatiable thirst for power, and willingness to sacrifice countless lives for personal glory.
Joseph Stalin: Exhibited a massive cult of personality, paranoia, and disregard for human suffering, all while glorifying his own image as the nation’s savior.
Alexander the Great: Obsessed with personal glory and his supposed divine lineage, eliminating anyone who opposed him.
Mao Zedong: Built a personality cult, rejected criticism, and sacrificed millions for his vision, showing little empathy or remorse.
King Henry VIII: Ruthless pursuit of power and personal desires, including the execution of wives and rejection of religious authority for personal gain.
Caligula: Roman emperor remembered for self-deification, sadism, and demanding worship.
Jim Jones: Cult leader who manipulated and controlled followers, culminating in the Jonestown mass suicide, reflecting extreme narcissistic exploitation.

Modern and Contemporary Figures

Donald Trump: Frequently cited as a textbook example of narcissistic behavior, including self-promotion, thin-skinned reactions to criticism, need for admiration, and prioritizing personal image over collective goals.
Kanye West (Ye): Known for public outbursts, controversial statements, and self-aggrandizing acts (e.g., comparing himself to Jesus, seeking the spotlight at award shows), as well as a chronic need for validation and attention.
Kim Kardashian: Promotes her wealth and lifestyle, seeks constant attention, and is often involved in controversies that keep her in the public eye.
Madonna: Openly acknowledges her craving for attention and limelight, and has been described as exploitative and demanding in her professional relationships.
Oprah Winfrey: Cited for excessive self-importance and grandiosity, with actions and branding that often center her own persona.
Taylor Swift: Manages her public image with meticulous control, frequently uses her art to highlight her own experiences, and seeks admiration from fans, blending vulnerability with grandiosity.
Jenny McCarthy: Publicly claimed to have scientific proof ignored by authorities, reflecting a sense of special knowledge and self-importance.
Suzanne Somers: Promoted her own health products as miracle cures, despite lacking medical credentials, demonstrating self-aggrandizement and entitlement.
Joan Crawford: Hollywood actress reportedly obsessed with public image, perfectionism, and control, with abusive behavior toward her children as documented in “Mommie Dearest”.

Common Narcissistic Behaviors Observed

Public meltdowns and controversy-seeking actions (e.g., Twitter rants, on-stage interruptions)
Image obsession and status-driven lifestyle choices (luxury displays, curated social media)
Exploitative or transactional relationships (using others for personal gain or status)
Dismissal of criticism and hypersensitivity to perceived slights

These examples illustrate how narcissistic traits can manifest in public life, often amplified by fame and power. While not all of these individuals have a clinical diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, their public behaviors align with many of the disorder’s hallmark traits.

Learn more about narcissism

Narcissism and Cluster B: Evil hiding in plain sight

Covert Narcissism

Narcissism Books

Machiavellianism

Pathocracy Definition: Are we in one?

June 1, 2025

What is Palantir, and why are they building a database about you?

Peter Thiel at Isengaard looking into the Palantir

In the shadows of Washington’s policy debates, a quiet technological revolution is taking shape—one that could fundamentally alter how the federal government collects, analyzes, and potentially weaponizes data on American citizens. At the heart of this transformation sits Palantir Technologies, the secretive data analytics firm co-founded by tech billionaire Peter Thiel that has become the Trump administration’s go-to contractor for an ambitious plan to merge information across federal agencies into what critics fear could become an unprecedented surveillance apparatus.

The push represents the culmination of Thiel’s decades-long influence campaign within both Silicon Valley and right-wing politics, where he has emerged as the “godfather” of a powerful network of tech billionaires who have shifted dramatically rightward. Once the sole major Silicon Valley figure to back Trump in 2016, Thiel has watched his political philosophy spread throughout the tech elite, with former PayPal colleagues like Elon Musk and proteges like Vice President J.D. Vance now occupying the highest levels of government. This so-called “PayPal Mafia“—a group of billionaires with overlapping business interests and shared anti-regulatory fervor—has become integral to the second Trump administration, with at least three former Palantir employees now working within Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Since Trump’s March executive order calling for expanded data sharing across government agencies, Palantir has quietly embedded itself deeper into the federal bureaucracy than ever before. The company has secured over $113 million in new federal contracts and expanded its flagship Foundry platform into at least four major agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, and most recently, the Internal Revenue Service. This technological infrastructure could enable the administration to create detailed digital portraits of Americans by combining bank records, medical claims, student debt information, and disability status—all accessible through a single, searchable database.

The expansion reflects Thiel’s long-standing belief that “freedom and democracy are not compatible,” a philosophy that has guided his investments and political activities for over a decade. While Thiel maintains no official government position, he has direct access to the president, vice president, and virtually every tech figure in Trump’s inner circle, recently hosting an inauguration party at his Washington mansion for the “crème de la crème of the tech world.” As one journalist noted during the 2024 Republican National Convention, “It’s Peter Thiel’s party now”—a sentiment validated by the presence of his handpicked protege as vice president and his former colleagues running key government efficiency initiatives.

But the expansion has also triggered alarm bells within Palantir itself, where current and former employees worry about their company becoming the public face of Trump’s political agenda. Thirteen former employees recently signed a public letter urging the company to reconsider its role, while at least one strategist has resigned over the expanded ICE contracts, calling the work a “red line” she won’t cross.

As privacy advocates file lawsuits and Democratic lawmakers sound warnings about potential abuse, Palantir finds itself at the center of a national debate about the balance between government efficiency and civil liberties. To understand how we arrived at this moment—and what it might mean for American privacy—we need to examine the company behind the technology and the controversial figures who built it.

What is Palantir?

And once again I turned to Perplexity Labs to help me tell the story of Palantir in an interactive way. I am a little bit addicted to this new featureset — it is miraculous. It can build incredibly sophisticated things in a very short amount of time. To view the presentation, simply click the image below to launch it in a new Lightbox window:

And once again, the methodology and the full response are below.

May 31, 2025

Easy Way to Save Social Security: Lift the salary cap

this Social Security tax rates by income level illustrates how regressive this tax system truly is

Social Security stands at a crossroads. With the trust fund set to run dry by 2033, millions of Americans face the prospect of automatic 21% benefit cuts unless Congress acts decisively. Yet while politicians debate painful across-the-board sacrifices, a targeted solution sits in plain sight: we could easily save social security by lifting the salary cap that currently shields high earners from paying Social Security taxes on income above $176,100.

By requiring wealthy Americans to pay the same tax rate on their entire income that middle-class families already do, we could generate hundreds of billions in new revenue and close up to 80% of the program’s funding gap—without touching benefits or raising taxes on 98% of workers. The math is clear, the solution is fair, and the time for action is now.

I’ve been playing with the new Perplexity Labs features — just one example of May’s action-packed AI announcement extravaganza — and asked it to come up with a “persuasive presentation” for illustrating how easily Social Security could be funded if we raise the salary cap for paying into it, allowing high-earning individuals to pay their fair share. I was incredibly impressed with what it came up with. I’ve embedded it below — just click on the image to launch the presentation in lightbox mode:

Here’s the prompt:

can you create a persuasive presentation that shows how social security could be kept solvent if we raise the salary cap at which people stop paying in to the system? dig in to all the financials of the current system, and explain how it is funded, to illustrate this

And here’s the full result output:

May 24, 2025

What is cosmism ideology?

Russian cosmism ideology still alive in Silicon Valley

What is cosmism: The Russian Philosophy Secretly Driving Silicon Valley’s Wildest Dreams

When Elon Musk talks about making humanity a “multiplanetary species” or when tech billionaires pour millions into defeating death itself, they’re not just indulging sci-fi fantasies. They’re channeling a century-old Russian philosophy that once inspired Soviet cosmonauts—and now quietly shapes Silicon Valley‘s most ambitious projects.

From Orthodox Monks to Space Dreams

The story begins in 1890s Russia with Nikolai Fyodorov, an Orthodox Christian librarian with an audacious idea: humanity’s ultimate purpose was to use science to resurrect every person who had ever died and then expand into the cosmos. This wasn’t just philosophical speculation—Fyodorov believed technology could literally overcome death and fulfill what he called humanity’s “Common Task.”

His followers, known as cosmists, took these ideas in fascinating directions. Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, a schoolteacher who became the father of astronautics, famously declared that “Earth is the cradle of humanity, but one cannot remain in the cradle forever.” Meanwhile, geochemist Vladimir Vernadsky envisioned human intelligence merging with technology to create a planetary “sphere of mind”—a concept that would later influence everything from Soviet planning to modern AI development.

What made cosmism unique was its blend of mystical spirituality and hardcore science. These weren’t just dreamers; they were serious researchers who saw technological progress as a path to spiritual transcendence.

The Soviet Space Race’s Secret Sauce

When the Bolsheviks took power, cosmist ideas found an unexpected home in communist ideology. Both movements shared a belief in radically remaking humanity and conquering natural limitations. The results were striking:

Lenin’s Mummy: When Vladimir Lenin died in 1924, the decision to preserve his body wasn’t just political theater. Leonid Krasin, who oversaw the mummification, was deeply influenced by Fyodorov’s resurrection theories. Lenin’s tomb became a symbol of faith that socialist science would eventually conquer death itself.

May 21, 2025

The “Big, Beautiful Bill” that Republicans don’t want you to see

The 2025 Republican budget bill will add $4.6 trillion to the deficit

There’s a lot of noise out there drowning out an important signal most Americans should probably know about (yes, even MAGA! Perhaps especially MAGA given the disproportionate effects this Republican budget bill is likely to have on their red state communities). That is by design — retired entrepreneur Bill Southworth refers to it as “narrative warfare” in the Russian tradition; Steve Bannon calls it “flooding the zone with shit;” and psychologists simply call it narcissistic personality disorder. By whatever name, today’s political information ecosystem is being manipulated to obscure the actual business of government, because the culture wars are staggeringly popular while the actual GOP agenda goes over like a lead balloon in terms of popular opinion.

So much so that the House Rules Committee plans to take up the “big, beautiful bill” for consideration, recently passed out of the Budget Committee on late Sunday night, at 1:00am in the morning. Nothing says pride like a dead of night hearing!

The Medicaid cuts that are in the Republican budget bill are especially toxic to the GOP — reportedly 75% of Americans on both sides of the aisle oppose the deep cuts to critical services that the right-wing seems hell-bent on enacting despite better ways to extract savings, like preventing private insurers from “upcoding” care to make it more expensive.

The reckless cuts to public services are meant to offset the cost of what Republicans and their billionaire donors want on the other side of the ledger: the extension of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts for their corporate donors and wealthiest Americans. Nevermind, apparently, that these tax cuts are primarily responsible (along with the George W. Bush tax cuts of the early 2000s) for the increasing debt ratio that the GOP falls all over themselves to theatrically complain about — while single-handedly and relentlessly continuing to make it worse.