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.
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.
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.
I was lucky enough to be one of the first professional tech bloggers, still work in digital media, and avidly keep up with the technology sector. Back in the proverbial day I covered the rise of social media from the launches and earliest days of Facebook (aka Meta), Twitter (aka X), YouTube, and a host of graveyard denizens from Friendster to MySpace (anyone remember tribe.net?!). I lived and worked in Silicon Valley for a time and became disillusioned with much of the ideology while remaining avidly interested in the pockets still driven by the idea of democratizing access to information.
Now I love tinkering with tools (especially AI, automation, and data analysis) as well as writing personal and experimental stuff on my blog(s). I’m also excited about the rise of decentralized social media projects like Bluesky, Mastodon, and other platforms meant to challenge surveillance capitalism and corporate dominance of the public square.
I’ve also been a political activist since my college years, and especially since 2015 have been pretty intensely into politics — which, among many other things, has led to an ongoing protracted “re-factoring” of what I thought I knew about American history.
An academic by temperament, I research various topics at depth as a “serious amateur.” For the past 9+ years I’ve been studying fascism, authoritarianism, narcissism, cults, disinformation, conspiracy theories, dark money, and Christian nationalism and their tributaries — many of which share intersection points. My love of information management keeps me juggling multiple projects and exploring the connections between topics worth taking a closer look at; I’m an incorrigible generalist in a specialists’ world, while craving meaningful depth into each subject.
Inspiration
I am motivated by some of the old school values of the internet — towards openness, democratization of information, shining light into dark spaces, giving a voice to the people beyond the gatekeepers of major media, and more. It’s lost a fair amount of that spirit now in the corporate scrum to own its vast landscapes, but it can still be found here and there — and I hope to offer another little output on the stormy seas for those who wander and wish to not feel lost.
I like to experiment and make new things as constantly as I can, which right now involves a lot of AI tools, including ChatGPT, Midjourney, Perplexity, NotebookLM, Leonardo.ai, Opus Clip, Descript, Replicate, Flux, Ideogram, RunwayML, Sora, minimax, Napkin AI, Suno V4, and others. It feels like the most exciting thing since the dawning of the internet age itself.
Ethics
I don’t take any sponsorship money for this site, because I’m not interested in tailoring my point of view towards whatever maximizes profit. In part because commerce content is my day job, I do monetize (for a pittance) through affiliate links to books — the kind of product I can get behind recommending strongly to people. It also helps me understand what my audience is most interested in, and allows me to track what people find compelling enough to take action on. If you click on my book links and end up ordering something from Amazon or bookshop, it helps me understand how better to interest and serve this audience. So please feel free to do so, but not obligated.
Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that occur when arguments are constructed or evaluated. They are deceptive and misleading, often leading to false or weak conclusions. Recognizing and avoiding logical fallacies is essential for critical thinking and effective communication.
These flaws in rhetorical logic can be observed aplenty in modern political and civil discourse. They are among the easiest types of argument to dispel, because their basic type has been discredited and compiled together with other discarded forms of rational persuasion, to make sure that ensuing generations don’t fall for the same tired old unethical ideas.
By understanding and identifying these common logical fallacies, individuals can sharpen their critical thinking skills and engage in more productive, rational discussions. Recognizing fallacies also helps avoid being swayed by deceptive or unsound arguments — which abound in increasing volume thanks to the prevalence of misinformation, disinformation, and disingenuous forms of motivated reasoning.
In an age of information overload, critical thinking has never been more essential. Whether you’re analyzing a news story, debating with friends, or writing a persuasive essay, your ability to recognize and avoid faulty reasoning can be the difference between clarity and confusion, persuasion and propaganda. At the heart of this effort lies this powerful concept of logical fallacies.
Types of logical fallacies
Logical fallacies fall into one of two main clusters:
Formal Fallacies
Formal fallacies occur when there’s a flaw in the logical structure of an argument, rendering the conclusion invalid—even if the premises are true. Think of formal fallacies as broken logic circuits: they don’t connect, even if the parts look sound.
Example:
If it’s raining, the ground is wet. The ground is wet, therefore it must be raining. (This is a classic fallacy known as affirming the consequent.)
Informal Fallacies
Informal fallacies, on the other hand, relate to the content of the argument rather than its structure. These occur when the premises don’t adequately support the conclusion, even if the structure appears valid.
These informal logical fallacies are more common in everyday conversation and rhetoric. Informal fallacies usually stem from misused language, assumptions, or appeals to emotion rather than flawed logic alone. They’re trickier to spot because they often feel intuitive or persuasive.
Example:
Everyone’s doing it, so it must be right. (This is the bandwagon fallacy—popular doesn’t mean correct.)
Within each of these two clusters is a number of different logical fallacies, each with its own pitfalls. Here are a few examples:
Ad Hominem: This fallacy attacks the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. For instance, dismissing someone’s opinion on climate change because they’re not a scientist is an ad hominem fallacy.
Straw Man: This involves misrepresenting an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. If someone argues for better healthcare and is accused of wanting “socialized medicine,” that’s a straw man.
Appeal to Authority: This fallacy relies on the opinion of an “expert” who may not actually be qualified in the relevant field. Just because a celebrity endorses a product doesn’t mean it’s effective.
False Dichotomy: This fallacy presents only two options when, in fact, more exist. For example, stating that “you’re either with us or against us” oversimplifies complex issues.
Slippery Slope: This fallacy argues that a single action will inevitably lead to a series of negative events, without providing evidence for such a chain reaction.
Circular Reasoning: In this fallacy, the conclusion is used as a premise, creating a loop that lacks substantive proof. Saying “I’m trustworthy because I say I am” is an example.
Hasty Generalization: This involves making a broad claim based on insufficient evidence. For instance, meeting two rude people from a city and concluding that everyone from that city is rude is a hasty generalization.
Understanding logical fallacies equips you to dissect arguments critically, making you a more informed participant in discussions. It’s a skill that’s invaluable in both professional and personal settings. Arm yourself with knowledge about this list of logical fallacies:
Fallacy
Definition
Example
Ad Hominem
Attacking the person instead of addressing their argument
“You can’t trust his economic policy ideas. He’s been divorced three times!”
Appeal to Authority
Using an authority’s opinion as definitive proof without addressing the argument itself
“Dr. Smith has a PhD, so her view on climate change must be correct.”
Appeal to Emotion
Manipulating emotions instead of using valid reasoning
“Think of the children who will suffer if you don’t support this policy!”
Appeal to Nature
Arguing that because something is natural, it is good, valid, or justified
“Herbal supplements are better than medication because they’re natural.”
Appeal to Tradition
Arguing that something is right because it’s been done that way for a long time
“We’ve always had this company policy, so we shouldn’t change it.”
Bandwagon Fallacy
Appealing to popularity as evidence of truth
“Everyone is buying this product, so it must be good.”
Begging the Question
Circular reasoning where the conclusion is included in the premise
“The Bible is true because it’s the word of God, and we know it’s the word of God because the Bible says so.”
Black-and-White Fallacy
Presenting only two options when more exist
“Either we cut the entire program, or we’ll go bankrupt.”
Cherry Picking
Selectively using data that supports your position while ignoring contradictory evidence
“Global warming can’t be real because it snowed last winter.”
Correlation vs. Causation
Assuming that because two events occur together, one caused the other
“Ice cream sales and drowning deaths both increase in summer, so ice cream causes drowning.”
Equivocation
Using a word with more than one meaning in a misleading way
“Evolution is just a theory, so it shouldn’t be taught as fact.” (Equivocating between scientific theory and casual speculation)
Fallacy of Composition
Inferring that something is true of the whole because it’s true of a part
“This cell is invisible to the naked eye, so the whole animal must be invisible too.”
Fallacy of Division
Inferring that something is true of the parts because it’s true of the whole
“The university has an excellent reputation, so every professor there must be excellent.”
Genetic Fallacy
Evaluating an argument based on its origins rather than its merits
“That idea came from a socialist country, so it must be bad.”
Hasty Generalization
Drawing a general conclusion from a sample that is too small or biased
“I had two bad meals at restaurants in Italy, so Italian cuisine is terrible.”
Middle Ground Fallacy
Assuming that a compromise between two extremes must be correct
“Some people say the Earth is flat, others say it’s round. The truth must be that it’s somewhat flat and somewhat round.”
No True Scotsman
Redefining terms to exclude counterexamples
“No true environmentalist would drive an SUV.” When shown an environmentalist who drives an SUV: “Well, they’re not a true environmentalist then.”
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Assuming that because B followed A, A caused B
“I wore my lucky socks and we won the game, so my socks caused our victory.”
Red Herring
Introducing an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue
“Why worry about environmental problems when there are so many people who can’t find jobs?”
Slippery Slope
Arguing that a small first step will inevitably lead to extreme consequences
“If we allow same-sex marriage, next people will want to marry their pets!”
Straw Man
Misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack
“Vegetarians say we should eat no meat at all and let farmers go out of business.” (When they actually argue for reduced meat consumption)
Texas Sharpshooter
Cherry-picking data clusters to fit a pattern
“Look at these cancer cases clustered in this neighborhood – it must be caused by the power lines!” (While ignoring similar neighborhoods with power lines but no cancer clusters)
Tu Quoque
Avoiding criticism by turning it back on the accuser
“You say I should quit smoking, but you used to smoke too!”
Burden of Proof
Claiming something is true while putting the burden to disprove it on others
“I believe in ghosts. Prove to me that they don’t exist.”
How to identify logical fallacies
Spotting fallacies takes practice, but these tips can help sharpen your skills:
Slow down and dissect the argument. Look at the premises and conclusion—do they logically connect?
Watch for emotional appeals. If an argument relies more on stirring feelings than presenting evidence, be cautious.
Ask: what’s being left out? Many fallacies omit key context or alternate explanations.
Compare to real-world examples. Would the logic hold up elsewhere?
Everyday example: “If we allow students to redo assignments, next they’ll expect to retake tests, and eventually no deadlines will matter at all.” — This is a slippery slope fallacy. One action doesn’t necessarily lead to an extreme outcome.
Why avoiding logical fallacies matters
Logical fallacies don’t just weaken arguments—they erode trust, obscure truth, and inflame discourse. Here’s why learning to avoid them is critical:
In personal arguments: Fallacies can escalate tension and derail meaningful conversation.
In academic writing: Sound reasoning is the backbone of scholarship; fallacies undermine credibility.
In public discourse and media: Propaganda and misinformation often rely on fallacious reasoning to manipulate opinion. Recognizing these tactics is key to resisting them.
In a world where bad actors exploit fallacies for influence and profit, being fallacy-literate is a form of intellectual self-defense.
The terse portmanteus are blunt and blocky, like a brutalist architecture vocabulary. Their simplicity indicates appeal to the small-minded masses for easily digested pablum.
Table of Contents
What is Newspeak?
Newspeak is a fictional language created by George Orwell for his dystopian novel 1984, published in 1949. The language serves as an essential tool for the oppressive regime, known as The Party, to control and manipulate the population of Oceania. Newspeak is intentionally designed to restrict the range of thought, eliminate words that convey dissent or rebellion, and enforce political orthodoxy. The language accomplishes this by reducing the complexity of Newspeak vocabulary and grammar, condensing words into simplified forms, and eliminating synonyms and antonyms. The Party aims to eliminate the potential for subversive thoughts by ensuring that the language itself lacks the necessary words and expressions to articulate them.
In Orwell’s world, Newspeak works hand in hand with the concept of “doublethink,” which requires individuals to accept contradictory beliefs simultaneously. This manipulation of language and thought is central to maintaining the Party’s power and control over the populace. Newspeak translation is often the exact opposite of the meaning of the words said.
Newspeak’s ultimate goal is to render dissent and rebellion impossible by making the very thoughts of these actions linguistically unexpressable. As a result, Newspeak serves as a chilling representation of how language can be weaponized to restrict personal freedoms, suppress independent thought, and perpetuate an authoritarian regime.
Newspeak Rises Again
Those boots ring out again, from Belarus to Hungary to the United States. There are book burnings and the defunding of libraries in multiple states. From Ron DeSantis to Trumpian anti-intellectualism to the rampant proliferation of conspiracy theories, It’s a good time to brush up on the brutalism still actively struggling to take hold.
The following is a list of all Newspeak words from 1984.
Newspeak 1984 Dictionary
Newspeak term
Definition
ante
The prefix that replaces before
artsem
Artificial insemination
bb
Big Brother
bellyfeel
The blind, enthusiastic acceptance of an idea
blackwhite
To accept whatever one is told, regardless of the facts. In the novel, it is described as “…to say that black is white when [the Party says so]” and “…to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary”.
crimestop
To rid oneself of unorthodox thoughts that go against Ingsoc’s ideology
crimethink
Thoughts and concepts that go against Ingsoc, frequently referred to by the standard English “thoughtcrime”, such as liberty, equality, and privacy, and also the criminal act of holding such thoughts
dayorder
Order of the day
dep
Department
doubleplusgood
The word that replaced Oldspeak words meaning “superlatively good”, such as excellent, fabulous, and fantastic
doubleplusungood
The word that replaced Oldspeak words meaning “superlatively bad”, such as terrible and horrible
doublethink
The act of simultaneously believing two, mutually contradictory ideas
duckspeak
Automatic, vocal support of political orthodoxies
facecrime
A facial expression which reveals that one has committed thoughtcrime
Ficdep
The Ministry of Truth’s Fiction Department
free
The absence and the lack of something. “Intellectually free” and “politically free” have been replaced by crimethinkful.
–ful
The suffix for forming an adjective
fullwise
The word that replaces words such as fully, completely, and totally
goodthink
A synonym for “political orthodoxy” and “a politically orthodox thought” as defined by the Party
goodsex
Sexual intercourse only for procreation, without any physical pleasure on the part of the woman, and strictly within marriage
goodwise
The word that replaced well as an adverb
Ingsoc
The English Socialist Party (i.e. The Party)
joycamp
Labour camp
malquoted
Inaccurate representations of the words of Big Brother and of the Party
Miniluv
The Ministry of Love, where the secret police interrogate and torture the enemies of Oceania (torture and brainwashing)
Minipax
The Ministry of Peace, who wage war for Oceania
Minitrue
The Ministry of Truth, who manufacture consent by way of lies, propaganda, and distorted historical records, while supplying the proles (proletariat) with synthetic culture and entertainment
Miniplenty
The Ministry of Plenty, who keep the population in continual economic hardship (starvation and rationing)
Oldspeak
Standard English
oldthink
Ideas from the time before the Party’s revolution, such as objectivity and rationalism
ownlife
A person’s anti-social tendency to enjoy solitude and individualism
plusgood
The word that replaced Oldspeak words meaning “very good”, such as great
plusungood
The word that replaced “very bad”
Pornosec
The pornography production section (Porno sector) of the Ministry of Truth’s Fiction Department
prolefeed
Popular culture for entertaining Oceania’s working class
Recdep
The Ministry of Truth’s Records Department, where Winston Smith rewrites historical records so they conform to the Party’s agenda
rectify
The Ministry of Truth’s euphemism for manipulating a historical record
ref
To refer (to someone or something)
sec
Sector
sexcrime
A sexual immorality, such as fornication, adultery, oral sex, and homosexuality; any sex act that deviates from Party directives to use sex only for procreation
speakwrite
A machine that transcribes speech into text
Teledep
The Ministry of Truth’s Telecommunications Department
telescreen
A two-way television set with which the Party spy upon Oceania’s population
thinkpol
The Thought Police, the secret police force of Oceania’s government
unperson
An executed person whose existence is erased from history and memory
upsub
An upwards submission to higher authority
–wise
The only suffix for forming an adverb
Newspeak Dictionary Quiz
Claude Artifacts made this in one prompt. Imagine this power to generate study aids for a wide variety of students at all levels. If I had had this as a kid…
Newspeak Quiz: Test Your Ingsoc Vocabulary
Welcome to the interactive Newspeak quiz! This quiz will help you learn the terminology of Oceania’s official language through fun repetition. Demonstrate your goodthink by mastering these terms – your commitment to linguistic purity will surely be recognized by the Party.
Beginner
Intermediate
Advanced
Term → Definition
Definition → Term
Score: 0/0
Quiz Complete!
Your final score: 0/0
Review Your Answers
Creation of New Words in Newspeak
One of the most fascinating and insidious aspects of Newspeak is the methodical creation of new words. This process is not only about inventing new terms but also about streamlining and simplifying the language to ensure it serves the purposes of the Party. Here’s how this process works:
1. Compounding Words
In Newspeak, many new words are created by combining existing ones. This technique, known as compounding, helps to streamline communication by reducing longer phrases into single, concise terms. For example:
Goodthink: A compound of “good” and “think,” meaning orthodox thought, or thoughts that align with Party doctrine.
Oldthink: A combination of “old” and “think,” referring to thoughts that are based on outdated, pre-revolutionary beliefs and values.
By merging words in this manner, Newspeak eliminates the need for descriptive phrases, thereby simplifying language and controlling thought.
2. Prefixes and Suffixes
Newspeak employs prefixes and suffixes to create new words and alter the meanings of existing ones. This method ensures that language remains efficient and devoid of any unnecessary complexity. Some common prefixes and suffixes include:
Un-: This prefix is used to form the negative of any word, thereby eliminating the need for antonyms. For example, “unhappy” replaces “sad.”
Plus- and Doubleplus-: These prefixes intensify the meaning of words. “Plusgood” means very good, while “doubleplusgood” means excellent or extremely good.
-wise: This suffix is used to form adverbs. For instance, “speedwise” means quickly.
Through these prefixes and suffixes, Newspeak ensures that language remains consistent and simplified, reinforcing the Party’s control over thought.
3. Simplification of Grammar
The creation of new words in Newspeak is also characterized by the simplification of grammar. Irregular verbs and noun forms are abolished, making all words conform to a delimited list of regular patterns. For example:
Think: In Newspeak, the past tense of “think” would simply be “thinked,” and the past participle would also be “thinked,” eliminating irregular forms like “thought.”
Knife: Plural forms are regularized, so “knife” becomes “knifes” instead of “knives.”
This grammatical regularization reduces the cognitive load required to learn and use the language, further limiting the scope for complex or critical thought.
4. Abolition of Synonyms and Antonyms
Newspeak systematically removes synonyms and antonyms to narrow the range of meaning, engendering black and white thinking. Each concept is reduced to a single, unambiguous word, eliminating nuances and shades of meaning:
Good: The word “good” stands alone without synonyms like “excellent,” “great,” or “superb.” Intensifiers like “plus-” and “doubleplus-” are used instead.
Bad: Instead of having a separate word like “bad,” Newspeak uses “ungood.” This not only simplifies vocabulary but also imposes a binary way of thinking.
By removing synonyms and antonyms, Newspeak reduces the complexity of language, ensuring that only Party-approved ideas can be easily communicated.
5. Creation of Euphemisms
In Newspeak, euphemisms are crafted to mask the true nature of unpleasant or controversial realities, aligning language with Party propaganda. For instance:
Joycamp: A euphemism for forced labor camps, designed to make the concept seem more palatable and less threatening.
Minipax: Short for the Ministry of Peace, which actually oversees war. The euphemistic name helps to disguise its true function.
These euphemisms help to distort reality, making it easier for the Party to maintain control over the population’s perceptions and beliefs.
Pathocracy is a relatively lesser-known concept in political science and psychology, which refers to a system of government in which individuals with personality disorders, particularly those who exhibit psychopathic, narcissistic, and similar traits (i.e. the “evil of Cluster B“), hold significant power.
Dave Karpf absolutely shreds Balaji Srinivasan’s book “The Network State” as the ravings of a rich delusional megalomaniac preening to his Silicon Valley peers who fancy themselves in Galt’s Gulch. These guys appear almost completely ignorant about the actual functions of a nation-state. If they want to declare themselves sovereign and secede from the United States, we ought to cut their sewage, water, and electric supply to give them a dose of the factual reality they so disdain.
What happens to these guys’ nerdy little crypto-enclaves when a much larger power (say, Russia…) decides to invade them and take their enormous stores of value they’ve bragged about removing from state protection? Especially after they’ve just ushered in the destruction of the post-WWII global order in which it was generally frowned upon for giant nations to gobble up their neighbors just because they could? 🤔
Moreover, what if that invader nation is simply the United States itself, once an administration comes to power that decides it is tired of dealing with its collection of ornery Confederate enclaves? Some might knuckle under peacefully, but there might also be some Waco events — except this time, with a lethal military strike justified by a president completely immune from prosecution and beyond the power of legislative or judicial oversight.
Please go away
What is stopping these guys from starting their start-up utopias right now? They are squintillionaires and could certainly buy land and start a community organized around whatever value system they want to run up the flagpole (arguably that seems to be the idea behind California Forever). Why isn’t Peter Thiel seasteading already and leaving us the fuck alone? Why does California Forever take Forever to operationalize when the entire premise of these techbro elites for decades has been that government (and specifically democracy) is too slow and they could totally build everything much faster and better if only given the chance?
Kamala Harris should be proud of the race she ran, an almost flawless sprint through the tape at a scant 108 days’ worth of time to make her pitch to the American voters — many of whom complained that they did not know her very well as a candidate.
Disinformation continued relentlessly throughout the race — even doubling down when called out.
Not a Mandate
Trump’s lead keeps dropping as California and other western states finish counting their ballots after what seems like an eternity — mostly due to CA accepting ballots postmarked by election day, adding 7 days to the final count no matter what.
He dropped below 50% and never recovered — meaning that more people voted against him than voted for him.
As of the final count, his margin dropped below 1.5% — the 4th largest margin in any popular vote win in the past 100 years.
Vote Predictors
Education
Media Sources
Urban vs. Rural
I haven’t had the energy to give to this piece and I just learned about this feature of Google’s NotebookLM that can generate a podcast between 2 hosts, from your uploaded assets. I tested it out with a combined corpus of some of my own thoughts and some of the resources I found insightful.
What NotebookLM came up with was uncannily compelling. It would be something I would consider useful, particularly as a tool for initiating some of those folks less steeped in politics as I am. So I’m posting it here, in part as a signpost regarding where we’re heading — whether we like it or not.
Douglas Rushkoff’s “Survival of the Richest: Escape Fantasies of the Tech Billionaires” delves into the unsettling strategies of the ultra-wealthy broligarchs as they prepare for global catastrophes of their own making. Drawing from personal encounters with tech magnates, Rushkoff unveils a mindset fixated on personal survival over collective well-being running rampant in Silicon Valley.
The Mindset
At the heart of Rushkoff’s critique is “The Mindset,” a belief system among tech billionaires from Peter Thiel to Elon Musk and beyond characterized by:
Extreme Wealth and Privilege: Leveraging vast resources to insulate themselves from societal collapse.
Escape Over Prevention: Prioritizing personal exit strategies rather than addressing systemic issues.
Technological Transcendence: Aiming to surpass human limitations through advanced technologies.
This worldview drives investments in elaborate escape plans, sidelining efforts to resolve the crises they anticipate. It is almost as if they are in a low-key doomsday cult, albeit one that lacks a singular leader and isn’t holed up in a compound (…yet).
The Event
The term “The Event” encapsulates potential disasters such as environmental collapse — particularly from climate change, social unrest, pandemics, and cyberattacks. They believe we should expect more bitter divisiveness, more covid-19s, and more hostile hacking in our future. The elite perceive these scenarios as unavoidable, focusing on personal survival rather than prevention.
Escape Strategies
Rushkoff examines the lengths to which the ultra-rich go to secure their futures, including:
Luxury Bunkers: Constructing fortified shelters to withstand various apocalyptic events.
These measures reflect a desire to detach from societal responsibilities and the broader human community.
The Insulation Equation
Rushkoff introduces the “insulation equation,” illustrating how billionaires calculate the wealth required to shield themselves from the fallout of their own actions. This cycle perpetuates reckless behavior and further wealth accumulation, exacerbating the very problems they seek to escape.
Critique of Capitalism and Technology
The book critiques the symbiotic relationship between capitalism and technology, highlighting:
Exponential Growth Pursuit: An obsession with endless expansion at any cost.
Shareholder Primacy: Prioritizing investor returns over societal or environmental considerations.
Erosion of Empathy: A growing disconnect between the wealthy and the rest of society.
Resource Exploitation: Reducing nature and human complexity to mere commodities.
Rushkoff argues that this dynamic fosters a dystopian future dominated by private technologies and monopolistic control — a very authoritarian direction.
Historical Context
Positioning today’s tech elites within a historical framework, Rushkoff contends they are not pioneers but continuations of past power structures that enriched themselves at others’ expense. Their perceived uniqueness is, in reality, a repetition of historical patterns, including colonialism.
Proposed Solutions
While primarily a critique, Rushkoff offers some ideas for pathways to counteract “The Mindset”:
Rejecting Doom’s Inevitability: Embracing proactive solutions over fatalistic resignation.
Supporting Local Economies: Fostering community resilience through localized commerce.
Advocating Anti-Monopoly Laws: Challenging corporate dominance to promote fair competition.
Redefining Identity: Moving beyond algorithmic categorizations to embrace human complexity.
Some critics argue these suggestions may not fully address the scale of the issues presented — but it’s much easier to be a critic than to come up with these solutions. We may not know all the answers yet as to how to curb these alarming trends, but I think Rushkoff’s point is well taken that we ought to involve ourselves in at least starting to work out the solutions with some urgency.
Ultimately, “Survival of the Richest” serves as a stark examination of the escapist fantasies of the tech elite, and an eye-opening look behind the curtains of the Great Oz’s who dot our landscape today. These wealthy tech elites have promised the moon (or Mars) without knowing whether they could really deliver — and all the while planning a Plan B in case their hare-brained schemes went belly-up. They are okay with sacrificing the vast majority of the people on the planet, as long as their underground bunkers (or better yet, private islands) are there for them.
By exposing their self-serving strategies, Rushkoff urges a shift from individualistic survivalism to collective action in tackling the many global challenges that face us today. We would be wise to heed the call and gather our tribes early and often.
The Psychology of Sadism: Understanding the Dark Side of Human Nature
In the pantheon of human psychological traits, few are as unsettling – yet fascinating – as sadism. While the term often conjures images of extreme criminal behavior or medieval torture chambers, the reality is both more nuanced and more pervasive than most people realize. Let’s dive deep into the psychological architecture of sadism and explore what modern science tells us about this disturbing aspect of human nature.
The Spectrum of Sadistic Behavior
At its core, sadism represents the capacity to derive pleasure from others’ suffering. But like many psychological phenomena, it exists on a spectrum rather than as a binary trait. On one end, we find what researchers call “everyday sadism” – those small cruel behaviors that pepper ordinary life, like enjoying watching fail videos or taking pleasure in office politics gone wrong. On the other end lies clinical sadism, the domain of true predators and those who commit acts of serious violence.
This spectrum theory helps explain why perfectly “normal” people might engage in behaviors like internet trolling or workplace bullying. These acts represent subclinical manifestations of sadistic tendencies that, while concerning, fall well short of criminal behavior.
The Dark Tetrad: A Family of Malevolent Traits
Sadism doesn’t exist in isolation. It’s part of what psychologists call the Dark Tetrad – a cluster of interconnected traits including narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy (it’s the newest band member of the artist formerly known as the Dark Triad). Think of these as the four horsemen of malevolent personality, each bringing its own flavor of interpersonal toxicity to the table.
What makes sadism unique within this dark constellation? Unlike its siblings, sadism involves a willingness to incur personal costs just to harm others. A narcissist might hurt you to get ahead, but a sadist will hurt you simply because it feels good – even if it means sacrificing their own resources or social standing in the process.
The Anatomy of a Sadistic Personality
Modern psychological research has identified three key components of sadistic personality:
Physical violence isn’t just tolerated – it’s enjoyed. Whether participating in or merely witnessing violent acts, sadistic individuals experience positive emotions where others would feel revulsion.
Verbal sadism manifests as a love of cruel humor, cutting remarks, and psychological warfare. These individuals don’t just win arguments; they savor their opponent’s emotional pain.
Violent media consumption goes beyond normal entertainment preferences. Sadistic individuals actively seek out graphic content and experience genuine pleasure from witnessing violence, even in fictional contexts.
The Neuroscience of Cruelty
Recent neurobiological research has begun to unlock the physical basis of sadistic behavior. Studies show that sadistic individuals often display blunted startle responses similar to those seen in psychopaths. This suggests a fundamental difference in how their brains process threats and emotional stimuli.
Even more intriguingly, brain imaging studies have revealed potential alterations in regions associated with empathy and emotion processing. It’s as if the neural machinery normally responsible for sharing others’ pain has been rewired to experience it as pleasure instead.
Measuring the Unmeasurable
How do you quantify something as complex as sadistic tendencies? Researchers have developed several innovative approaches:
The Comprehensive Assessment of Sadistic Tendencies (CAST) provides a standardized way to measure sadistic traits across populations.
Behavioral experiments, including the infamous “bug-grinding study,” create controlled environments where sadistic tendencies can be observed in action.
Advanced neuroimaging techniques allow researchers to watch the sadistic brain in real-time, offering unprecedented insights into the neural correlates of cruel behavior.
Why This Matters
Understanding sadism isn’t just an academic exercise. It has profound implications for:
Improving workplace dynamics by recognizing and addressing subtle forms of sadistic behavior
Looking Forward
As our understanding of sadism continues to evolve, we’re faced with uncomfortable questions about human nature. Is the capacity for sadistic pleasure a bug or a feature of our psychological makeup? Can we develop effective interventions to curb sadistic tendencies? How do we balance the need to understand sadism with the risk of normalizing it?
These questions don’t have easy answers, but they’re crucial to address as we work toward creating a society that can recognize, understand, and ultimately minimize the expression of sadistic behavior.
The study of sadism reminds us that the darker aspects of human nature deserve neither glorification nor denial, but rather careful, clear-eyed examination. Only by understanding the psychology of cruelty can we hope to build a world with less of it.
For a deeper dive into related topics in psychology and human behavior (and more), explore more articles here on Doctor Paradox.
What is fascism? Fascism is a far-right political ideology that emerged in the early 20th century, primarily in Italy under Benito Mussolini. It advocates for a centralized, authoritarian government, often led by a dictatorial figure, and places a strong emphasis on nationalism and, sometimes, racial purity. Fascism rejects liberal democracy, socialism, and communism, instead promoting a form of radical authoritarian ultranationalism. It often involves the suppression of dissent, the glorification of war and violence, and the demonization of perceived enemies, whether they be internal or external.
Historical context of fascism
Fascism gained prominence in the aftermath of World War I, a period marked by social upheaval, economic instability, and a crisis of traditional values. Mussolini’s Italy was the birthplace of fascism, but the ideology found its most extreme and devastating expression in Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler. The Holocaust, the invasion of multiple countries, and the atrocities committed during World War II, including genocide, are dark chapters directly associated with fascist ideology. After the war, fascism was discredited but not eradicated. Various forms of neo-fascism, far-right, and alt-right ideologies have emerged in different parts of the world, although they often avoid the label of “fascism” due to its historical baggage.
Psychology of adherents
Understanding the psychology of those who adhere to fascist ideologies can be challenging but is crucial for a comprehensive view. Several factors contribute to the appeal of fascism:
Social Identity: People often gravitate towards ideologies that offer a strong sense of community and identity. Fascism’s emphasis on nationalism and often ethnocentrism can be attractive to those feeling alienated or marginalized.
Economic Insecurity: Fascism often gains traction during times of economic uncertainty. The promise of stability and prosperity can be enticing to those who feel left behind by other political systems.
Fear and Prejudice: Fascist ideologies often exploit existing prejudices, whether they be racial (like white nationalism), religious (like Christian nationalism), or otherwise, to create an “us versus them” mentality.
Desire for Order: The authoritarian nature of fascism can appeal to those who value social order and are willing to trade off democratic freedoms for promised or perceived safety and stability.
Charismatic Leadership: Fascist movements often rely on charismatic leaders who can galvanize public sentiment and offer simplistic solutions to complex problems. So do cults.
Core Ideological Pillars of Fascism
Ultranationalism At the heart of fascism lies a rabid nationalism that elevates the nation above all else, often cloaked in exclusionary rhetoric that defines “the nation” by narrow ethnic, racial, or cultural terms.
Authoritarianism Fascist regimes hinge on the power of a singular, dictatorial leader who positions himself as the embodiment of the national will.
Totalitarian Control A fascist state doesn’t just seek influence; it seeks control over every corner of public and private life, leaving no room for dissent.
Rejection of Democracy Inherently hostile to liberal democracy, fascism dismantles pluralism, erodes individual rights, and scorns any notion of democratic checks.
Cult of the Leader Charismatic, “infallible,” and above reproach, the fascist leader becomes a central figure to be idolized and obeyed without question.
Social and Cultural Machinery of Fascism
Militarism Fascism lionizes military power, often celebrating conflict and expansionism as tools for national rejuvenation.
Social Darwinism Fascist ideology thrives on a belief in social hierarchies, arguing that the strong must dominate the weak in a brutal, zero-sum worldview.
Anti-intellectualism Ideas and arts that challenge fascist ideals are often met with disdain or outright suppression. Thought and expression are sacrificed on the altar of ideology.
Sexism and Rigid Gender Roles Fascist movements are overwhelmingly male-dominated and sexist, perpetuating restrictive gender norms and relegating women to traditional roles.
Scapegoating A classic tool: fascism thrives on the creation of enemies, identifying scapegoats—whether minorities, intellectuals, or political dissidents—as a unifying target for the masses.
In-Group/Out-Group Polarization
Fascist movements masterfully exploit humanity’s tribal instincts by constructing rigid boundaries between “us” (the pure, virtuous, authentic people) and “them” (the corrupted, dangerous, foreign others). This binary “us vs. them” worldview transforms complex social realities into simplified moral battlegrounds where compromise becomes betrayal, dialogue becomes weakness, and the out-group is systematically dehumanized. By constantly reinforcing these divisions through rhetoric, symbolism, and policy, fascist leaders ensure that followers’ primary loyalty shifts from universal human values to exclusive group membership, making previously unthinkable actions against the “other” not only acceptable but morally imperative.
Political and Economic Playbook of Fascism
Corporatism Fascism tends to ally with powerful business interests, intertwining the state with corporate power to mutually reinforce each other’s agendas.
Suppression of Labor Labor unions and workers’ rights are among the first casualties, often stifled or eradicated in a fascist regime’s march to consolidate power.
Media Domination Fascists aim to monopolize information, using propaganda and disinformation to construct a controlled narrative that drowns out dissent.
Obsession with Security Fear is weaponized. Fascists often amplify threats, real or imagined, to justify repressive measures under the banner of “national security.”
Methods and Tactics of Fascism
Violence as a Political Tool Organized violence isn’t just incidental to fascism—it’s woven into the strategy, deployed to silence opposition and enforce control.
Manipulation of Truth Fascism operates in a realm where facts are malleable. Myths, lies, and distorted realities are crafted to serve political ends.
Populist Rhetoric Fascist leaders often adopt populist language to appear as champions of “the people,” casting themselves as saviors from elites or corrupt institutions.
While not all these elements must be present to identify fascism, a critical mass of these characteristics—especially the core ideological traits—serves as a clear signal of fascist leanings. Fascism’s true face is layered, but its essence is unmistakably authoritarian, divisive, and repressive.
What is fascism? Fascism is a far-right ideology that has had a profound impact on global history and continues to exist in various forms today. Its appeal lies in its ability to offer simple solutions to complex problems, often at the expense of individual freedoms and ethical considerations. Understanding the historical and psychological factors that contribute to the rise of fascism is crucial for recognizing and combating it in the modern world — where it is once again on the rise.
When evaluating a candidate for a role, you would be wise to consider what those who have worked with them in the past think of them — that’s why we ask for references during a job interview process. Unfortunately for Donald Trump, a majority of his closest advisors don’t support him and cannot recommend him as being fit for the presidency — and in fact many are actively campaigning against him and supporting the Harris-Walz ticket in the 2024 election.
And these aren’t just people out at the edges of a sprawling administration — these folks are from the inner circle, the cabinet, the military’s top brass, and other high-level officials in or near the White House who routinely interacted with the then-President.
Trump bragged about hiring all the best people — but then proceeded to fire a huge swath of them for having the audacity of disagreeing with him, or other trivial reason. Of those that remained, an unusually large number resigned from his administration in protest over whatever they saw as their personal last straw — many on January 6. And of that whole set, a conspicuously large number are now actively speaking out against the former president and working to prevent him from ascending to a second term.
I’ve been a voter for 30 years. And never have I seen the outpouring of “duty to warn” from former officials of someone seeking re-election. Never has this many of the president’s closest advisors refused to support him for a second term. Let’s hear why, in their own words.
Mike Pence
Former Vice President
“It should come as no surprise that I will not be endorsing Donald Trump this year,” he said to Fox News — an extraordinary historical moment when a VP cannot in good conscience support their own former President. Of course, when that former President tried to murder to you — or at the very least looked the other way while it happened in front of him on TV — it might be more difficult to get over than the usual spat between political cronies.
Mark Esper
Former Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Army
Another rare moment: when a former cabinet member goes on national television weeks before an election to warn the American public about the dangers of their former boss. I have definitely never seen this in my lifetime and my 30 years of voting.
“I think he’s unfit for the presidency. As somebody who worked directly for him — I don’t think he’s the right person for our country. And so I will not be supporting him.” — to CNN, April 16
“Trump is not fit for office because he puts himself first and I think anybody running for office should put the country first.”
“Yes, I think we should take those words seriously,” former Trump Defense Secretary Mark Esper says after Trump suggesting using the U.S. military against the “enemy from within.” pic.twitter.com/oXOlaU7tnZ
Disinformation is more than just false information—it’s a calculated effort to deceive. Unlike misinformation, which spreads by accident or ignorance, disinformation is crafted with precision to manipulate public opinion and sow confusion. Its architects in the right-wing media ecosystem and elsewhere often exploit existing divides—political, social, or cultural—using these cracks in the foundation of society to achieve their aims. Whether the goal is political dominance, economic advantage, or simply the unraveling of trust, disinformation thrives in the chaos it creates. And in today’s digital landscape, it spreads like wildfire, fanning the flames of discord faster than ever before.
But disinformation isn’t just about fake news or conspiracy theories. It’s a full-blown strategy, weaponized by those who understand how to pull the levers of media, technology, and emotion to get what they want. It doesn’t need to be entirely false to do damage—sometimes a well-placed half-truth or a twisted fact is all it takes. The aim is to make us question what’s real and undermine our ability to discern truth from fiction. And this is where vigilance and education come in, arming us with the tools to resist these tactics. In the following disinformation dictionary, in addition to the disinformation definition I’ll break down some of the key terms and tactics used to muddy the waters of truth.
Disinformation Dictionary of Psychological Warfare
The cat is well and truly out of the bag in terms of understanding how easily wide swaths of people can be misled into believing total falsehoods and even insane conspiracy theories that have no basis whatsoever in reality. In their passion for this self-righteous series of untruths, they can lose families, jobs, loved ones, respect, and may even be radicalized to commit violence on behalf of an authority figure. It starts with the dissemination of disinformation — a practice with a unique Orwellian lexicon all its own, collated in the below disinformation dictionary.
Disinformation is meant to confuse, throw off, distract, polarize, and otherwise create conflict within and between target populations. The spreading of falsehoods is a very old strategy — perhaps as old as humankind itself — but its mass dissemination through the media was pioneered in the 20th century by the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union, the Nazis in Germany, Mussolini‘s Fascists in Italy, and other authoritarian regimes of the early 1900s through the 1940s.
After World War II and the Allies’ defeat of Hitler, the role of disinformation lived on during the Cold War. The Soviet KGB were infamous for their spycraft and covert infiltration of information flows, while the United States experienced waves of anti-Communist paranoia and hysteria fueled by the spread of conspiracist thinking. Psychologists, social scientists, and others did their best to unpack the horrors revealed by the reign of the Nazi regime with a wellspring of research and critical thought about authoritarian personalities and totalitarianism that continues to this day.
The John Birch Society rides again
In some ways, we haven’t really moved on yet from the Cold War — in fact, some appear not to have moved on since the New Deal and are hellbent on rolling its provisions back, almost 100 years later. The dregs of the John Birch Society — an organization famously too koo-koo even for William F. Buckley, who excommunicated them from the conservative wing of the Republican Party — live on today in a reconstituted form known as the CNP, or Council for National Policy.
Founded officially in 1981 after almost a decade down in the political trenches radicalizing the right, the CNP is the shadowy organization pulling the strings of many of the set pieces in puppets in today’s political play. In alliance with other powerful networks including the Koch empire, the NRA, and the Evangelical church, the CNP is the group behind the recent hysteria out of nowhere about Critical Race Theory in public schools (where it is not taught).
They are funneling the money of America’s billionaires into absurdist theatrical displays of performance artists who distract America with bread and circuses while the plutocrats make off with the cash in the form of tax cuts, tax breaks, tax carve outs, tax loopholes, tax policy, and other wealth-building sweetheart deals for themselves and their cronies.
The CNP, in partnership with Charles Koch’s massive database of all American voters (and of course, his money), have managed to brainwash the Evangelical flock and various assorted MAGA groups into believing a raft of nonsense from climate change denial to anti-masking to the Big Lie about the 2020 election and much more.
They have leveraged new political technology in order to recruit and radicalize new cult members quickly and at now digital scale — via QAnon, Fox News, the even more extreme aggressively partisan coverage of Newsmax and OANN, and a fleet of “grassroots” astroturf operations peddling their brand of seditious aspirational theocracy to ruralites like it was going out of style… on accounta it is.
US 2024 elections disinformation
As the U.S. now sees the 2024 elections in the rearview mirror, it’s ever more clear the impact of disinformation campaigns on American politics. These orchestrated fakeries are becoming more sophisticated and widespread, targeting voters across social media, messaging apps, and even AI-generated content. These efforts aim to confuse voters, suppress turnout, smear candidates, and undermine trust in the electoral system. In today’s highly polarized environment, disinformation is not just a tool of foreign interference but also a domestic weapon used to influence election outcomes. Understanding these tactics and how they operate is critical for protecting democracy and ensuring a fair election process.
Here is a guide to the main types of election interference disinformation campaigns in progress, so you can be forewarned and forearmed as much as possible:
Voter Suppression and Confusion False information is often spread about when, where, or how to vote, confusing voters about eligibility or tricking them with fake polling place closures (see: right-wing operative Jacob Wahl convicted for telecommunications fraud for a voter suppression campaign in MI, NY, PA, IL, and OH in 2020).
Candidate Smear Campaigns Bad actors fabricate scandals, use manipulated images or videos (“deepfakes”), and spread false claims about candidates to damage their reputations.
Foreign Interference Nations like Russia, China, and Iran are expected to use fake social media accounts, amplify domestic conspiracy theories, and send targeted messages to influence U.S. elections.
Undermining Election Integrity Disinformation campaigns spread false claims of widespread voter fraud, misrepresent election security, and attempt to delegitimize results with premature victory declarations or “rigged” election claims.
Platforms and Methods
Social Media and Messaging Apps Disinformation spreads rapidly on platforms like Facebook, Twitter (X), TikTok, WhatsApp, and Telegram, where users share and amplify false narratives.
Fake News Websites Some websites pose as legitimate news sources but are created to deceive readers with false stories that push specific agendas.
AI-Generated Content The rise of AI allows for the creation of highly realistic but fake images, videos, and texts, making it harder to distinguish truth from falsehood.
Targeted Communities
Communities of Color Minority communities are often the focus of disinformation, with tactics designed to exploit shared traumas, concerns, and cultural connections. Misinformation is tailored to specific demographics, often in multiple languages.
Emerging Trends in Disinformation
AI-Generated Content AI tools are making it easier to create convincing but fake media, posing new challenges for detecting and countering disinformation.
Prebunking Efforts Governments and organizations are becoming more proactive, working to debunk false narratives before they spread.
Cross-Platform Coordination Disinformation is coordinated across different platforms, making it harder to detect and stop, as the false narratives hop from one space to another.
Countermeasures
Government Agencies Federal entities are focused on monitoring foreign interference to safeguard elections.
Social Media Content Moderation Platforms are increasingly using algorithms and human moderators to identify and remove disinformation.
Fact-Checking and Public Education Non-profits and independent groups work to fact-check false claims and educate voters on how to critically assess the information they encounter.
Media Literacy Initiatives Public awareness campaigns aim to teach people how to recognize and resist disinformation, helping voters make informed decisions.
Disinformation Definitions Dictionary
This disinformation definition dictionary covers (and uncovers) the terminology and techniques used by disinfo peddlers, hucksters, Zucksters, propagandists, foreign actors, FARA actors, and professional liars of all sorts — including confirmation bias, the bandwagon effect, and other psychological soft points they target, attack, and exploit. From trolling to active measures to “alternative facts,” we dig into the terminology that makes disinformation tick.
This resource will be added to over time as neologisms are coined to keep up with the shifting landscape of fakes, deep fakes, AI disinformation, and alternative timelines in our near and potentially far future.
Mind control is a type of “psychological technology” used by con artists, cult leaders, and influence peddlers of all stripes to try and modify human behavior, to twist it to one’s own nefarious and usually opaque ends. Books about cults and how they use forms of mind control to capture victims can help us understand this otherwise inexplicable phenomenon.
Also referred to as undue influence techniques, brainwashing, emotional abuse, or thought reform, mind control is a set of techniques designed to hack in to the brain’s cognitive quirks, biases, and numerous psychobiological “opportunities to circumvent rational and critical thought.”
Cults are a specific structure of social organization formed through the application of mind control. There are at least 2 “layers” and often many interstitial rings that draw members ever closer to a hidden agenda lurking at the center — the true purpose of the organization that most of the footsoldiers know nothing about, because they work for one of the many “friendly PR faces” tacked on to the outside of the group to disguise the malignancy within.
Position himself (and the group — his extension) as the only safe haven to turn to when afraid: “I alone can fix it!”
Isolate followers from other sources of information — i.e. keep them in the Fox News/OANN/Newsmax ecosystem
Arouse fear in the follower — invent invisible boogeymen everywhere! Huge caravans at the border that mysteriously disappear after elections! Evil liberals trying to do their jobs in schools and educate our youth about our history! INFLATION looms as a large spectre every time the left manages to eke out a few pennies from the cold unfeeling hands of the aristocrats!
Rinse; repeat. Stoking fear is “EZ Mode” — it means one of the parties in our two-party system can “de facto secede” from governance by just sitting on the sidelines and heckling all day, waiting for the problems and frustration to boil over so they can harness the abject anger of poor manipulated people into political weaponry, to break their lives on the wheels of history carelessly and for no higher purpose than personal greed and addiction to power, wealth, and status.
Books about cults
In the shadowy corners of society, cults have long thrived, weaving their intricate webs of influence, control, and mystique. From charismatic leaders to the vulnerable souls they ensnare, the study of cults offers a chilling glimpse into the extremes of human behavior. As we navigate an era where misinformation and manipulation are more pervasive than ever, understanding the mechanisms that drive these insular communities is not just fascinating—it’s increasingly essential. The following list of books delves into the psychology, history, and dark allure of cults, providing critical insights into the forces that can both unite and destroy.
Grandiosity is a psychological term used to describe a pattern of behavior characterized by an inflated sense of self-importance, a preoccupation with one’s achievements and abilities, and a need for admiration and attention from others. Grandiosity can manifest in a range of behaviors, including boastfulness, arrogance, entitlement, and an exaggerated sense of one’s own abilities and accomplishments.
People who exhibit grandiosity often have a huge ego — and an exaggerated sense of their own importance and abilities. They may believe that they are unique, superior, or special, and that others should recognize and acknowledge their exceptional qualities. This can lead to a sense of entitlement, as individuals with grandiosity may feel that they deserve special treatment, privileges, or attention. They may become upset or angry when they feel that their needs are not being met or that they are not receiving the recognition they feel they deserve.
Grandiosity traits
Grandiosity can also manifest in a tendency to exaggerate or embellish one’s accomplishments and abilities — or even to outright lie about them, or completely fabricate them. People with grandiosity traits may feel the need to constantly promote themselves and their achievements, and may be inclined to brag or boast about their successes. They may also be prone to exaggerating their abilities, skills, or knowledge, and may present themselves as experts in areas where they have limited experience or actual understanding.
In addition to an inflated sense of self-importance, grandiosity is often accompanied by a need for admiration and attention from others. Individuals with grandiosity may crave recognition, praise, and validation from others, and may go to great lengths to gain (and keep) attention and admiration. They may be drawn to positions of power or influence, where they can exert their control and influence over others. However, they may also become resentful or angry if they feel that they are not receiving the level of attention or recognition they believe they deserve.
Grandiosity traits list
If you observe one or more of these traits in someone you know or encounter, be wary — and on the lookout for additional grandiose qualities:
Exaggerated sense of self-importance: Believing oneself to be more important or valuable than others without evidence to support this belief.
Need for excessive admiration: Constantly seeking praise and validation from others, often to reinforce an inflated self-image.
Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, or brilliance: Frequently imagining oneself achieving extraordinary levels of success or influence that are unrealistic.
Belief in being unique or special: Thinking that one can only be understood by, or should associate with, other high-status people or institutions.
Sense of entitlement: Expecting favorable treatment or automatic compliance with one’s expectations, regardless of circumstances.
Exploitativeness: Taking advantage of others to achieve personal goals, often without regard for their well-being.
Lack of empathy: Having little to no ability to recognize or consider the feelings and needs of others.
Arrogant or haughty behaviors: Displaying a superior attitude and acting disdainfully or condescendingly toward others.
Overestimation of abilities or achievements: Believing one’s skills or accomplishments are far greater than they actually are, often boasting about them.
Dismissal or devaluation of others: Minimizing or disregarding the contributions or worth of others, particularly if they threaten one’s self-image.
The downsides of grandiosity
Grandiosity can have a range of negative consequences for individuals who exhibit this behavior. People with grandiosity may have difficulty forming meaningful relationships with others, as they may be more focused on promoting themselves and seeking attention than on building genuine connections with others. They may have little empathy for others, which can make their friendships and attachments very one-sided, with too much time and focus directed toward the grandiose person and too little time for the other person(s).
They may also have a tendency to overestimate their abilities, which can lead to poor decision-making and mistakes. In some cases, grandiosity can lead to reckless or dangerous behavior, as individuals may take risks or engage in behavior that is outside of their abilities or experience. Their supreme overconfidence can lead them into risky activities, and they may lead others into danger as well.
What causes grandiosity?
There are a range of factors that can contribute to the development of grandiosity. Some individuals may have lived through early childhood experiences that led them to believe they were exceptional or entitled, while others may have a personality type that is prone to grandiosity. In some cases, grandiosity may be a symptom of an underlying mental health condition, such as narcissistic personality disorder, bipolar disorder, or other personality disorder. Grandiosity can also operate at the group level, with collective narcissism driving the inflated self-importance and sense of entitlement for a particular organization or class of people.
Treatment for grandiosity typically involves therapy and counseling to help individuals understand and manage their behavior. This may include cognitive-behavioral therapy, which can help individuals identify and challenge their negative thought patterns and beliefs, and develop healthier ways of thinking and behaving. Additionally, medication may be prescribed to treat underlying mental health conditions that may be contributing to grandiosity. With appropriate treatment and support, individuals with grandiosity can learn to manage their behavior and develop more positive and fulfilling relationships with others — on the other hand, it is generally quite rare for a grandiose person to even seek help and treatment in the first place, largely due to their own overconfidence and conviction that they do not require any professional assistance.
Grandiosity examples
Here are a few more specific examples of grandiosity in action, to illustrate the concept with potentially familiar experiences:
Delusional Beliefs of Superiority: A person might genuinely believe they are destined to be a world leader or have a unique, unparalleled talent that will change the course of history, despite having no evidence or achievements to support this belief.
Exaggerated Achievements: Someone may boast about their accomplishments in a way that significantly overstates their actual contributions or success, such as claiming they single-handedly saved a company from bankruptcy when their role was minor.
Unrealistic Expectations of Recognition: A person might expect to receive praise, admiration, or special treatment wherever they go, believing they are far more deserving of it than others, even in situations where their contributions are minimal.
Overestimation of Influence: An individual might believe they have the power to control or influence outcomes on a grand scale, such as thinking they can sway public opinion or manipulate significant events through sheer will or charisma.
Dismissal of Others: A person might dismiss the abilities or contributions of others as insignificant compared to their own, often underestimating the talents and efforts of peers while placing themselves on a much higher pedestal.
Narcissists think of themselves as special; chosen; beyond the fray — rules do not generally apply to them, but oh do they ever to you. They tend to see the world in black and white terms, as a Manichaean struggle of hierarchy vs. fairness, with strict social status to abide by and perpetuate — a world of dominance and submission, with themselves at the top. This narcissism books list will arm you with the most important information you need to know about dealing with this infuriating type of personality disorder.
The higher on the Cluster B scale you go (with psychopathy at the top of the ruthless scale), the less empathy these fundamentally narcissistic individuals possess. Without empathy, there is no basis for forming a conscience. One could say the classic defining hallmark of this group of personality disorders is that the people exhibiting narcissism have little to no conscience.
Part of the dark triad along with psychopathy and Machiavellianism, narcissism is characterized by manipulative behavior towards others and a malevolent, often exploitational approach to interpersonal relationships. There are many aspects to narcissism, and the following book assortment covers a wide range of core and intersecting topics.
The Good Daughter Syndrome: Help For Empathic Daughters of Narcissistic, Borderline, or Difficult Mothers Trapped in the Role of the Good Daughter — Katherine Fabrizio
Political Ponerology: A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes — Andrew M. Lobaczewski
You could say that narcissists are those who never manage to find enough escape velocity to get outside themselves. They stay stuck forever in an infantile loop of getting what they want, using people along the way to achieve their goals. Narcissists think transactionally, and are always seeking to maximize benefit to themselves, at the expense of others if necessary or possible.
Their world is a zero-sum game where every interaction is a potential transaction to be exploited. Empathy is a foreign concept, often feigned but never felt, as genuine concern for others would undermine their self-centered agenda. Narcissists operate with a relentless focus on self-preservation and self-advancement, their actions governed by an insatiable need for validation. This leads them to view relationships not as mutual partnerships, but as opportunities to extract value—be it in the form of admiration, status, or resources. The people around them become mere tools, reduced to their utility in satisfying the narcissist’s desires.
