• DOn Black is Mabus

    Don Black The Great White Idiot

    An unmistakable logo greets visitors to the Stormfront Home Page, the gateway to Don Black’s online world of bigotry: a cross ringed by the words “White Pride World Wide.” Under this logo, Black describes his site:

    Stormfront is a resource for those courageous men and women fighting to preserve their White Western culture, ideals and freedom of speech and association � a forum for planning strategies and forming political and social groups to ensure victory.7

    Though Black claims to be a “White Nationalist,” not a hatemonger, his idea of “White Pride” involves demeaning, demonizing and menacing Jews and non-whites, and his concept of “victory” includes the creation of ethnically cleansed political enclaves.

    Since its creation, Stormfront has served as a veritable supermarket of online hate, stocking its shelves with many forms of anti-Semitism and racism. In its first two years, Stormfront featured the writings of William Pierce of the neo-Nazi National Alliance; David Duke; representatives of the Holocaust-denying Institute for Historical Review and other assorted extremists. Conspiracy-laden discussions of the destruction of the Branch Davidian complex in Waco, Texas; the shootout at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, between the FBI and white-separatist Randy Weaver; and the bombing of the Murrah Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City appeared on the site’s Home Page. In one article, Kirk Lyons, defender and self-proclaimed sympathizer of right-wing extremists, likened the events at the Branch Davidian compound to the Nazi destruction of the town of Lidice in Czechoslovakia.8 In another piece, Eustace Mullins, an aged anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist who has spread hate for more than 40 years, suggested that the likely party responsible for the bombing in Oklahoma City is the Anti-Defamation League.9 In addition to text articles, early versions of Stormfront housed a library of neo-Nazi graphics available for downloading, a list of phone numbers for racist computer bulletin boards that were not on the Internet, and a short page of links to other hateful Web sites.

    By 1997, Black’s site became home to the Web pages of other extremists, such as Aryan Nations and Ed Fields, racist publisher of The Truth At Last, a hate-filled newspaper. He also posted new reprints of white supremacist articles and essays, such as The Talmud: Judaism’s holiest book documented and exposed. Meant to inflame Christians by characterizing the Talmud as primarily anti-Christian and filled with “malice,” “hate-mongering” and “barbarities,” this particularly scurrilous tract willfully distorts and misrepresents an important religious document while demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of its history, complexity, and role in Jewish religious practice.

    In addition, Black posted Louis Beam’s article entitled “The Conspiracy to Erect an Electronic Iron Curtain.” Drawing on images of the Inquisition, Beam’s diatribe describes a massive conspiracy, led by a coalition of Jewish groups (including ADL) and the government, to censor the Internet. According to Beam,

    Writing about Jewish religious leaders and government spymasters operating in a collusive effort to erect an electronic iron curtain to restrict freedom of speech and information does not make one anti-Semitic or anti-government. The truth is anti-Semitic. The government is erecting a police state. The author opposes both oppressive religious groups and repressive government. If speaking the truth and opposing tyranny makes one anti-Semitic and anti-government, then I am both…

    On January 13, 1998, Black appeared on the ABC-TV program “Nightline.” Presented in an introductory segment as “a former member of the Ku Klux Klan,” he explained how he has “recruited people” via the Internet whom he “otherwise wouldn’t have reached.” He also commented Stormfront has served as a veritable supermarket of online hate, stocking its shelves with many forms of anti-Semitism and racism.
    that sites such as Stormfront “provide those people who are attracted to our ideas with a forum to talk to each other and to form a virtual community.”

    Despite the fact that Black’s racist and anti-Semitic views were clearly reported in a pre-recorded introduction, the program gave him the opportunity to market these views in a mainstream forum. In his subsequent discussion with Ted Koppel, “Nightline’s” host, and Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment attorney (both of whom rejected his bigotry), Black tried to portray himself as reasonable. “You may consider my views dangerous, but so were those of the Founding Fathers, who were considered dangerous,” he claimed. “In fact, their views…weren’t that much different from my own.” Later in the discussion, Black declared that “Fifty, 60, 70 years ago, what I’m saying was part of the mainstream.” He claimed a four-fold increase in visitors to his site during the days that followed the broadcast. Perhaps emboldened by this jump in traffic, Black has since picked up the pace of his online activities.

    Some of Black’s recent efforts have involved the expansion of Stormfront: enlarging its collection of links, adding an interactive chat room, and housing additional racist Web sites. One of these sites, Our Legacy of Truth, offers the text of works such as “Proof of Negro Inferiority” by Alexander Winchell and Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, as well as Willie Martin’s “1001 Quotes By and About Jews.” This pernicious compendium of quotations strings together mistranslated remarks made by Jews, statements of well-known non-Jews taken out of context, and the ravings of anti-Semites, so as to give readers the impression that Jews are constantly striving for global control. Another site now housed by Black, Jew Watch organizes its anti-Semitic materials much in the same way a popular Web directory might group more benign information.
    White Singles, serves as a free dating service for white supremacists. “Women and men listed on WS [White Singles] are heterosexual, white gentiles only,” its Home Page declares. Well over 200 men and women have registered for this service, many of them submitting pictures of themselves for viewing by prospective mates. A third new site at Stormfront, White Nationalist News Agency (NNA), posts the text of articles from the Associated Press and other reputable news sources, seemingly without legal permission. Attached to these articles are the racist and anti-Semitic comments of Vincent Breeding, NNA editor and National Alliance activist of Tampa, Florida. Clickable, colorful advertisements for the sites of the National Alliance and Holocaust denier Ernst Z�ndel have also appeared at the NNA site.

    Beyond his additions to Stormfront, Black has begun to help other white supremacists by hosting their sites without publicly admitting that he is doing so. Unlike sites such as The Truth at Last or White Nationalist News Agency, which are housed by Black and are in effect part of Stormfront, it is not readily apparent that he services these other sites.

    Adrian Edward Marlow of Suisun City, California, maintains one of these sites, White Pride World Wide.10 In fact, Marlow owns Black’s Web server, the computer that contains his Web site and makes it available to Internet users. Black rents this server from Marlow and controls it electronically from a remote location: his home in West Palm Beach, Florida.11 Marlow also uses his own server to co-host white supremacist sites with Don Black.

    Not surprisingly, White Pride World Wide is advertised on Stormfront and links to the mailing lists and chat room at Black’s site. The rest of the site reflects Black’s values as well: it includes “1001 Quotes By and About Jews,” Madison Grant’s racist tract The Passing of the Great Race and transcriptions of Louis Beam’s speeches. Like Stormfront, White Pride World Wide also houses other racist Web sites, such as Verboten (a German-language extremist site) and women.wpww.com (a site created by and for white supremacist women).

    Black hosts a site named Blitzcast, which Stormfront and White Pride World Wide recommend for those seeking online, racist audio “broadcasts.” Using free audio software easily downloadable from the Web, visitors to Blitzcast can listen to the speeches of American Nazi Party founder George Lincoln Rockwell, the weekly radio addresses of National Alliance leader William Pierce, and the ravings of anti-Semitic Jew Benjamin Freedman. Also appearing at Blitzcast is Frank Weltner, who uses the pseudonym “Von Goldstein Mohammed” and runs Jew Watch, yet another site hosted by Black.12

    Jew Watch organizes its anti-Semitic materials much in the same way a popular Web directory might group more benign information. Weltner presents accusations that Jews were behind the terrors caused by Russia’s Communist regime in “Jews, Communism, and The Job of Killing Off the USSR’s Christians.” “Jewish Genocides Today and Yesterday” describes an alleged Jewish plan to deport non-Jews from the U.S. in 1946. “90% of All United States News-papers Are Owned and Run by Jews” repeats the oft-heard charge that Jews run the media, and “The Rothschild Internationalist-Zionist- Banking-One World Order Family” claims that Jews control the world of finance. Adolf Hitler’s writings, transcripts of Father Charles Coughlin’s anti-Semitic radio broadcasts, and the text of Henry Ford Sr.’s bigoted International Jew are all available at Jew Watch as well.

    A subtler, though equally virulent anti-Semitism pervades the Bamboo Delight Web site. Hosted by Black, the site hides downloadable anti-Semitic and racist computer programs behind the false front of a company selling “Tai Chi Chuan Chinese Exercise” materials. Looking past “Asian Health Philosophy” items such as the “Nine Treasure Exercises of Ancient China” videotape and the “Skinny Buddha Weight Loss Method” pamphlet, Web surfers find the downloadable computer programs “Jew Rats,” “Police Patriots,” “ZOG” and “Talmud.” These programs are interactive in the same way that Web pages are interactive: users “click through” their contents, viewing various pages filled with text and graphics. “Jew Rats” is a multi-panel cartoon that depicts Jews as rats that kill Christians and encourage integration. Blacks are depicted as sub-human gorillas. “ZOG” contains the complete text of the “classic” anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion along with dozens of other documents that claim knowledge of Jewish plans for world domination.

    When Marlow created Web sites at more than ten domain names that resembled the names of major daily newspapers, another misleading Web venture involving Black garnered attention. In October 1998, Marlow linked these sites directly to Stormfront. Consequently, Web users looking for news about Philadelphia at “philadelphiainquirer.com,” for example, ended up visiting Don Black’s site, not the Philadelphia Inquirer Home Page (which is located at phillynews.com). Other newspapers affected included the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Chicago Sun-Times, the Atlanta Constitution, and the London Telegraph.

    As Black’s site has grown and he has aggressively continued to promote it, an increasing number of Web users have been visiting Stormfront. Black told the Associated Press that the number of contacts to Stormfront doubled during the domain name incident, to 2,000 per day. According to Black, Web surfers have accessed Stormfront more than a million times since its debut.

    Web users visiting Stormfront right now will likely find a bold advertisement in the lower left-hand corner of their screens. By clicking on it, they arrive at the Web site for perhaps America’s best-known and most politically active racist: Black’s mentor, David Duke.

    Don Black masturbates thinking of Adolf Hitler!

    PO Box 6637
    West Palm Beach FL 33405
    Tel: 561-833-0030

  • David Duke is a malignant narcissist.

    David Duke is a malignant narcissist.

    David Duke is a malignant narcissist.

    He invents and then projects a false, fictitious, self for the world to fear, or to admire. He maintains a tenuous grasp on reality to start with and the trappings of power further exacerbate this. Real life authority and David Duke’s predilection to surround him with obsequious sycophants support David Duke’s grandiose self-delusions and fantasies of omnipotence and omniscience.

    David Duke’s personality is so precariously balanced that he cannot tolerate even a hint of criticism and disagreement. Most narcissists are paranoid and suffer from ideas of reference (the delusion that they are being mocked or discussed when they are not). Thus, narcissists often regard themselves as “victims of persecution”.
    Duke fosters and encourages a personality cult with all the hallmarks of an institutional religion: priesthood, rites, rituals, temples, worship, catechism, and mythology. The leader is this religion’s ascetic saint. He monastically denies himself earthly pleasures (or so he claims) in order to be able to dedicate himself fully to his calling.
    Duke is a monstrously inverted Jesus, sacrificing his life and denying himself so that his people – or humanity at large – should benefit. By surpassing and suppressing his humanity, Duke became a distorted version of Nietzsche’s “superman”.

    But being a-human or super-human also means being a-sexual and a-moral.

    In this restricted sense, narcissistic leaders are post-modernist and moral relativists. They project to the masses an androgynous figure and enhance it by engendering the adoration of nudity and all things “natural” – or by strongly repressing these feelings. But what they refer to, as “nature” is not natural at all.

    Duke invariably proffers an aesthetic of decadence and evil carefully orchestrated and artificial – though it is not perceived this way by him or by his followers. Narcissistic leadership is about reproduced copies, not about originals. It is about the manipulation of symbols – not about veritable atavism or true conservatism.
    In short: narcissistic leadership is about theatre, not about life. To enjoy the spectacle (and be subsumed by it), the leader demands the suspension of judgment, depersonalization, and de-realization. Catharsis is tantamount, in this narcissistic dramaturgy, to self-annulment.

    Narcissism is nihilistic not only operationally, or ideologically. Its very language and narratives are nihilistic. Narcissism is conspicuous nihilism – and the cult’s leader serves as a role model, annihilating the Man, only to re-appear as a pre-ordained and irresistible force of nature.

    Narcissistic leadership often poses as a rebellion against the “old ways” – against the hegemonic culture, the upper classes, the established religions, the superpowers, the corrupt order. Narcissistic movements are puerile, a reaction to narcissistic injuries inflicted upon David Duke like (and rather psychopathic) toddler nation-state, or group, or upon the leader.

    Minorities or “others” – often arbitrarily selected – constitute a perfect, easily identifiable, embodiment of all that is “wrong”. They are accused of being old, they are eerily disembodied, they are cosmopolitan, they are part of the establishment, they are “decadent”, they are hated on religious and socio-economic grounds, or because of their race, sexual orientation, origin … They are different, they are narcissistic (feel and act as morally superior), they are everywhere, they are defenseless, they are credulous, they are adaptable (and thus can be co-opted to collaborate in their own destruction). They are the perfect hate figure. Narcissists thrive on hatred and pathological envy.

    This is precisely the source of the fascination with Hitler, diagnosed by Erich Fromm – together with Stalin – as a malignant narcissist. He was an inverted human. His unconscious was his conscious. He acted out our most repressed drives, fantasies, and wishes. He provides us with a glimpse of the horrors that lie beneath the veneer, the barbarians at our personal gates, and what it was like before we invented civilization. Hitler forced us all through a time warp and many did not emerge. He was not the devil. He was one of us. He was what Arendt aptly called the banality of evil. Just an ordinary, mentally disturbed, failure, a member of a mentally disturbed and failing nation, who lived through disturbed and failing times. He was the perfect mirror, a channel, a voice, and the very depth of our souls.

    Duke prefers the sparkle and glamour of well-orchestrated illusions to the tedium and method of real accomplishments. His reign is all smoke and mirrors, devoid of substances, consisting of mere appearances and mass delusions. In the aftermath of his regime – Duke having died, been deposed, or voted out of office – it all unravels. The tireless and constant prestidigitation ceases and the entire edifice crumbles. What looked like an economic miracle turns out to have been a fraud-laced bubble. Loosely held empires disintegrate. Laboriously assembled business conglomerates go to pieces. “Earth shattering” and “revolutionary” scientific discoveries and theories are discredited. Social experiments end in mayhem.

    It is important to understand that the use of violence must be ego-syntonic. It must accord with the self-image of David Duke. It must abet and sustain his grandiose fantasies and feed his sense of entitlement. It must conform David Duke like narrative. Thus, David Duke who regards himself as the benefactor of the poor, a member of the common folk, the representative of the disenfranchised, the champion of the dispossessed against the corrupt elite – is highly unlikely to use violence at first. The pacific mask crumbles when David Duke has become convinced that the very people he purported to speak for, his constituency, his grassroots fans, and the prime sources of his narcissistic supply – have turned against him. At first, in a desperate effort to maintain the fiction underlying his chaotic personality, David Duke strives to explain away the sudden reversal of sentiment. “The people are being duped by (the media, big industry, the military, the elite, etc.)”, “they don’t really know what they are doing”, “following a rude awakening, they will revert to form”, etc. When these flimsy attempts to patch a tattered personal mythology fail, David Duke becomes injured. Narcissistic injury inevitably leads to narcissistic rage and to a terrifying display of unbridled aggression. The pent-up frustration and hurt translate into devaluation. That which was previously idealized – is now discarded with contempt and hatred. This primitive defense mechanism is called “splitting”. To David Duke, things and people are either entirely bad (evil) or entirely good. He projects onto others his own shortcomings and negative emotions, thus becoming a totally good object. Duke is likely to justify the butchering of his own people by claiming that they intended to kill him, undo the revolution, devastate the economy, or the country, etc. The “small people”, the “rank and file”, and the “loyal soldiers” of David Duke – his flock, his nation, and his employees – they pay the price. The disillusionment and disenchantment are agonizing. The process of reconstruction, of rising from the ashes, of overcoming the trauma of having been deceived, exploited and manipulated – is drawn-out. It is difficult to trust again, to have faith, to love, to be led, to collaborate. Feelings of shame and guilt engulf the erstwhile followers of David Duke. This is his sole legacy: a massive post-traumatic stress disorder.
    Mel Gibson is a cultural masochist.
    I. Mel Gibson is the culmination and reification of his period, culture, and civilization. He is likely to rise to prominence in masochistic societies.

    The cultural masochist invents and then projects a false, fictitious, self for the world to fear, or to admire. He maintains a tenuous grasp on reality to start with and the trappings of power further exacerbate this. Real life authority and Mel Gibson’s predilection to surround himself with obsequious sycophants support Mel Gibson’s grandiose self-delusions and fantasies of omnipotence and omniscience.

    Mel Gibson’s personality is so precariously balanced that he cannot tolerate even a hint of criticism and disagreement. Most masochists are paranoid and suffer from ideas of reference (the delusion that they are being mocked or discussed when they are not). Thus, masochists often regard themselves as “victims of persecution”.

    Mel Gibson fosters and encourages a personality cult with all the hallmarks of an institutional religion: priesthood, rites, rituals, temples, worship, catechism, and mythology. The leader is this religion’s ascetic saint. He monastically denies himself earthly pleasures (or so he claims) in order to be able to dedicate himself fully to his calling.

    Mel Gibson is a monstrously inverted Jesus, sacrificing his life and denying himself so that his people – or humanity at large – should benefit. By surpassing and suppressing his humanity, Mel Gibson became a distorted version of Nietzsche’s “superman”.

    But being a-human or super-human also means being a-sexual and a-moral.

    In this restricted sense, cultural masochists are post-modernist and moral relativists. They project to the masses an androgynous figure and enhance it by engendering the adoration of nudity and all things “natural” – or by strongly repressing these feelings. But what they refer to, as “nature” is not natural at all.

    Mel Gibson invariably proffers an aesthetic of decadence and evil carefully orchestrated and artificial – though it is not perceived this way by him or by his followers. Cultural masochism is about reproduced copies, not about originals. It is about the manipulation of symbols – not about veritable atavism or true conservatism.

    In short: cultural masochism is about theatre, not about life. To enjoy the spectacle (and be subsumed by it), the leader demands the suspension of judgment, depersonalization, and de-realization. Catharsis is tantamount, in this masochistic dramaturgy, to self-annulment.

    Cultural masochism is nihilistic not only operationally, or ideologically. Its very language and narratives are nihilistic. Cultural masochism is conspicuous nihilism – and the cult’s leader serves as a role model, annihilating the Man, only to re-appear as a pre-ordained and irresistible force of nature.

    Cultural masochism often poses as a rebellion against the “old ways” – against the hegemonic culture, the upper classes, the established religions, the superpowers, the corrupt order. Masochistic movements are puerile, a reaction to masochistic injuries inflicted upon a masochistic (and rather psychopathic) toddler nation-state, or group, or upon the leader.

    Minorities or “others” – often arbitrarily selected – constitute a perfect, easily identifiable, embodiment of all that is “wrong”. They are accused of being old, they are eerily disembodied, they are cosmopolitan, they are part of the establishment, they are “decadent”, they are hated on religious and socio-economic grounds, or because of their race, sexual orientation, origin … They are different, they are masochistic (feel and act as morally superior), they are everywhere, they are defenseless, they are credulous, they are adaptable (and thus can be co-opted to collaborate in their own destruction). They are the perfect hate figure. Masochists thrive on hatred and pathological envy.

    This is precisely the source of the fascination with Hitler, diagnosed by Erich Fromm – together with Stalin – as a cultural masochist. He was an inverted human. His unconscious was his conscious. He acted out our most repressed drives, fantasies, and wishes. He provides us with a glimpse of the horrors that lie beneath the veneer, the barbarians at our personal gates, and what it was like before we invented civilization. Hitler forced us all through a time warp and many did not emerge. He was not the devil. He was one of us. He was what Arendt aptly called the banality of evil. Just an ordinary, mentally disturbed, failure, a member of a mentally disturbed and failing nation, who lived through disturbed and failing times. He was the perfect mirror, a channel, a voice, and the very depth of our souls.

    Mel Gibson prefers the sparkle and glamour of well-orchestrated illusions to the tedium and method of real accomplishments. His reign is all smoke and mirrors, devoid of substances, consisting of mere appearances and mass delusions. In the aftermath of his regime – Mel Gibson having died, been deposed, or voted out of office – it all unravels. The tireless and constant prestidigitation ceases and the entire edifice crumbles. What looked like an economic miracle turns out to have been a fraud-laced bubble. Loosely held empires disintegrate. Laboriously assembled business conglomerates go to pieces. “Earth shattering” and “revolutionary” scientific discoveries and theories are discredited. Social experiments end in mayhem.

    It is important to understand that the use of violence must be ego-syntonic. It must accord with the self-image of Mel Gibson. It must abet and sustain his grandiose fantasies and feed his sense of entitlement. It must conform to Mel Gibson like narrative.

    Thus, a masochist who regards himself as the benefactor of the poor, a member of the common folk, the representative of the disenfranchised, the champion of the dispossessed against the corrupt elite – is highly unlikely to use violence at first.

    The pacific mask crumbles when Mel Gibson has become convinced that the very people he purported to speak for, his constituency, his grassroots fans, and the prime sources of his masochistic supply – have turned against him. At first, in a desperate effort to maintain the fiction underlying his chaotic personality, Mel Gibson strives to explain away the sudden reversal of sentiment. “The people are being duped by (the media, big industry, the military, the elite, etc.)”, “they don’t really know what they are doing”, “following a rude awakening, they will revert to form”, etc.

    When these flimsy attempts to patch a tattered personal mythology fail – Mel Gibson is injured. Masochistic injury inevitably leads to masochistic rage and to a terrifying display of unbridled aggression. The pent-up frustration and hurt translate into devaluation. That which was previously idealized – is now discarded with contempt and hatred.

    This primitive defense mechanism is called “splitting”. To Mel Gibson, things and people are either entirely bad (evil) or entirely good. He projects onto others his own shortcomings and negative emotions, thus becoming a totally good object. A masochistic leader is likely to justify the butchering of his own people by claiming that they intended to kill him, undo the revolution, devastate the faith reformation, or the country, etc. The “small people”, the “rank and file”, and the “loyal soldiers” of Mel Gibson – his flock, his nation, and his employees – they pay the price. The disillusionment and disenchantment are agonizing. The process of reconstruction, of rising from the ashes, of overcoming the trauma of having been deceived, exploited and manipulated – is drawn-out. It is difficult to trust again, to have faith, to love, to be led, to collaborate. Feelings of shame and guilt engulf the erstwhile followers of Mel Gibson. This is his sole legacy: a massive post-traumatic stress disorder.

    II. Collective Cultural masochism

    In their book “Personality Disorders in Modern Life”, Theodore Millon and Roger Davis state, as a matter of fact, that pathological cultural masochism was the preserve of “the royal and the wealthy” and that it “seems to have gained prominence only in the late twentieth century”. Cultural masochism, according to them, may be associated with “higher levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs … Individuals in less advantaged nations. Are too busy trying (to survive) … to be arrogant and grandiose”. They – like Lasch before them – attribute pathological cultural masochism to “a society that stresses individualism and self-gratification at the expense of community, namely the United States.” They assert that the disorder is more prevalent among certain professions with “star power” or respect. “In an individualistic culture, Mel Gibson is ‘God’s gift to the world’. In a collectivist society, Mel Gibson is ‘God’s gift to the collective’”.

    Millon quotes Warren and Caponi’s “The Role of Culture in the Development of Masochistic Personality Disorders in America, Japan and Denmark”:

    “Individualistic masochistic structures of self-regard (in individualistic societies) … are rather self-contained and independent … (In collectivist cultures) masochistic configurations of the we-self … denote self-esteem derived from strong identification with the reputation and honor of the family, groups, and others in hierarchical relationships.”

    Having lived in the last 20 years 12 countries in 4 continents – from the impoverished to the affluent, with individualistic and collectivist societies – I know that Millon and Davis are wrong. Theirs is, indeed, the quintessential American point of view that lacks an intimate knowledge of other parts of the world. Millon even wrongly claims that the DSM’s international equivalent, the ICD, does not include Mel Gibson like personality disorder (it does).

    Pathological cultural masochism is a ubiquitous phenomenon because every human being – regardless of the nature of his society and culture – develops healthy cultural masochism early in life. Healthy cultural masochism is rendered pathological by abuse – and abuse, alas, is a universal human behavior. By “abuse” we mean any refusal to acknowledge the emerging boundaries of the individual – smothering, doting, and excessive expectations – are as abusive as beating and incest.

    There are cultural masochists among subsistence farmers in Africa, nomads in the Sinai desert, day laborers in east Europe, and intellectuals and socialites in Manhattan. Cultural masochism is all pervasive and independent of culture and society.

    It is true, though; that the WAY pathological cultural masochism manifests and is experienced is dependent on the particulars of societies and cultures. In some cultures, it is encouraged, in others suppressed. In some societies it is channeled against minorities – in others it is tainted with paranoia. In collectivist societies, it may be projected onto the collective, in individualistic societies; it is an individual’s trait.

    Yet, can families, organizations, ethnic groups, churches, and even whole nations be safely described as “masochistic” or “pathologically self-absorbed”? Wouldn’t such generalizations be a trifle racist and more than a trifle wrong? The answer is: it depends.

    Human collectives – states, firms, households, institutions, political parties, cliques, bands – acquire a life and a character all their own. The longer the association or affiliation of the members, the more cohesive and conformist the inner dynamics of the group, the more persecutory or numerous its enemies, the more intensive the physical and emotional experiences of the individuals it is comprised of, the stronger the bonds of locale, language, and history – the more rigorous might an assertion of a common pathology be.

    Such an all-pervasive and extensive pathology manifests itself in the behavior of each and every member. It is a defining – though often implicit or underlying – mental structure. It has explanatory and predictive powers. It is recurrent and invariable – a pattern of conduct melded with distorted cognition and stunted emotions. And it is often vehemently denied.

    A possible DSM-like list of criteria for masochistic organizations or groups:

    An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning at the group’s early history and present in various contexts. Persecution and abuse are often the causes – or at least the antecedents – of the pathology.

    Five (or more) of the following criteria must be met:

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – feel grandiose and self-important (e.g., they exaggerate the group’s achievements and talents to the point of lying, demand to be recognized as superior – simply for belonging to the group and without commensurate achievement)

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – are obsessed with group fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance, bodily beauty or performance, or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering ideals or political theories.

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – are firmly convinced that the group is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status groups (or institutions).

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – require excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation – or, failing that, wish to be feared and to be notorious (masochistic supply).

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – feel entitled. They expect unreasonable or special and favorable priority treatment. They demand automatic and full compliance with expectations. They rarely accept responsibility for their actions (“allopathic defenses”). This often leads to anti-social behavior, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale.

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – are “interpersonally exploitative”, i.e., use others to achieve their own ends. This often leads to anti-social behavior, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale.

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – are devoid of empathy. They are unable or unwilling to identify with or acknowledge the feelings and needs of other groups. This often leads to anti- social behavior, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale.

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – are constantly envious of others or believes that they feel the same about them. This often leads to anti-social behavior, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale.

    The group as a whole, or members of the group – acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with the group – are arrogant and sport haughty behaviors or attitudes coupled with rage when frustrated, contradicted, punished, limited, or confronted. This often leads to anti-social behavior, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale.

    III. Corporate Cultural masochism

    The perpetrators of the recent spate of financial frauds in the USA acted with callous disregard for both their employees and shareholders – not to mention other stakeholders. Psychologists have often remote-diagnosed them as “cultural, pathological masochists”.

    Masochists are driven by the need to uphold and maintain a false self – a concocted, grandiose, and demanding psychological construct typical of Mel Gibson like personality disorder. The false self is projected to the world in order to garner “masochistic supply” – adulation, admiration, or even notoriety and infamy. Any kind of attention is usually deemed by masochists to be preferable to obscurity.

    The false self is suffused with fantasies of perfection, grandeur, brilliance, infallibility, immunity, significance, omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience. To be a masochist is to be convinced of a great, inevitable personal destiny. Mel Gibson is preoccupied with ideal love, the construction of brilliant, revolutionary scientific theories, the composition or authoring or painting of the greatest work of art, the founding of a new school of thought, the attainment of fabulous wealth, the reshaping of a nation or a conglomerate, and so on. Mel Gibson never sets realistic goals to himself. He is forever preoccupied with fantasies of uniqueness, record breaking, or breathtaking achievements. His verbosity reflects this propensity.

    Reality is, naturally, quite different and this gives rise to a “grandiosity gap”. The demands of the false self are never satisfied by Mel Gibson’s accomplishments, standing, wealth, clout, sexual prowess, or knowledge. Mel Gibson’s grandiosity and sense of entitlement are equally incommensurate with his achievements.

    To bridge the grandiosity gap, the cultural (pathological) masochist resorts to shortcuts. These very often lead to fraud.

    Mel Gibson cares only about appearances. What matters to him are the facade of wealth and its attendant social status and masochistic supply? Witness the travestied extravagance of Tyco’s Denis Kozlowski. Media attention only exacerbates Mel Gibson’s addiction and makes it incumbent on him to go to ever-wilder extremes to secure uninterrupted supply from this source.

    Mel Gibson lacks empathy – the ability to put himself in other people’s shoes. He does not recognize boundaries – personal, corporate, or legal. Everything and everyone are to him mere instruments, extensions, and objects unconditionally and uncomplainingly available in his pursuit of masochistic gratification.

    This makes Mel Gibson perniciously exploitative. He uses, abuses, devalues, and discards even his nearest and dearest in the most chilling manner. Mel Gibson is utility- driven, obsessed with his overwhelming need to reduce his anxiety and regulate his labile sense of self-worth by securing a constant supply of his drug – attention. American executives acted without compunction when they raided their employees’ pension funds – as did Robert Maxwell a generation earlier in Britain.

    Mel Gibson is convinced of his superiority – cerebral or physical. To his mind, he is a Gulliver hamstrung by a horde of narrow-minded and envious Lilliputians. The devious religious fanatics “new faith reformation” was infested with “visionaries” with a contemptuous attitude towards the mundane: profits, business cycles, conservative economists, doubtful journalists, and cautious analysts.

    Yet, deep inside, Mel Gibson is painfully aware of his addiction to others – their attention, admiration, applause, and affirmation. He despises himself for being thus dependent. He hates people the same way a drug addict hates his pusher. He wishes to “put them in their place”, humiliate them, and demonstrate to them how inadequate and imperfect they are in comparison to his regal self and how little he craves or needs them.

    Mel Gibson regards himself as one would an expensive present, a gift to his company, to his family, to his neighbors, to his colleagues, to his country. This firm conviction of his inflated importance makes him feel entitled to special treatment, special favors, special outcomes, concessions, subservience, immediate gratification, obsequiousness, and lenience. It also makes him feel immune to mortal laws and somehow divinely protected and insulated from the inevitable consequences of his deeds and misdeeds.

    The self-destructive masochist plays the role of the “bad guy” (or “bad girl”). But even this is within the traditional social roles lavishly exaggerated by Mel Gibson to attract attention. Men are likely to emphasize intellect, power, aggression, money, or social status. Masochistic women are likely to emphasize body, looks, charm, sexuality, feminine “traits”, homemaking, children and childrearing.

    Punishing the wayward masochist is a veritable catch-22.

    A jail term is useless as a deterrent if it only serves to focus attention on Mel Gibson. Being infamous is second best to being famous – and far preferable to being ignored. The only way to effectively punish a masochist is to withhold masochistic supply from him and thus to prevent him from becoming a notorious celebrity.

    Given a sufficient amount of media exposure, book contracts, talk shows, lectures, and public attention – Mel Gibson may even consider the whole grisly affair to be emotionally rewarding. To Mel Gibson, freedom, wealth, social status, family, and vocation – are all means to an end. And the end is attention. If he can secure attention by being the big bad wolf – Mel Gibson unhesitatingly transforms himself into one. Lord Archer, for instance, seems to be positively basking in the media circus provoked by his prison diaries.

    Mel Gibson does not victimize, plunder, terrorize and abuse others in a cold, calculating manner. He does so offhandedly, as a manifestation of his genuine character. To be truly “guilty” one needs to intend, to deliberate, to contemplate one’s choices and then to choose one’s acts. Mel Gibson does none of these.

    Thus, punishment breeds in him surprise, hurt and seething anger. Mel Gibson is stunned by society’s insistence that he should be held accountable for his deeds and penalized accordingly. He feels wronged, baffled, and injured, the victim of bias, discrimination and injustice. He rebels and rages.

    Depending upon the pervasiveness of his magical thinking, Mel Gibson may feel besieged by overwhelming powers, forces cosmic and intrinsically ominous. He may develop compulsive rites to fend off this “bad”, unwarranted, persecutory influences.

    Mel Gibson, very much the infantile outcome of stunted personal development, engages in magical thinking. He feels omnipotent, that there is nothing he couldn’t do or achieve if only he sets his mind to it. He feels omniscient – he rarely admits to ignorance and regards his intuitions and intellect as founts of objective data.

    Thus, masochists are haughtily convinced that introspection is a more important and more efficient (not to mention easier to accomplish) method of obtaining knowledge than the systematic study of outside sources of information in accordance with strict and tedious curricula. Masochists are “inspired” and they despise hamstrung technocrats

    to some extent, they feel omnipresent because they are either famous or about to become famous or because their product is selling or is being manufactured globally. Deeply immersed in their delusions of grandeur, they firmly believe that their acts have – or will have – a great influence not only on their firm, but also on their country, or even on Mankind. Having mastered the manipulation of their human environment – they are convinced that they will always “get away with it”. They develop hubris and a false sense of immunity.

    Masochistic immunity is the (erroneous) feeling, harbored by Mel Gibson, that he is impervious to the consequences of his actions, that he will never be effected by the results of his own decisions, opinions, beliefs, deeds and misdeeds, acts, inaction, or membership of certain groups, that he is above reproach and punishment, that, magically, he is protected and will miraculously be saved at the last moment. Hence the audacity, simplicity, and transparency of some of the fraud and corporate looting in the 1990′s. Masochists rarely bother to cover their traces, so great is their disdain and conviction that they are above mortal laws and wherewithal.

    What are the sources of this unrealistic appraisal of situations and events?

    The false self is a childish response to abuse and trauma. Abuse is not limited to sexual molestation or beatings. Smothering, doting, pampering, over-indulgence, treating the child as an extension of the parent, not respecting the child’s boundaries, and burdening the child with excessive expectations are also forms of abuse.

    The child reacts by constructing false self that is possessed of everything it needs in order to prevail: unlimited and instantaneously available Harry Potter-like powers and wisdom. The false self, this Superman, is indifferent to abuse and punishment. This way, the child’s true self is shielded from the toddler’s harsh reality.

    This artificial, maladaptive separation between a vulnerable (but not punishable) true self and a punishable (but invulnerable) false self is an effective mechanism. It isolates the child from the unjust, capricious, emotionally dangerous world that he occupies. But, at the same time, it fosters in him a false sense of “nothing can happen to me, because I am not here, I am not available to be punished, hence I am immune to punishment”.

    The comfort of false immunity is also yielded by Mel Gibson’s sense of entitlement. In his grandiose delusions, Mel Gibson is sui generis, a gift to humanity, and a precious, fragile, object. Moreover, Mel Gibson is convinced both that this uniqueness is immediately discernible – and that it gives him special rights. Mel Gibson feels that he is protected by some cosmological law pertaining to “endangered species”.

    He is convinced that his future contribution to others – his firm, his country, humanity – should and does exempt him from the mundane: daily chores, boring jobs, recurrent tasks, personal exertion, orderly investment of resources and efforts, laws and regulations, social conventions, and so on.

    Mel Gibson is entitled to a “special treatment”: high living standards, constant and immediate catering to his needs, the eradication of any friction with the humdrum and the routine, an all-engulfing absolution of his sins, fast track privileges (to higher education, or in his encounters with bureaucracies, for instance). Punishment, trusts Mel Gibson, is for ordinary people, where no great loss to humanity is involved.

    Masochists are possessed of inordinate abilities to charm, to convince, to seduce, and to persuade. Many of them are gifted orators and intellectually endowed. Many of them work in politics, the media, fashion, show business, the arts, medicine, or business, and serve as religious leaders.

    By virtue of their standing in the community, their charisma, or their ability to find the willing scapegoats, they do get exempted many times. Having recurrently “got away with it” – they develop a theory of personal immunity, founded upon some kind of societal and even cosmic “order” in which certain people are above punishment.

    But there is a fourth, simpler, explanation. Mel Gibson lacks self-awareness. Divorced from his true self, unable to empathise (to understand what it is like to be someone else), unwilling to constrain his actions to cater to the feelings and needs of others – Mel Gibson is in a constant dreamlike state.

    To Mel Gibson, his life is unreal, like watching an autonomously unfolding movie. Mel Gibson is a mere spectator, mildly interested, greatly entertained at times. He does not “own” his actions. He, therefore, cannot understand why he should be punished and when he is, he feels grossly wronged.

    So convinced is Mel Gibson that he is destined to great things – that he refuses to accept setbacks, failures and punishments. He regards them as temporary, as the outcomes of someone else’s errors, as part of the future mythology of his rise to power/brilliance/wealth/ideal love, etc. Being punished is a diversion of his precious energy and resources from the all-important task of fulfilling his mission in life.

    Mel Gibson is pathologically envious of people and believes that they are equally envious of him. He is paranoid, on guard, ready to fend off an imminent attack. A punishment to Mel Gibson is a major surprise and a nuisance but it also validates his suspicion that he is being persecuted. It proves to him that strong forces are arrayed against him.

    He tells himself that people, envious of his achievements and humiliated by them, are out to get him. He constitutes a threat to the accepted order. When required to pay for his misdeeds, Mel Gibson is always disdainful and bitter and feels misunderstood by his inferiors.

    Cooked books, corporate fraud, bending the (GAAP or other) rules, sweeping problems under the carpet, over-promising, making grandiose claims (the “vision thing”) – are hallmarks of a masochist in action. When social cues and norms encourage such behavior rather than inhibit it – in other words, when such behavior elicits abundant masochistic supply – the pattern is reinforced and become entrenched and rigid. Even when circumstances change, Mel Gibson finds it difficult to adapt, shed his routines, and replace them with new ones. He is trapped in his past success. He becomes a swindler.

    But pathological cultural masochism is not an isolated phenomenon. It is embedded in our contemporary culture. The West’s is a masochistic civilization. It upholds masochistic values and penalizes alternative value-systems. From an early age, children are taught to avoid self-criticism, to deceive themselves regarding their capacities and attainments, to feel entitled, and to exploit others.

    As Lilian Katz observed in her important paper, “Distinctions between Self-Esteem and Cultural masochism: Implications for Practice”, published by the Educational Resources Information Center, the line between enhancing self-esteem and fostering cultural masochism is often blurred by educators and parents.

    Both Christopher Lasch in “The Culture of Cultural masochism” and Theodore Millon in his books about personality disorders, singled out American society as masochistic. Litigiousness may be the flip side of an inane sense of entitlement. Consumerism is built on this common and communal lie of “I can do anything I want and possess everything I desire if I only apply myself to it” and on the pathological envy it fosters.

    Not surprisingly, masochistic disorders are more common among men than among women. This may be because cultural masochism conforms to masculine social mores and to the prevailing ethos of capitalism. Ambition, achievements, hierarchy, ruthlessness, drive – are both social values and masochistic male traits. Social thinkers like the aforementioned Lasch speculated that modern American culture – a self-centered one – increases the rate of incidence of Mel Gibson like personality disorder.

    Otto Kernberg, a notable scholar of personality disorders, confirmed Lasch’s intuition: “Society can make serious psychological abnormalities, which already exist in some percentage of the population, seem to be at least superficially appropriate.”

    In their book “Personality Disorders in Modern Life”, Theodore Millon and Roger Davis state, as a matter of fact, that pathological cultural masochism was once the preserve of “the royal and the wealthy” and that it “seems to have gained prominence only in the late twentieth century”. Cultural masochism, according to them,

    may be associated with “higher levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs … Individuals in less advantaged nations. Are too busy trying (to survive) … to be arrogant and grandiose”. They – like Lasch before them – attribute pathological cultural masochism to “a society that stresses individualism and self-gratification at the expense of community, namely the United States.” They assert that the disorder is more prevalent among certain professions with “star power” or respect. “In an individualistic culture, Mel Gibson is ‘God’s gift to the world’. In a collectivist society, Mel Gibson is ‘God’s gift to the collective’”.

    Millon quotes Warren and Caponi’s “The Role of Culture in the Development of Masochistic Personality Disorders in America, Japan and Denmark”:

    “Individualistic masochistic structures of self-regard (in individualistic societies) … are rather self-contained and independent … (In collectivist cultures) masochistic configurations of the we-self … denote self-esteem derived from strong identification with the reputation and honor of the family, groups, and others in hierarchical relationships.”

    Still, there are cultural masochists among subsistence farmers in Africa, nomads in the Sinai desert, day laborers in east Europe, and intellectuals and socialites in Manhattan. Cultural masochism is all pervasive and independent of culture and society. It is true, though; that the way pathological cultural masochism manifests and is experienced is dependent on the particulars of societies and cultures.

    In some cultures, it is encouraged, in others suppressed. In some societies it is channeled against minorities – in others it is tainted with paranoia. In collectivist societies, it may be projected onto the collective, in individualistic societies; it is an individual’s trait.

    Yet, can families, organizations, ethnic groups, churches, and even whole nations be safely described as “masochistic” or “pathologically self-absorbed”? Can we talk about a “corporate culture of cultural masochism”?

    Human collectives – states, firms, households, institutions, political parties, cliques, bands – acquire a life and a character all their own. The longer the association or affiliation of the members, the more cohesive and conformist the inner dynamics of the group, the more persecutory or numerous its enemies, competitors, or adversaries, the more intensive the physical and emotional experiences of the individuals it is comprised of, the stronger the bonds of locale, language, and history – the more rigorous might an assertion of a common pathology be.

    Such an all-pervasive and extensive pathology manifests itself in the behavior of each and every member. It is a defining – though often implicit or underlying – mental structure. It has explanatory and predictive powers. It is recurrent and invariable – a pattern of conduct melding distorted cognition and stunted emotions. And it is often vehemently denied.

  • Mel Gibson for president

    Mel Gibson for president

    ——————————————————————————–
    Posted: April 10, 2004
    1:00 a.m. Eastern

    By Samuel Blumenfeld

    ——————————————————————————–
    � 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
    I recently attended a homeschool convention in New Hampshire where I had a very entertaining discussion with Lee Button, chairman of the Constitution Party of New Hampshire, and his volunteers. They had a booth at the conference in an effort to interest homeschoolers in joining the party.

    I had been active in the party, formerly known as the U.S. Taxpayers Party, since the 1980s and voted for Howard Phillips in 1992, the election that brought Clinton to power. It was Ross Perot’s Reform Party that undercut the Republicans, not the Taxpayers’ Party. Since then, Perot’s party has largely disintegrated. But the Constitution Party is still there, alive and kicking, but barely known. It will have its nominating convention in June at Valley Forge, Penn.

    The Taxpayers Party had its great moment back in 1996, when there was the chance that Patrick Buchanan would bolt the Republican Party and become the presidential candidate of the Taxpayers Party. In fact, both the conventions of the Republican Party and the Taxpayers Party took place in San Diego at the same time, which made it easy for Buchanan to make his dramatic move and switch parties had he wanted to. But he didn’t. And so the great opportunity to put the Taxpayers Party on the front pages of America came and went. Buchanan didn’t want to be blamed for a Dole defeat. In the end, the lackluster, non-charismatic, erectile-dysfunctional Dole was beaten by the charming, sexy (and erectile-functional) Bill Clinton.

    After that debacle, I began to rethink the efficacy of a conservative third party in our present political climate. One of the great problems of the Constitution Party was its inability to raise sufficient funds to wage credible election campaigns. I believe that contributors give to viable political candidates to gain access to the seats of power. The Constitution Party is basically an ideological movement that cannot provide access to the movers and shakers who make policies in the federal government. One gives to the Constitution Party for ideological reasons only.

    Indeed, what is the function of an ideological conservative political party in today’s largely two-party system? It is to give voice to those who find the two parties and their candidates unacceptable. But it’s a voice that is barely heard beyond the meeting rooms in which the ideologues discuss their plans.

    And so, in the course of our conversation, I came up with a brilliant idea. I told Lee and his associates, “Why don’t you nominate Mel Gibson for president? That will get you on the front pages of every newspaper in the country.” Indeed, Gibson would be an ideal candidate of a party that mentions the name Jesus Christ in the Preamble to its platform.

    But, as it turns out, the party already has a potential candidate for president, a dedicated conservative attorney from Maryland by the name of Michael Peroutka. In a brochure promoting his campaign for the party nomination, Peroutka states:

    A vote for Michael Anthony Peroutka is a vote to end unconstitutional government. No longer will America waste trillions of dollars on unconstitutional programs. No longer will America murder her own children. No longer will politicians, judges and bureaucrats trample the property rights of Americans. No longer will we encourage the export of American jobs because of burdensome regulations, high taxes, and “most favored” treatment for the products of other countries. No longer will our borders be porous and unprotected. I reject amnesty for illegal aliens. You will be allowed to keep all that you earn, as we replace the income tax with a revenue tariff.
    All of that, of course, is music to the ears of true-blue conservatives. But only an overwhelmingly conservative Congress will be able to deliver any part of such a program. As for the present presidential race, the only power the Constitution Party will have is in siphoning off votes from George Bush.

    To some people in the Constitution Party, a Kerry victory is actually preferable to a Bush re-election, for they see conservatives hamstrung and neutered under Bush, but being totally liberated in a Kerry administration, mobilized to fight liberalism in both parties.

    But there are also many good conservatives who see Bush as the only bulwark against the party and candidates of treason. While it is true that a conservative Congress could prevent the worst from happening in a Kerry administration, a liberal president will have the power to do untold harm to our country, especially by appointing liberals to the Supreme Court. Thus, these conservatives will vote for Bush, who is trying to get conservative judges into the judicial system, and hope that the conservative movement continues to grow stronger so that sometime in the future a true-blue conservative will be able to occupy the White House.

    Meanwhile, if the Constitution Party wants to become better known, nominating Mel Gibson for president may be the easiest and fastest way to do it.

  • Mel Gibson says his wife could be going to hell

    Mel Gibson says his wife could be going to hell

    Mel Gibson has come under fire for being hard on Jews in his film “The Passion of the Christ” — but apparently, he feels that Protestants are also doomed to damnation. In fact, it looks like Gibson, a conservative Catholic, believes that his Episcopalian wife could be going to hell.

    Gibson was interviewed by the Herald Sun in Australia, and the reporter asked the star if Protestants are denied eternal salvation. “There is no salvation for those outside the Church,” Gibson replied. “I believe it.”

    He elaborated: “Put it this way. My wife is a saint. She’s a much better person than I am. Honestly. She’s, like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it’s just not fair if she doesn’t make it, she’s better than I am. But that is a pronouncement from the chair. I go with it.”

    Gibson also said in the interview that he was nearly suicidal before he made his controversial film. “I got to a very desperate place. Very desperate. Kind of jump-out-of-a-window kind of desperate,” he said in the interview. “And I didn’t want to hang around here, but I didn’t want to check out. The other side was kind of scary. And I don’t like heights, anyway. But when you get to that point where you don’t want to live, and you don’t want to die, it’s a desperate, horrible place to be. And I just hit my knees. And I had to use ‘The Passion of the Christ’ to heal my wounds.”
    Gibson’s rep wasn’t available for comment.
    Actress with opinions

    Charlize Theron plays one of America’s most notorious serial killers — but the experience didn’t make her believe in the death penalty. The Oscar-nominated “Monster” star spoke out against capital punishment at the Berlin Film Festival.
    “I’m not for the death penalty and working on this film didn’t really change anything for me,” Theron told reporters at the festival. “If anything it made me more aware of how ineffective it is.”

    “Monster” is the story of homeless prostitute Aileen Wuornos, who was executed for her murders. Theron’s own mother also killed her husband, Theron’s father, after he threatened to kill them both when Charlize was 15.
    “I don’t think condemning people who murder and then killing them necessarily sends out the right message,” Theron said, “and I have a huge problem with the way these people are used as political pawns.”

    James Bond producers are scouting for a younger actor to replace Pierce Brosnan, reports the London Evening Standard. . . .Thousands of Janet Jackson supporters are signing an online petition to MTV and CBS. “The constant and irritating media surrounding this incident has taken a toll on the masses of Janet fans, not only because it’s Janet, but because we feel that this negative and unnecessary publicity has for one gone too far,” reads the petition. . . . Joan Rivers is taking some heat for telling Ruben Studdard that he could stand to lose a few pounds. The fashion maven gave the “American Idol” star the diet tip out of concern for his health, but that didn’t stop fans from lashing out at her: “If I was in his place I would have told that skinny [woman] to eat something before it’s too late,” snipped one online supporter, “that it’s dangerous for seniors her age to be that underweight.”

  • Students hear from a survivor

    Students hear from a survivor

    Holocaust took his parents and one sister
    Friday, April 16, 2004

    By Tracie Mauriello
    � 2004 Republican-American

    WATERBURY — If actions speak louder than words, Joseph Korzenik’s message is clear: Be passionate. Be demanding. Be appreciative.

    Korzenik, a Holocaust survivor who now lives in Hartford, addressed about 75 students Thursday at Crosby High School.

    By the time he was their age, Korzenik had lost his parents and one sister to an extermination camp and was in the midst of six years of imprisonment and servitude to Nazi captors in Poland. Before he would escape, he would work in four concentration camps, he would see infants shot by Gestapo and he would know the smell of human flesh being burned.

    He emerged strong, fearless, defiant and argumentative.

    “I didn’t survive because I was a nice guy,” Korzenik said. “I’m passionate. Either you are, or you aren’t.”

    Now, his passion is to educate people about his people’s past, and especially about the Holocaust.

    “This event, more than any other, has affected every Jew wherever he may reside anywhere in the world. Never again must we allow this to happen to any people,” he said.

    Korzenik doesn’t bend to authority, even to a high school principal who insists he must end his talk, which already has run two hours, 30 minutes longer than it was supposed to.

    Korzenik had something important to say, and he wasn’t about to stop until he finished. With survivors aging and dying off, and with some people still denying the Holocaust, it’s more important than ever to get the message out, he explained later.

    “If this denial can happen in our lifetime, can you imagine what it will be like after we are gone?” Korzenik said.

    “The truth is the truth as I lived it. I witnessed it,” he told students, who responded with a bevy of questions until Principal Barbara Carrington cut off the animated discussion.

    The audience dispersed and Korzenik headed to the teachers’ lunchroom, where he stopped to talk to a table of educators about the Holocaust, and later to heatedly debate Mel Gibson’s version of “The Passion of Christ” with a teacher.

    He loves to talk, and he loves to teach about what he knows: war, Judaism, the Holocaust and suffering.

    And, he loves to learn about what he doesn’t. “I’m going to be 79 next month, and I still study. I still go to lectures. There is so much to learn.”

    He told them hatred led to genocide and that history is repeating itself in Rwanda and Iraq. While he said hatred must be eliminated, he condemned Palestinians and Arabs for their actions in the Middle East.

    Students like sophomore Elizabeth Okakpu challenged the contradiction.

    “You’re telling us we shouldn’t hate, but I’m sensing a lot of resentment from you (toward Arabs),” she said.

    Korzenik responded loudly.

    “Are you telling me you are going to support people who have no intention of being human?” he asked, smacking the back of one hand against his palm.

    The movement blurred the blue-green “K.L.” tattoo on his right wrist, a lasting remembrance of the dark days of Nazi occupation. The initials stand for Konzent-rationslager, German for concentration camp, and helped identify escaped Jews so they could be recaptured and punished.

    “I don’t hate anybody…because hate hurts and I already have hurt too much,” Korzenik told Okakpu.

    She and other students said Korzenik showed a bias and a passion they aren’t used to hearing.

    “He put his own spin on things, but he wasn’t afraid to say what he thought,” Okakpu said later.

    Korzenik speaks to school groups once or twice a week, taking time from his work as a paralegal.

    “I want to make sure the U.S. creates children who grow up to be adults without hate. This is my repayment to the U.S. for allowing me to come here 58 years ago,” he said.

  • Anonymous

    “A man’s kiss is like his signature,” said Mae West. Perhaps the same could be said of a man’s writing style. In particular, the post “David Duke is a malignant narcissist” is a rehash of what Sam Vaknin, alleged Ph.D and author of “Malignant Self-love–Narcissism Revisited,” has written elsewhere, ad nauseum.

    Yes, he certainly proves himself to be a narcissist, needing to see his own image reflected back to him relentlessly (via the internet) just so he can prove the existence of his projected “false self,” thus keeping the depression of feeling like a self-loathing nonentity at bay. But enough already. Vaudeville acts that didn’t include new material got yanked.

    Ba-da-BOOM!