- When a sociopath does something wrong, he or she is likely to accept none of the blame and to blame others instead.
- Sociopaths are willing to hurt whomever whenever if it means that they will achieve their goals. This is why many sociopaths are highly successful people
- Sociopaths love to lie about their pasts, too. Look for inconsistencies in their stories.
- Some sociopaths will go to great lengths to make you believe their lies. Many
- sociopaths are delusional to the point where they believe that their lies are the truth
- You can think of sociopaths as con artists who always have a secret agenda. They need to know how to charm people in order to get what they want. To advance their goals, they first have to blend in with the crowd, which means they need to know how to smile, greet people, and make people feel comfortable.
- Although many sociopaths can be extremely charming, they harbor strong antisocial inclinations. They have a hard time staying in connection for long periods of time. They make frequent and long trips to the bathroom. They can be extremely charming, and then cold and distant. They are also not quite genuine in the interactions either. When people are very polar in their behavior, ranging from antisocial to extremely charming, it's a marker of disintegration in their psyche - and it's a red flag. It can also be an attempt to elicit rejection and wounding, to then control the others with. It is always accompanied with a lack of compassion or basic consideration of another's life. If it doesn't feel genuine from within them, it could very well be a person with sociopathic tendencies.
Now, let's assume for a moment we haven't already gone over the "Goldwater Rule", which indicates that psychoanalysis from afar is both unhelpful
and unethical, and we actually buy this crap. Going down the list, we have some problems:
- When a sociopath does something wrong, he or she is likely to accept none of the blame and to blame others instead.
Clinton takes responsibility for Benghazi.
Clinton takes responsibility for her email use.
Clinton takes responsibility for empowering Bush to go to Iraq. Hmm. Swing and a miss, buddy.
- Sociopaths are willing to hurt whomever whenever if it means that they will achieve their goals. This is why many sociopaths are highly successful people
There is no evidence that this applies to Clinton. There are rather dubious conspiracy theories with little supporting evidence, but how does this actually apply here? And keep in mind this doesn't just mean "I'm not a nice guy who will help those around me". I don't see how this applies to Clinton at all, and you have yet to provide any examples. But even further than examples of her hurting people to achieve her goals, we need to see a
consistent pattern of it in her day-to-day life. Not just a few individual examples, but rather that this is a constant thread throughout her public and private life. This is why it's so hard to
- Sociopaths love to lie about their pasts, too. Look for inconsistencies in their stories.
Again, let's be clear here: a handful of fabrications about one's past does
not indicate sociopathy. What we're looking for is a constant and consistent pattern of lying, often about trivial things, often for no apparent reason,
all the time. That's... just not Clinton. I'm sorry, it's not. A few lies, even significant ones, does not indicate sociopathy. Otherwise,
every politician would be at risk.
I'm not sure
where you got your list (it's not from the link posted below in the post), but it's incomplete and doesn't match up with the DSM-V's definition, Hervey Cleckley's qualifiers, or the ICD-10 criteria. The few you
do list don't seem to apply to Clinton in any meaningful way, and we don't have anywhere near enough information about her private life to be able to say with any certainty. But where you really lose me is here:
- You can think of sociopaths as con artists who always have a secret agenda. They need to know how to charm people in order to get what they want. To advance their goals, they first have to blend in with the crowd, which means they need to know how to smile, greet people, and make people feel comfortable.
- Although many sociopaths can be extremely charming, they harbor strong antisocial inclinations. They have a hard time staying in connection for long periods of time. They make frequent and long trips to the bathroom. They can be extremely charming, and then cold and distant. They are also not quite genuine in the interactions either. When people are very polar in their behavior, ranging from antisocial to extremely charming, it's a marker of disintegration in their psyche - and it's a red flag. It can also be an attempt to elicit rejection and wounding, to then control the others with. It is always accompanied with a lack of compassion or basic consideration of another's life. If it doesn't feel genuine from within them, it could very well be a person with sociopathic tendencies.
This is where I know this isn't actually about a serious attempt to match Clinton's behavior with the symptoms. Clinton is
legendarily charmless. Seriously, she's one of the least charismatic people to run for president, people constantly talk about how uncomfortable she seems in front of crowds, and her "likability gap" is seen as a serious problem. At the same time though,
people who interact with her one-on-one report that she is in fact quite genuine and earnest (if uncharismatic).
You seem to be starting with "this is what makes a sociopath" and trying to force Clinton into that mold, regardless of how unreasonable that may be. This makes an already pointless task downright ridiculous. Diagnosing someone based entirely on what they show in their public life with absolutely no access to or understanding of their personal life is a waste of time and completely unreasonable; there's a reason
the Goldwater Rule is a thing; but if you're not even going to be honest or consistent with the person's outward opinion, then why even bother? Clinton is missing a lot of the tell-tale signs of psychopathy and doesn't really show
any of them to a degree not seen in other politicians.
Look, here's an excerpt the DSM-IV's sociopathic diagnosis tool.
A) Pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by three or more of the following:
- Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
- Deception, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure
- Impulsiveness or failure to plan ahead
- Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults
- Reckless disregard for safety of self or others
- Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations
- Lack of remorse as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another
The ones highlighted in red simply cannot reasonably be attributed to Clinton in any meaningful way. They just can't. The remaining two, even by the harshest critique of Clinton, are not reasonably attributable to her. This whole argument is stupid. "Sociopath" is not the same thing as "liar" or "cheat" or "person with a poor moral compass". If you're going to throw accusations around,
learn what they mean.
And yes, I will
gladly include the people who try to claim Trump is a narcissist or a sociopath or a psychopath or
whatever. Knock it off. You see a tiny sliver of his life, one he explicitly curates for public viewing. You don't know what he's like behind closed doors, and you are
not a trained psychiatrist. It's annoying and distracting and
stupid. Stop it.
