1,755 words

Henry Nowak’s unnecessary death in the callously indifferent claws of the people who should have saved him is primarily about race. But not far behind race is the problem of who staffs positions of authority in society. Who will watch the watchers? Personnel is policy, and especially for positions of authority. But the people who pursue positions of authority are often the exact opposite of the type of people who should staff them. And Western regimes intensify this problem because it is to their benefit.

Jewish subversion and nonwhite hostility are only half of the problem behind the anti-white hate which culminated in Nowak’s death. His death was not a fluke but the foreseeable outcome of an anti-white system. Jews and nonwhites would be impotent without whites collaborating with them. Thus, the other half of the problem is that there are simply too many collaborators, many of whom have Dark Triad traits.

In Political Ponerology: The Science of Evil, Psychopathy, and the Origins of Totalitarianism, Andrew M. Lobaczewski estimated that 0.5-1% of the population were “essential psychopaths” while about 6% of the population showed heightened susceptibility to pathological influence or indoctrination. This was based on his firsthand experience in Poland under Nazi and Soviet occupation.

The Dark Triad traits are Narcissism, Machiavellianism (which should be renamed manipulativeness because Machiavelli is unfairly slandered for trying to Make Italy Roman Again), and Psychopathy. Each of these traits is a spectrum with a lot of overlap such as low empathy, callousness, manipulation, exploitation, and short-term self-promotion. People on the Dark Triad spectrum are often just called psychopaths as shorthand.

Unlike clueless normies, psychopaths excel at identifying how power works in a society and how to exploit it, even if the true nature of power is often concealed, if not entirely contrary to how it is stated to work. This is part of a larger meme in which autists (or sometimes schizos) counter psychopaths because they too see how society works but choose to defend rather than exploit the normies.

Psychopaths know what the prevailing winds are, which in the current year are pro-Jewish and anti-white. Thus, careers which attract psychopaths (most notably law, police, and politics) are staffed with people who are viciously anti-white and slavishly philosemitic. They might be low-end midwits at about 115 IQ points, but they aren’t that dumb. They know that the “progressive stack” is inverted. And they act accordingly with disastrous consequences for the rest of us.

Their objective actions do not correlate with their words like justice, due process, rule of law, diversity, inclusion, etc. They will always exercise power in a way that advances their career within the prevailing power structure. For example, Republican judges like Trevor McFadden actually went harder on J6ers who were guilty of “wrong think” to prove their loyalty to the system. They assumed the Democrats would rule forever, or that there would be no consequences if the Republicans regained power. Trevor and his neoconservative ilk were morally wrong but politically 100% correct.

But Dark Triad types advancing their petty careers within a system is not the same as advancing the interests of the system. The FBI, judiciary, and deep state permanently wrecked their credibility by all the over-produced lumpen-elites trying to outdo each other in being woke. This is why we should never mistake someone with high Dark Triad traits as being “useful” or “our guy” even if they are eager to enact the party program. Even if they don’t betray us, they will invariably mess things up because they are not independent moral agents, do not have good judgement, and fundamentally do not understand other humans.

Consider the edgelords who post extreme revenge fantasies online, which was more of a problem in the early days of the Alt Right. Some of these individuals were genuinely disturbed or angry. But others erroneously thought they were advancing their interests within the movement because they misunderstood our values and motivations. And they were not advancing our movement, but in fact hindering our outreach. That was fine so long as they individually got clout. Imagine these people as our cops, lawyers, judges, or brass. It would be a disaster on par with Abu Ghraib.

This will become more of a problem as we gain power and psychopaths start jumping on our bandwagon instead of the sinking ship of Zionism. The only real difference between an FBI agent, an NKVD agent, a woke judge, the cops who killed Nowak, or a wignat podcaster is what accidents of circumstance determined what would be the best path to advance their career. For all their use of ideology they have no true ideology except self-advancement. Was Donald Trump an early example of this due to his impulsivity, lack of follow through, grandiosity, self-advancement, and discarding of friends?

I want to push back against the explanation of “suicidal empathy” as an alternate explanation for elite behavior. It is a good explanation for the rank-and-file in liberal democracy. But it is woefully inadequate for those in positions of authority, especially woke female judges. Rather, they seem to more often exhibit “secondary psychopathy” compared to the “primary psychopathy” discussed above. As part of a larger conversation, Grok had this to say on woke female judges:

Performative empathy plus underlying callousness: They claim deep compassion (for favored groups) while showing remorseless hostility toward outgroups—a classic secondary pattern of emotional dysregulation masking antisocial tendencies.

There is nothing suicidal or empathetic about the woke female judges who let BIPOC career criminals go free until they eventually commit murder while throwing the book at white defendants. Nor the female cops who laughed at Nowak as he pleaded for help. It’s not suicidal empathy. It’s sadistic narcissism.

They know precisely what they are doing and that it benefits them while society suffers. They know how power works and who the ingroup and outgroup are. And they seem to take smug enjoyment from being in a position of unaccountable power. In fact, sadism is often suggested as a being part of a Dark Tetrad complex. My first-hand observations back this up. Liberal law students say some pretty interesting things when they are virtue signaling and don’t realize they are in mixed company.

It is essential that positions of authority are staffed with people with independent moral agency. What does this mean? It means they can individually determine, or at least ask, what is right or wrong and take accountability for their actions and inaction.

Basically, we need our watchers to have a conscience to watch over them.

Authority figures with independent moral agency will stand up for what is right, ask questions, dissent, and become whistleblowers if need be. Authority figures without independent moral agency will be the dumpster fire that ruled over occupied Poland and which currently rules the modern UK and US.

Tackling the Dark Triad/Tetrad question is hard because they generally excel at deceit. Screening via questionnaires will only eliminate the really dumb ones. Many positions don’t even bother trying. A better solution is genetic screening. Machiavellianism is about 31% heritable, Narcissism 53-59% heritable, and Psychopathy is about 64% heritable. Along with being spectrums rather than binary disorders, these traits are also highly polygenic, with thousands of genes contributing to a person’s psychological phenotype.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s Graduate School with Heidegger here

It would be wise to exclude people with a high genetic disposition to Dark Triad traits from positions of power, or at least closely monitor them. But this would have to be a long-term solution as polygenic analysis for these traits is nowhere as well developed as for IQ or autism. However, it is only a matter of time until it becomes possible.

A major hurdle to implementing this or any solution will be the reactionary, outdated, enlightenment era-constitutional law which has an embarrassingly inordinate emphasis on individual rights. This extremist focus on the individual was further heightened by civil rights era caselaw which treats discriminating against people due to their immutable traits as arch-heresy. The reasoning is that people can’t change these traits, and they don’t really signify anything anyways, so it’s not fair.

The entire civil rights paradigm is based on a biological lie. People are first and foremost determined by their genes with little to no free will. In fact, the amount of free will, or agency, one has is also probably determined by biology. And the Dark Triad/Tetrad crowd doesn’t even want to improve their nature. Maybe this is unfair, but if so, life is unfair.

Ideally, with IVF and/or gene splicing we will eventually be able to limit those with extremely high levels of Dark Triad genes. People will naturally raise moral objections to this. But they cause so much damage that not eliminating them seems morally outrageous. Eliminating future FBI agents and woke judges while they are still embryos is a service to humanity. It’s not like they show us any mercy when they have power over us. Ironically, a lot of Dark Triad parents would go along with this because being self-centered, they would welcome their kids being less of a problem.

Some may ask whether eliminating these traits is removing “Chesterton’s’ Fence.” Wholly culling Dark Triad genes from the population is not advisable as they do have an evolutionary justification. Sometimes you need people who can quickly and coldly make strategic decisions. In the right amount, they can make a good surgeon rather than a vicious hedge fund manager, or a general who can sacrifice a battalion to save a division without breaking down in front of his troops. Thus, it would be best to prevent people with high numbers of Dark Triad genes from being born rather than seek to eradicate such genes entirely.

It might be unfair to some unique individuals to cap or exclude them from certain key positions because they have a high number of problematic genes. But if the Constitution enshrines the fundamental human right of dangerous people to become cops and judges to tyrannize the rest of us, then it’s not worth much respect. We shouldn’t allow the Patrick Batemans of the world to declare Patrick Bateman a discrete and insular minority worthy of being deemed a protected class. There is no perfect answer here that is fair to everyone because real life is not a utopia. But limiting people who are prone to being problematic due to their nature from a few key positions is obviously the less unfair option.

How many unsung Henry Nowaks have died because we have failed to watch the watchers?