General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: who is more sociopathic [View all]laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)Although it's important to note that there are different classifications of sociopaths/psychopaths. I don't feel like digging up my books (in the middle of a move) but there are some psychopaths (some books mix psychopath with sociopath) who are dumb and violent (the repeat offender type), there are some who are a bit smarter and perpetuate white collar fraud and sometimes get caught, there are some whose purpose in life is to mooch off of people and work as little as possible by manipulating those close to them, and then there are the smart/scary/violent ones who cause mayhem before getting caught (if they do) and the smart/scary/manipulate-people-through-legal-means-mostly types.
I think if GWB would have been born in a middle-class or poor family he would've been of the moocher type. I think Mitt is the last one with an overdose of narcissism. GWB doesn't give a shit what people think, even when he was campaigning. Worrying about image is all Mitt thinks about, imo. And GWB was probably the biggest slacker in the WH ever. And yes, they are both equally dangerous. In the book I'm talking about (by psychopath expert Robert Hare) he mentions that whatever 'type' of psychopath a person is, they are all equally capable of great destruction and violence if pushed to that point (which is usually much, much lower than with normal people who only get that way if their lives are threatened, or children or some great duress happens.) There is no 'benign' psychopath type.