A FEW GOOD CARDINALS

“For the toxic narcissist, life is essentially war.” – Anonymous

Amazon Kindle/eBook etc.	LULU.COM	Bookshop.org
	NOTE: The concept and narrative of the book is similar across our various distribution channels. Variations occur in content between the ebook and printed versions and where appropriate.
BOOK REVIEW: Click here for the review of A Few Good Cardinals on the Wrote A Book Blog. BIBILIOGRAPHY and Resources: Click here for a selection of books, media and other links that made A Few Good Cardinals possible.

El Abra in Colombia is a cave system of considerable significance. It is estimated to be approximately 12,640 years old and reported to be one of the most ancient archaeological discoveries in the Western Hemisphere. The Muisca called El Abra their home between around 600 and 1600 AD. In around 1537 AD, the Muisca, an indigenous culture of the Altiplano Cundiboyacense, negotiated with an invading European power over the source of their gold.

There appears to have been a misunderstanding. To the Muisca, gold could have been a symbol of accomplishment because they owned lots of jewelry made of this precious and highly desirable metal. The conquistadores insisted the Muisca show them the source. The Muisca pointed to their salt mines, from which they extracted the commodity so desired by other tribes it made for excellent trading value. Frustrated, the invaders reportedly killed their counterparts in the negotiation and, to show how serious they were, almost everyone else in the tribe for “good measure.”

In hindsight, what the conquistadores failed to appreciate could hinder anyone today in getting ahead, being appreciated and loved just the same. Bias appears to have hindered them in considering that, to the Muiscas, salt was “gold” as it generated them abundant profit. The invaders, similarly, failed to appreciate that the presence of jewelry did not logically imply that a source of the precious metal was nearby or readily accessible. Perhaps the long, stressful journey, or the pressure from back home to return with abundant riches, prevented them from having an open mind. In addition, the impulse to retribute the Muisca’s perceived unwillingness to cooperate with capital punishment may be indicative of a utilitarian perspective held by the invader: “When no longer useful, discard.”

Manipulation in order to make a target do something they don’t want to do can be considered toxic behavior. If the end result mutually benefits each party, one could argue the target should have been more open minded. The question that inevitably arises is, “When does the benefit materialize?” while a follow up question may be, “Are there any stakeholders who stand to lose, regardless, but whose voice may never be sufficiently heard?” When passion dictates decision making, regret may come too late. It is said that to this day, the source of gold in the time of the Muisca’s run-in with the Spanish is yet to be found. Failure to obtain meaningful results from manipulative and coercive tactics appears not to have stopped anyone so inclined before or after the time of the conquistadores.

What mechanism(s) may be in play that would perpetuate the often indiscriminate use of coercion and manipulation? It seems that it would be the concept of “learning by example,” perhaps in conjunction with the principle of self-justification. If one party initiates something, a second party may try it as well—while fixing any shortcomings in the process. If the result is not meaningfully challenged, self-justification may give a sense of permission to continue the now newly established practice as Carol Travis et al. argue convincingly in Mistakes Were Made (but not by me).

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck, Nobel Prize winner: physics. April 23, 1858

 

But if there is a challenge we call that person a whistleblower. Reporting on abuse may suffer from a different form of manipulation though perhaps not less impactful. Going back a few hundred years, the Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, also known as the Spanish Inquisition, was introduced in 1478 by the Catholic Monarchs King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen Isabella I of Castile.These days, clergy may not go after heretics anymore, but they still go after children if a recently published list of cases between 2000 and 2019 is to be believed, accusing Protestant church leaders of having failed the community by mistreating sexual abuse victims and survivors.

Every time I feel compelled to do something, there must be a reason behind it. I may think logically about why I eat when I do, for example, but there is arguably a biological impetus for it as well. Survival is a strong motivator, and so is the will to live. For humans, in contrast to animals, having a meaning for life may also play a role as Viktor Frankl surmised after he spent some time in a Nazi concentration camp and developed his Logotherapy based on the experience. With behavior closely associated with context, we might be tempted to add a host of other factors as well, most of which may be of psychological and biochemical origin therefore falling outside of scope of this book. Research appeared to reveal that behavior seems to be quite similar across certain people if we group them in a particular way.

The counterpart of the toxic person must be the empath. It is recognized that empathy manifests in three different ways: cognitive, emotional and compassionate.  Cognitive empathy may be considered the closest in nature to narcissism, while compassionate empathy embodies the most wholesome qualities of empathy, instilling in the subject to not just feel what another person is feeling but also to take action to perpetuate constructive emotional wellbeing.

Experts seem to agree that the toxic person does not consider their behavior and its impact in the same way as a compassionate or emotional empath appears to do. They define everything a bit different. A lie, for the narcissist, is just an alternate interpretation of truth, for example. Unfortunately,experts have failed to identify in a meaningful way, at least for the victims of abuse, where toxic behavior comes from. The closest we seem to get is by identifying toxic behavior in terms of, for example:

1. A fear of being unable to meet the demands of a higher authority—whether a person or a deity;
2. A deep rooted conviction that one should pursue a goal whatever it takes; and
3. A sense of separateness or physical dissociation from one’s environment—the inability to perceive the effect of one’s actions as interconnected to a social structure.

Karma is a fundamental law that promises us to “reap what we sow.” When I do a good deed, I (or at least, my ego) may expect a reward. However, if it is indeed my ego expecting said reward, the good deed may be considered objectionable because it does not originate from the right frame of mind: genuine altruism. Philosophers have debated the issue of good deeds for thousands of years and may very well continue the discussion. Meanwhile, as ordinary citizens, we have to put up with, or benefit from, day to day toxic, not so toxic or genuinely benevolent neighborly actions. How are we supposed to know which to expect?

“Everything can be taken from a [hu]man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.” – Viktor Frankl, MD, PhD.

There are local, individual instances of abuse such as that between two people. Similarly to their behavior at home behind closed doors, toxic people can operate as a team or organization in order to perpetuate their agenda on a wider scale.

Anybody who has ever had to deal with a bureaucratic organization intent on pursuing its own agenda—against better knowing—may be able to attest to the challenges such institutionalized toxicity brings. We should be able to trust the media based on the premise that journalism’s first obligation reportedly is to tell the truth. How disappointing it must have been at the time, when the radio show War of the Worlds led to the birth of modern day fake news. Newspapers reported an alien invasion in October of 1938, an invasion that didn’t happen. The reason? Publishers apparently feared competition from a “new” medium, radio. Apparently, it was case in which it was okay to abandon one’s principles given a strong enough threat to one’s survival. Did everyone suddenly lose trust in reporters? It seems a new generation of readers and listeners grew up instead and all was forgotten…

When we are acutely aware of the effect of karma, it may strongly direct our behavior. How does that work for the person who ignores karma or claims it does not apply to them? Apparently, there is a great sense of freedom. A contributing factor is their shifting blame to another person or situation. When they run out of options, they may beg for forgiveness from you or the community, promising they will “never do it again.” Karma may be considered the uncomfortable consequence of behavior, but it may be best, and most conveniently, forgotten by those who stand to lose the most.

“Empathy is an important step towards compassion. Compassion for ourselves must be part of that, it must come first even. Once we have compassion for our mind and body, we can reimagine how society should function.”

Some people have always sought to gain control through pressure. It wasn’t until fairly recently that an effort was made to study the psychology of control. Labels were conceived: narcissism and empathy, psychopathy and altruism, sociopathy and echoism. The ultimate medium through which psychopathy and sociopathy express themselves as character traits may be war. War does not have to be violent nor does it have to involve many people. I may suggest that I am “at war” with the neighbor if I don’t like the new fence he put around his yard, for example. War may be constrained in time, or it may extend indefinitely. There is a “war on drugs,” for instance, that has been going on for decades.

How much does narcissism cost us? Maybe a lot financially—if the 2008 financial crisis was any indication and you did not live in a First Nation tribe isolated from “western” society. But what about the emotional and mental toll on our lives? Do the effects of narcissism extend to trauma inflicted on their victims, and does it affect one gender more than another? There are many voices that suggest men seem more narcissistic by nature. In fact, when I searched online and typed, “are men more narcissistic than women” the auto-fill suggested “why are men more…” instead. Yet, despite the widely held belief that men are more narcissistic than women, no systematic review to establish the magnitude had apparently been conducted until a few years ago. A recent meta-analysis of the available data appears to establish that the differences seem less well pronounced or even non-existent.

In real life, we deal with narcissism from either men or women—or both at once. It may be so complex that no reasonable research could ever establish a reliable cause and effect, at which point most people might abandon the effort and go on with their lives—until something meaningful affects us personally.

“...the cost-conscious design of the four nuclear powerplants at the Chernobyl site in Ukraine was not an accident—pun not intended. When something leaves little room for error, the impact of one person can be quite significant.”

That we seem to be our own worst enemy should not have been a secret in the 1820s. Jealousy, honor killings, territorial disputes, and war were all very well established practices at the time Faraday invented his electric motor. However, since Faraday’s invention, things have accelerated rather rapidly both for evil and good. Occasionally, both principles were advocated by the same person. In 1918, Fritz Haber gave the world the Haber–Bosch process to synthesize ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen gas, considered critical for the large-scale synthesis of fertilizers and explosives. Before that, Haber—allegedly against the advice of his wife—pioneered developing and weaponizing chlorine and other poisonous gases during World War I, resulting in the gruesome death of countless soldiers on the battlefield. A further developed form of Haber’s creation, Zyklon B, contributed to the Holocaust in World War II.

What makes one person seek destruction and another progress and prosperity? It seems the will to survive translates differently from one individual to another. In one personality, it presents as fear and manifests as insecurity. Insecurity, not to be confused with lack of confidence and worry, can, according to experts in the field, be compensated by embellishment of one’s contribution, bullying and imposing control on others.

People born during four distinct periods in the year have a personality characteristic that sets them apart from everyone else: the ability to focus on something intently. The object of their choosing seems to become them. Born between December 21 and January 20, March 21 and April 19, June 21 and July 22, and between September 23 and October 22, they appear to have a knack for expertise in their chosen field. The downside of this natural sense of direction is that these people tend to think rather highly of their own capabilities. In other words, these people appear to have a significantly higher risk of developing narcissistic behavior traits than others. Contributing factors may be childhood development, trauma, and exposure to narcissistic behavior from others.

Narcissistic behavior that turns toxic includes denying the presence and contributions of others. Peer pressure can apparently legitimize such denial. When toxic narcissists operate together, their manipulation of relationships can turn into institutionalized abuse, corruption and worse.

Irrespective of intellectual capacity, the anti-social behavior of the toxic narcissist appears to have an adverse impact on our collective quality of life. How can we identify avenues to promote responsible behavior that eliminates risk and prevents objectionable harm? Someone with a utilitarian mindset may never be able to judge nor be accountable for the consequences of their actions. How suitable would such an individual thus be for a leadership position that impacts the lives of hundreds, thousands or millions? Perhaps a solopreneur business as a merchant, artist, inventor or expert with a small support team—where they are accountable to themselves—their talent, skills and dedication may be a much more fertile ground for the fulfillment of their life purpose.

If the toxic narcissist perceives life as a theater of war, how does the healthy, adaptive narcissist consider life? The adaptive narcissist, and the cognitive empath, may see life as an adventure, whereas the somatic empath who is capable of feeling what others feel, and the affective empath, who responds to people’s emotions, may see life and all of its manifestations as a big puzzle to be solved.

There may be no wrong or right answer to anything. Everything may be exactly the way God intended it to be. And yet, he also gave us discernment and neverending curiosity. Let's make the most of it.

Get your copy of A Few Good Cardinals now:

Amazon Kindle/eBook etc.	LULU.COM	Bookshop.org
BOOK REVIEW: Click here for the review of A Few Good Cardinals on the Wrote A Book Blog.

References