>>331546 >Get a PDF of "Dangerous Personalities: An FBI Profiler Shows You How to Identify and Protect Yourself from Harmful People" by Joe Navarro and post it here. Done: http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=D73BA85DB50E2493339084CF7682FA5C

>>331546 >FBI Profiler Shows You How to Identify and Protect Yourself from Harmful People" > (Opinionated, Argumentative, Prone to Hate). From observations, does it look like FBI's actually used definition of "Harmful People" would likely include: - SJW? - Gore's cargo cult? - shitlords? - veterans? >stringing together disparate events and ideas to fit their views and justify their actions. Uh. > They see no connection between AntiFa and someone saying women being sexy is bad. They see no connection between someone who would mock or harass someone on social media for a "bad" opinion, and someone who would kill or cause serious harm for the same reason. Huh. That's going to work well. >The only counter we need to be aware of is "rebranding" of SJW. And this only is "rebranding" FBI. > A. Teaching others how to "spot" an SJW, how they escalate, how they react to certain stimuli. "This mentality is a threat to you" presented as "Look at this loser". Already done by one megaloshitlord known as Vox Day. "SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police".

This came from a recent thread. The bottom line is- the SJW desires power because s/he is a loser. Changing the world around them (rather than improve themselves) makes themselves feel like they have power. So, do we try to "fix" some and reassure them they don't need to do this shit to make up for inferiority (give them the "love" they never had)? Or do we kick them while they are drown, drive the bastards deeper into despair, until going after games/media/politics sends them into the same horror as trying to lose weight or find a meaningful partner? Due to how they have acted, I'm heavily leaning on the latter.

>>331665 As a follow up - Point 19 explains they aren't usually bullying or commanding, only when they have a sense of superiority (given to them by others due to being part of a group or collective or because they haven't lost all self-confidence). I'd also argue this comes about because they are so starved for victory/power that when they finally get it they misuse it. Like an ugly guy bragging he finally has a girlfriend, a child bragging he finally won against an older sibling, etc. Point 20 suggests that they use tactics that promote themselves coming under harm because their self-hatred is so deep it results in a kind of masochism. While I said earlier to neutralize them by holding up their self-loathing under intense scrutiny- perhaps killing them with kindness might work. Even if they don't heel-turn (and probably won't) their lashing out to even kindness will drive away neutrals from their ideals, and could result in the same goal as the mockery. Some people react badly to being humiliated and mocked. Other react worse to being humiliated and pitied. > No I don't need help… I said I'M FINE!! In short: > Mock them for wanting power/success because they're a loser > Pity them for wanting power/success because they're a loser > Make memes for both?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ll4sI0aiX0E/ A video by Computing Forever, brilliantly summarizing the Marxist/Leftist attitude. I.e. A loser who loses out in survival of the fittest, so they push for systems that will give them equal footing (diversity quotas, Marxism, etc)- even if they are underfoot of a tyrannical regime or even if their QoL improves only minimally. The video goes on to explain how meritocracy must be upheld in all walks of life to prevent it spreading- including the video game market. I'd add to this and say that many do not push for destruction of meritocracy to gain something consciously. While many women may see how the system could benefit them, I'd argue most of the time those who push for it do so because it's ingrained into them as normal via education and media. Feelings are most important, good people must feel good and never bad, bad people must never feel good.

Found this doing rounds on Twitter. Seems to be the writer criticizes how modern SJWism is affecting literacy education. The article basically summarizes SJWness. http://quillette.com/2018/04/15/stifling-uniformity-literary-theory/ https://archive.is/MExeq > If one understands the underlying theories, then it is not difficult to see why this happens. Despite significant differences, all the approaches I listed above assume that: 1) There is no universal human nature. 2) Human beings are primarily a product of their time and place. 3) Therefore, power, culture, ideologies, and the social institutions that promulgate them have an extraordinary capacity to shape and condition individuals. 4) In Western societies, since these institutions have been dominated by people who were predominantly rich, straight, white, and male it has tended towards pushing the particular interests of rich straight white men to the detriment of all other groups. 5) Furthermore, these rich straight white men have done this by acting as if their sectional interests were universal and natural – a flagrant lie. 6) Importantly, however, few if any of these rich white straight men were consciously aware of doing this, because they were themselves caught in the matrices of power, culture, ideologies and so on. 7) Where subordinated groups have gone along with these power structures, they have been exploited and the victims of ‘false consciousness’. 8) Now is the time to redress this balance by exposing the ways in which old texts have promoted the sectional interests of the rich straight white men and by promoting the voices of the historically marginalised groups. […] > "Either you are with the oppressed & therefore on the side of the angels, or you are implicitly supporting the side of the oppressors, & a damnable & unrepentant sinner. It is a straightforward binary moral choice & its missionaries will take no prisoners" […] > However, it is not simply a matter of which thinkers are taught, but also how they are taught. Whenever I teach literary theory, I always ensure that I stress to students that what they are studying is not Gospel, but rather ‘highly opinionated men and women making very contentious statements about the world’. Critical thinking cannot flourish in conditions in which students cannot question the material they are being taught. We should not expect or even encourage students to inherit our own ideas, least not of all political beliefs. Universities are places to learn how to think not what to think. It seems somewhat ironic that a set of literary approaches so committed to deconstructing and uncovering the supposed processes of social indoctrination should also be so oblivious to their own role in indoctrinating a generation of students. Worth spreading IMO. Put the URL into the searchbar of Twitter and you'll find pleanty of people RTing it. https://twitter.com/clairlemon/status/985725716179251201

>>331546 I've been reading through this book, and I noticed a little silly something about it to make it easier to understand the particulars of dangerous personalities- namely how villains from the pokemon games function as examples of these personality types. The Narcissist - Lysandre Completely disregards the opinions of others, thinks in absolutes, holds a high opinion towards grandiose concepts, has an "If I can't have it, no-one can" mentality. Those things are trademarks of the narcissist, full stop. He also enforces his subordinates' uniforms to be as equally expensive and gaudy as his are. He refuses to accept the idea that that ugly things exist, but not only fails to look at his own ugly attitudes, he acts to destroy this "ugly" thing and refuses to see the beauty that resides within ugly things and people. The ultimate weapon has an ugly purpose, to destroy and kill, yet he's willing to use it to wipe out all the "ugly" things in the universe. not only is it the backwards mentality of "starting war to end war" It's like putting down a dog with a sledgehammer because it's got an off-color fur spot or an ear chopped off. Someone like Lysandre doesn't see that, all they see is an ugly mutt that they think needs to be put down for it's ugliness. The Emotionally Unstable - Guzma Abused, afraid, angry, escalates his attitude when his path is blocked, attracted to someone who's potentially abusive. Guzma goes from threatening, to blank, to screaming self-depreciation in the space of mere minutes- all in the same sequence! It looks easy to put Ghetsis in this category as well, which would be correct in ways- when both don't get their way, their emotions and attitude go completely off the wall, Guzma is the more prominent choice, because it fits him better based on the book's information. As far as dangerous personalities go, I really feel like Guzma is actually both accurate and subdued as far as "Emotionally Unstable" goes, namely because he loosens up, and even resolves an old wound in the postgame of (U)S/(U)M. I say he's subdued, because if you've read any stories about people's completely off-the-fucking-wall in-laws, they can go from zero to sixty to backwards thirty then fifty and then throwing the television at you because you said something minor that made them think you absolutely hate them. The Paranoid Personality - Ghetsis Ghetsis fits the paranoid personality for several reasons: #1. His egocentricity, the fact he set up his own adopted son as a puppet-leader, a political meat-shield, and probably a literal one if he deemed necessary. #2. His abusiveness towards everyone around him (especially his pokemon), and willingness to use physical violence outside of pokemon battles. #3. The fact that he's usually well-composed until his direct influence is interfered with, then he goes batshit insane. #4. His battle team is a direct countermeasure against said adopted son and the legendary pokemon he plans to control. #5. He sets up his organization like a cult, and hides his true intentions from everyone around him. Most of the other pokemon villains see their subordinates as tools or as a means to an end, Ghetsis, is so distrusting, that everyone below him on the chain of command doesn't know his true intentions, or even the ultimate goal of the organization. After the events of B/W, he takes a backseat in the leadership of team plasma, letting Colress do the heavy lifting so-to-speak. Ghetsis has many other aspects of dangerous personalities, but paranoid is his most defining, and thus the reason I chose him for this category. The Predator - Giovanni First off, he's a legit mob boss. Second, he's willing to use any means to expand his sphere of power, he's charismatic and influential and gives zero shits. When one gives zero shits about the law in this context, that's a dangerous person to be around. Given all this, he's got the competency, and the smarts to juggle his cover jobs, his criminal enterprise, and the masses of his stolen technology. His influence is such a shaker, that even after his actions have been undone, there are still those who hold fast to his power, hence why the events in GSC happened, and the fact that team rocket hangs on like a stubborn tick most of the time. The nugget bridge event in sun & moon, that veteran was probably that same ex-grunt who got thrashed by red all those years ago, also… [spoilers]Even if you beat him, it's nothing to him. He just thinks about where he can take his evil schemes to next.[/spoiler] That's a predator for you.

>>331870 Needed to split my post because of length. Everyone Else Archie and Maxie are potentially narcissists, but considering how they change their minds after the player deals with their respective legendary, it's really not as comparable as lysandre, who outright refuses to accept defeat. Lusamine would've been applicable for the narcissist- even emotionally unstable, but that was Nihilego speaking through her, and Necrozma taught her a lesson in being a haughty bitch. Cyrus is one I've been having a hard time categorizing, he's a straight up misanthrope, and was like that since a child, but his attitudes are inconsistent. He has a crobat, which evolves with friendship towards that pokemon- we don't know if he thinks of his crobat as a tool, or a friend. He freaks out when he loses in the DS games, but in a bonus appearance of the later generations, he's actually calm and reserved when he loses. I am by no means a psychological profiler, especially towards video game characters, but I'm having difficulty figuring out where he lies among when it comes to dangerous personality. As for Colress? He's not a dangerous personality, just probably autistic. In B2W2, he always takes things at a clinical, methodical approach, He's distant from emotion in a way somewhat like Cyrus, but plenty capable of feeling and acknowledging empathy- which is something that's completely alien to dangerous personalities.

>>331871 >>331870 I wish to add: I don't think Cyrus is really even a dangerous personality. He acts more like an idealist-romantic type pushed too far, as if he really did think that the only way to save the world would be to destroy and remake it. Also, I love how Giovanni is the most badass of them, when everyone else was aiming way higher with their schemes.

>>331546 Reading it now. I must say, this guy writes like an absolute cuckold (although a cuckold may be as correct in his knowledge as any other man.) He uses "toxic" to refer to people unironically. It's also kiked in many ways. I would advise reading as little of the emotional appeal bullshit and just going straight to the practical parts, except that there really are no practical parts in it. Navarro jumps to conclusions, presumes, does the same "magical thinking" he so criticises, and evidently has no clue about how life works, despite having seen so many of these personality types. Holy cocks, there are so many stories here where it becomes self-evident that the only way to live is not to take shit like this and to rely first and foremost on one's own judgement. These cucks get nothing, but still give. That, I think, is almost as much of a problem as the so-called "dangerous personalities." Also, Navarro believes in da six hundred gorillion, (((antiracism))), and learned nothing from the Unabomber or Breivik except how to shoehorn sane people into his "muh paranoid" type. There is so much poz and useless emotional appeal that I don't even see a point in honestly reading it unless you're a useless normalfag and belong on cuckchan anyway. There's also a good few SJWs with a resemblance to the emotionally unstable, although that mostly applies more to lolcows and other such уроды.

>>331880 I'm not sure I understand why you think that Cyrus isn't a DP, he's antisocial at best, and a sociopath at worst. >>331888 >Holy cocks, there are so many stories here where it becomes self-evident that the only way to live is not to take shit like this and to rely first and foremost on one's own judgement. that's half the point of this book, to give the reader a resource to defend themselves from evil people. >Also, Navarro believes in da six hundred gorillion, (((antiracism))), and learned nothing from the Unabomber or Breivik except how to shoehorn sane people into his "muh paranoid" type. There is so much poz and useless emotional appeal that I don't even see a point in honestly reading it unless you're a useless normalfag and belong on cuckchan anyway. >sane people Did that strike a nerve? You took that awfully personally. Besides, you got me with your bait on (((muh holohoax))). You can't fucking fake industrial-scale suffering and torture, no way. The only remote credence to holocaust denial was that the actual number of practicing Jewish people that died. What we DO know, is that hundreds of millions of Europeans were put under a religious banner -regardless of actual practice- and murdered. By the way, haven't you forgotten that Hitler is the posterboy of SJWs? He's a failed artist who spends more time politicking than doing actual art, goes into actual politics, gets power, and turns everything upside down. Guilty until proven innocent was his M.O. which happens also be the M.O. of Social Justice Warriors. >random fucking Russian for no reason. Why? What the fuck are you playing at?