In August Guido ran a thread bluntly entitled Is Brown Bonkers? Among some predictable comments were several fairly clinical and detailed observations: is it autism, or Aspergers ? No, replied one correspondent, Brown has Antisocial Personality Disorder, this being the appropriate technical diagnosis because he lies so systematically. Autistics / Aspergers sufferers are incapable of maintaining a lie.
I have recently come across some research that suggests another way of looking at Brown’s 'mis-speaking', pointing back to his being autistic.
Put some sand in an empty smarties tube and ask a child to guess what’s inside. Get them to open it and then ask them what they’d guessed. Older children - typically aged 4 and over - will admit they guessed smarties: but younger kids will say ‘sand’. As will autistics.
There are even more complex experiments which test for intention. Again, autistics will tend retrospectively to re-write history to align their account of past intentions with outcomes: they will claim an actual outcome is what they intended, even though it can be shown by cleverly designed experiment that they intended something else.
This is closely linked to the well-known horror autistics have of being seen to be in the wrong. Remind us of anyone ?
I suggest as a working hypothesis that Brown’s lies are best understood as an autistic re-writing of history – specifically, the history of his past predictions and intentions. He was expecting smarties, but he’s landed us with a handful of dust – and he’s telling us it was going to be dust all along.
Of course neither autism nor any other physiological condition is a moral failing per se. As it happens Brown has several moral failings as well, and I see no contradiction in leveling them against him.
But the real sin is that of the craven Labour MPs who knowingly inflicted him upon us.
ND
50 comments:
I've always thought he was a card carrying nut job ever since I first saw him in the 80s. The odd tics (the curiously drooping/jutting jaw motion), the complete inability to think on his feet and depart from a pre-prepared briefing, the power lust, the controlling instincts. I think also deeply insecure - hence his insatiable mania for spending other people's money in order to gain approval.
Seb - on the subject of his compulsively spending other people's money, did you see this from yer actual expert, Lucy Beresford, back in October ?
I covered a fine example of Brown-in-denial here.
I've always thought he was flawed, and another observation I would make is that he is pathologically jealous, as seen in his dealings with Blair. Blair and him were the flip sides of the same coin, and both were delusional to the extreme. The only difference is that I believe that Brown actually convinces himself that he is right, while Blair was just a lying money grubbing twat.
I too think he is truly psychologically flawed and it is day by day showing itself.
I can't agree more about the Labour MP's in that they know what he is like, they know he is lying, they know it is wrong, and they know they should do something about it, but won't because of petty greed and a desire to cling to power, which in my book shows them for being unfit for public office. It's an argument I make about the rich Tories, in that they don't need the job, so are there for another reason, while Labour MP's are greedy and need the pay and point to Prescott as the perfect example. It usually causes a riot but is true nonetheless.
Politicians as a group display many traits that in others would be considered psychological disorders. The ego trip, self importance, never admitting you are wrong, in the belief you are always right, are horrible personal characteristics. Public service was once a noble calling, now debased by incompetence at the highest level. "No-one in their right mind would be a politician" - how often have you heard that?
I have always considered Brown to be a "successful psychopath". He actually knows full well he has no interest in other people but understands from experience that fegning such interest can get him power and wealth. Politics is actually the most obvious route for a successful psychopath to take to power and wealth by lying about a shared interest in other people. He has probably learned that if you make a mistake, but then fail to admit a mistake and then carry on as if you had made the right decision all the time, then eventually people will forget you ever made the mistake in the first place. This strategy is becmoing undone because his decisions are now needing to be very frequent and are more open both to public scrutiny and human memory.
Let take the 10p tax fiasco. That wasn't a strategy that grew out of autism. That was a strategy that grew out of a desire to attack the Tories on their ground whilst at the same time entirely forgetting about the impact such a tax hike would have on his own voters. When exposed his lies were deliberate. They were not a projection of his own revised reality. In fact he pushed Alistair Darling to back-track over the whole issue while he hid in the dark corners, showing little interest in the impact this would have on Alistair Darling himself. Remember, the 10p fiasco was a made-by-Brown fiasco but Darling was the one forced top pick up the pieces.
What is of greatest interest is whether Darling will be pushed too far. He seems to be basically on honourable man (probably why Brown chose him - projecting an image of a government of honour whilst covering for his own psychopathic personality, another trait os "successful psychopaths").
Interestingly Tony Blair was also once described as a succesful psychopath, but I wonder if he was little more than a facade for the successful psychopath at the heart of new Labour -Gordon Brown.
Houdini touched upon the fact that Blair was well aware of Browns psychological flaws, but I am sure that Blair was behind the return of Campbell and Mandelson into government circles, because he could not bear to see Brown destroy his "legacy" any further.
Blair is heavily complicit with keeping this nutjob in power for his own narcissistic reasons.
Isn't Lucy Beresford marvellous? We'll never see her on the BBC again.
Seb - she's great, isn't she ? I fear you may be right; she'll need to watch her back ...
Mark - fine satire, sir
Houdini - petty greed, maybe, but I suspect cowardice as well (then again, they truly have no other candidate!)
John - welcome: yes, frequently, and I know some really excellent people who dropped out of the politico-rat-race, for that & other related reasons
(all the more shocking when it's Damian Green that gets picked on, he's closer to what you'd hope for than many we could all name)
anon - Darling: agreed
- Blair: don't let's get started ! BTW you might find this interesting, at Sackerson's excellent blog
Ralph - Brown, Blair, Mandelson, Campbell, Murdoch - it's quite a freak-show, isn't it ? so many extraordinary pathologies in the same bunker ...
...The ego trip, self importance, never admitting you are wrong, in the belief you are always right..Politicians as a group display many traits that in others would be considered psychological disorders."
I say ..steady on.
But he lies about things he knows are wrong. Surely an Autistic person wouldn't be able to resist actually answering questions in PMQ ( Brown clearly can ).
He also has a massive ego - as his activities as a student in Edinburgh shows.
My money's on Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Of course he has Antisocial Personality Disorder at the very least. Why else would anyone suggest it is a good idea to take some empty beer cans and a brick in a plastic bag to a party?
Fascinating stuff, Nick. Whilst none of us are perfect, and many exhibit sometimes strange (to others) traits, there's no doubt in the Tuscan mind that Gordon is a long, long way from being the full enchilada. Shaking hands with your wife after a difficult speech is waaaaaay off the normal emotional scale.
Perhaps his 'wife' could phone the number in the ad at the bottom of the page? Then we could all find out?
If you think that Gordon Brown has "sprung a leak" mentally speaking - I may well agree with you.
But to compare him to someone on the autistic spectrum is disgusting. As the father of an autistic child (who has read nearly everything published about the condition) - I found your comments about "moral failing" of autistic people insulting and stupid.
One point in comparison to Brown; It is often seen that people with ASD are very keen to fight injustice done to individuals - therefore would have been up in arms about the Damien Green affair.
It would be ideal for his supporters if he were seen to be autistic, because he might gain from the sympathy vote and it would help other people rationalise his behaviour. This might help them sleep at night while he continues to flush their country down the toilet but it doesn't do any good in the long run.
Both Autistics and Narcissists are extremely self absorbed, suffer from rages and show little empathy among other common traits. However, even a high functioning Aspergers is unlikely to cope with being a PM. They are pedantic and specialise in one field. They are not good at lying. Ask them about anything else and you will draw a blank. Narcs on the other hand claim to speak for the whole world about various matters (99% bs)and twist and manipulate the truth for the listener. Narcs are all control freaks.
Narcs are so self absorbed they do not realise how irrational they appear to an outside observer. Nor do they care because you are either in or out of their circle of control. If you are inside, you are a codependent. If you criticise from the outside you are a threat to their own grandiosity and will be treated mercilessly by the Narc and codependents. See Damian Green. Narcs use shock tactics to control onlookers. See Damian Green again. If you accept their behaviour (shock tactics, splitting, manipulation, acting like it never happened, reverse reactions to events, overspending money they don't have, rages, withholding due consideration, asexuality, evading responsibility, bullying, crossing personal boundaries to name a few) then you are a controlled codependent who will accept that up is down if the Narc says so.
Note how shrink Lucy Beresford said about Gollum. "There is a danger that we may collude with him." ie become codependent.
Another possibility is that he suffers from "Cluster Headaches" - look it up & related Horner's Syndrome to see for yourself. Nothing terrible about being a clusterhead except for the standard treatment in Scotland at his time was ECG and some very powerful psycho-somatic drugs. All of which can have some weird long term side effects. Allegedly there is a conference paper, presented in the Netherlands, which describes the treatment of a gifted student who became affected after loosing an eye in a sports injury........
Leave him alone to get on with the job!
For me it was when he was interviewed by Boulton on Sky when he was confronted about lying about George Osbourne during his party conference speech. He denied that he'd said what he clearly had and then shuffled through some papers as to look for evidence of his innocence. Class A nutter.
I have AS. I do not believe Brown has it. The only "speculated" person, past or present, whom I regard as a likely case is Orwell.
I know I couldn't do a customer services job, let alone be Prime Minister. It wouldn't happen.
Bi-polar disorder anyone?
Whatever it is, he patently has several screws loose. The repetitive language; the inability to empathise when it's appropriate; the tantrums; the blatent lying (I didn't call an election because I thought I might win!); the delusions of brilliance over the economy when its patently going down the tubes.
Whatever else it is, he's obviously a Megalomaniac. Definition: a historical term for behavior characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, genius, or omnipotence ....It is a Greek word ,"megalo" meaning "very large", "great", or "exaggerated" and "mania" meaning obsession thus combining to denote an obsession with, either in the form of irrational perceived need for or preoccupation with in one's own estimation having and/or obtaining, grandiosity and extravagance (especially in the form of great fame and popularity, material wealth, social influence or political power)"
1. I must have missed the passage of the law that says people with mild autism aren't allowed to have responsible jobs.
2. And, anyway, those who've met him say in private he's a personable and humorous. Doesn't sound autistic to me.
3. Now, Margaret Thatcher ...
I think you have completely misunderstood the smartie tube thing... as a father to an autistic child, I have done it. Two people look in a smarties tube, then one leaves and the other stays with the AS person and replaces the smarties with sand. The AS kid assumes that the person who left and who has not seen the smarties replaced with sand, nevertheless still knows. If something is true - ie no sweets in tube instead sand, then everybody knows this... because AS people have a poor - not non existent - concept of self and other...A High functioning AS person like my son can perfectly understand this if it is explained..
Look, the fact that he is raving, a compulsive liar, completely barking, round the twist, demented and delusional (to say nothing of properly nasty, deeply vengeful and clearly inadequate) is obviously beside the point.
Ditto, we shouldn't read too much into the fact that he may also be (though I admit I am only guessing), very, very, very strangely sexually frustrated.
What counts is that he and his BEST friend Peter, his very, very, very best friend Peter, have taken control of the news agenda again.
In short, he understands.
So, lay off.
AS people can be very personable and humorous, as it is a question of the individuals personality.. its obvious when you think about it. Everybody is different in their reactions to things ...
thanks for that Mutley, very explanatory.
What is of greatest interest is whether Darling will be pushed too far. He seems to be basically on honourable man
Sorry to say it, but I think that is bollocks. Darling is a true unreconstructed old red militant, seventies style, only now in a nice suit. He is soft spoken and not the petrol bomb type any more, but that comes with having money and enjoying the trappings of power. He and Brown are two peas in an incompetent and 'out of their depth' socialist pod. Don't mistake his quietness as honourable; he is red to the core and is happy to be used by Brown as long as the trappings of his office are bestowed on him.
1. I must have missed the passage of the law that says people with mild autism aren't allowed to have responsible jobs.
No law, but this isn't exactly the job of lolly pop man is it? You want to take chances like this with psychologically flawed individuals then fine, but you won't make that judgement for me and mine. I wonder why you would want to?
2. And, anyway, those who've met him say in private he's a personable and humorous. Doesn't sound autistic to me.
Like who? You? You've seen this reported somewhere? Why would you believe this? But they would say that wouldn't they? And let's be honest here, the nut job Brown would be the centre of attention so of course he would wallow in that and be very nice and agreeable wouldn't he?
3. Now, Margaret Thatcher ...
Now we get it and understand your shite completely. We are talking about Thatcher, the one who brought us back from the brink of the late seventies and the disaster, again, of Labour?
Here's a little factoid for you to scurry off and cry over...there were more jobs lost in the coal industry, and more mines closed, between 1974 and 1979, than under the whole of Thatchers tenure as PM. Look it up and then think what a cretin you really are.
You've all got it wrong. Brown isn't mentally ill - he's criminally insane!
And, anyway, those who've met him say in private he's a personable and humorous. Doesn't sound autistic to me.
Stalin liked a good drink. In fact no one could out drink him. it later emerged that this was because his Vodka was largely water but still.. And he had many friends.
Killed a lot of them but still..
And Hitler. life and soul of the beer celler. loads of friends who he stood by long after their incompetence had made them unfit for office.
our Jacqui has nothing to fear.
http://www.depression-guide.com/largactil.htm
Largactil ( Thorazine, Chlorpromazine ) is an anti psychotic drug of low-potency. Used in the treatment of disorganized and psychotic thinking. Also used to help treat false perceptions (e.g. hallucinations or delusions.)
Side Effects of Largactil:
Although side effects from Largactil are not common, they can occur...
* skin discoloration (yellowish-brown to greyish-purple)
* jaw, neck, and back muscle spasms
...
* rhythmic face, mouth, or jaw movements
The Prime Mentalist is on largactil! There's a thought. It reminds me of a Billy Connolly gig I went to see at the Albert Hall back in the 80s. At the time Ronald Reagan was the subject of a (skin?) cancer scare. If I remember correctly Connolly said something like "I hope he doesn't get depressed. He's got his finger on the nuclear button - if it's curtains for him it could be curtains for all of us! MY FATHER'S YOUNGER THAN HIM & WE DON'T GIVE HIM THE REMOTE CONTROL FOR THE TV!" Classic stuff.
Luckily our trident nukes won't work without American permission. (Don't believe this crap anout independent nuclear deterrent, believe you me.)
An inspired post today, ND! Such excellent discussion. It's what blogs are for.
M-i-a-S, Lilith, TT - APD was where I came down after the Guido thread, including comments like clowntime's; and as Steven & the anons say, there are several other possibilities to consider: but then reading the experiments ...
Mike W - no desire to insult anyone. There are two distinct strands I was contrasting:
(a) there is some pathology at work here, as we all agree (except pants!), and the stakes are so high for all of us that we're entitled to wonder about it (I for one want to know which way Brown is likely to jump: this is of no small interest to me)
(b) at the same time there are moral judgements to be made. In Brown's case I see no reason to withold judgement (which one might do on a very young child or a very disfunctional adult)
DD - (1) & (2) - what houdini said. Some jobs, sure: PM - no way. Whatever the diagnosis, just look at Brown's shocking performance
Mutt - thanks for comments: yes there are lots of subtleties and I may well have missed some of the import of these experiments; but I do believe the smarties experiment I was reading about is slightly different to the one you describe
versatile scientific apparatus, that smarties tube !
Labour MPs didn't inflict him on us, they were just too scared about their own careers to speak out.
A subtle difference, but a difference nonetheless.
let's be clear.
A person might well be autisic - it doesn't mean they're not a total **** too !
Here is a documentary about someone with mild aspergers. They are always seeking to find order out of chaos, not vice versa as in McBeans case.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WAfWfsop1e0
To me it looks like Gordon Brown is narcissistic, not AS/ autistic.
He doesn't like to be blamed for being wrong far more than he hates being wrong.
Thus the cover-up is more important than the decision.
I don't believe Gordo is a rationaliser, see economy.
I don't believe Gordo dislikes attention. I think Gordo used Blair's charisma to get attention for himself.
Gordo wants to control other people, an autistic wouldn't care what other people did.
Gordo likes to tinker, an autistic would like to simplify.
This is of course, not very useful as it still leaves the fact that we cannot predict what paths he will choose for the country. Only that he has a very poor record of choosing the correct ones in the past.
Surely a difficulty in admitting when you're wrong is more a sign of a large ego (not exactly uncommon in any politician, or any professional for that matter) rather than some other deep seated psychological malady.
As for Lucy Beresford, we on the left were more than a little skeptical of her, grounds for calling her an expert look more than a little shaky.
I think the two different experiments suggest the same conclusion, not delusion. That for ASD people what is, is. Facts are facts, very black and white. By the way I don't recognise Brown as ASD, rather he is obsessive, arrogant, cruel and deluded, but probably within the bounds of normality.
My son has Aspergers. He is as honest as the days is long. If he says snow is black and then its proved he is wrong he will unfailingly admit he was wrong before.
I don't think Brown's behaviour is explained by this condition at all. He's just an idealogue who is convinced he is right and that free market economics is wrong. That explains why he will argue a case ad infinitum and then when he changes his postion will pretend thus was always so.
I do however agree with those who say he is a twat.
Its one thing to critices a politicians policies and achievements, but to suggest he is bonkers is offensive. I just can't work out whether it's offensive to politicians, or offensive to people with Autism.
And Houdini - found how to pull your chain. I'm not sure how praising Thatcher's achievements is proof of her sanity. And say what you like about Gordon Brown, at least he doesn't count someone who overthrew a democratically elected government and tortured and murdered thousands of his fellow countrymen as a friend.
I'm not sure how praising Thatcher's achievements is proof of her sanity.
Look again at what was said; I never held up any achievement of Thatchers, and I never said she wasn't bonkers. Want to try again in your vile defence of this vile Government?
And say what you like about Gordon Brown, at least he doesn't count someone who overthrew a democratically elected government and tortured and murdered thousands of his fellow countrymen as a friend.
Pinochet never overthrew a democratically elected Government; he overthrew a communist, Cuban backed junta that was in itself murdering its own citizens, and then he gave back democracy to Chile. I think he is great as he helped us during the Falklands conflict and saved perhaps many thousands of British troops, which is why Thatcher counted him, and Chile, as a friend. I was there at Kellys Garden and appreciate the help given.
I bet you would have loved to see the troops fail eh? Just to see Thatcher fail you would see British troops dead, yep, a true son of Labour. I bet you would like and campaign for the Malvinas to be given to Argentina eh?
All that being said, Thatcher never had anything as bad as Iraq or Afghanistan, to name only two, on her conscience, but you didn't support them so that doesn't count eh?
Gordon Brown is not autistic, though he does share some characteristics of autism.
He is actually a psychopath (often called sociopath or anti-social personality disorder)
Some of the main traits of psychopaths:
Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.
Other traits:
Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
Authoritarian
Secretive
Paranoid
Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
Conventional appearance
Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
Incapable of real human attachment to another
Unable to feel remorse or guilt
Extreme narcissism and grandiose
May state readily that their goal is to rule the world
Perhaps you might wish to set out your qualifications and experience in order to make such a diagnosis - especially since you have probably never had the chance to meet the guy and certainly never in a clinical context.
I appreciate that some of those making comments may well have some experience - but I suspect that it is as patients.
Perhaps you and all the other amateur psychologists should understand that all people tend to behave differently when subject to public exposure - and no professional would ever try to make a diagnosis on such a basis.
Now how would you diagnose people who allow their dislike of someone to over power their usual rational thinking and become consumed by malice?
Please remember that this technique has been employed in the past against Tony Benn and Tony Blair - to say nothing about its popularity with the KGB and the Nazis.
3.19pm
Gordon is psychologically flawed.
Nice try TBNGU but we all know he's a
Replicant
I suggest as a working hypothesis that Brown’s lies are best understood as an autistic re-writing of history – specifically, the history of his past predictions and intentions. He was expecting smarties, but he’s landed us with a handful of dust – and he’s telling us it was going to be dust all along.Or would he? Because you see, I think Brown would argue and shout that there were Smaries in the tube. That if we could not see those smarties, then that would be our fault, and not his.
Yet, you on the left, Andreas, seem to find nothing wrong in Mr Draper probably having no qualifications at all...Why is that?
Post a Comment