U.S.A. – The Sociopathic Society

A sociopathic society, paradoxically, creates dominant social norms that are antisocial— that is, norms that assault the well-being and survival of much of the population and undermine the social bonds and sustainable environmental conditions essential to any form of social order. This reign of antisocial social norms is crucial to my definition of sociopathic society. Like an autoimmune disease, such antisocial societal programming leads to behavior that weakens and can, in the most extreme scenario, kill the society itself. … One defining mark of a sociopathic society is that most sociopathic behavior is perfectly legal and conforms to social norms and expectations. As a codification of antisocial norms, the law itself becomes sociopathic in the most full-blown sociopathic societies.1
————————————————————

It’s as if the contemporary form of capitalist society is itself the ultimate perfection of a system of norms, laws, and practices of manipulation, corruption, and total self-destruction. Rather than sociopathic shouldn’t we understand that American Society has entered the end game of an Anti-World? Was this not the actual and intentional telos of Capital all along? The accumulation of Death Culture, a realm where time, economics, and entropy phase shift into the final form of hypernihilistic indifference, callousness, and war. America, the self-imploding vehicle for a parasitical society whose only relations are those bound to self-consumption, a diseased system feeding upon its host with extreme prejudice and finality.


  1. Derber, Charles. Sociopathic Society: A People’s Sociology of the United States (Kindle Locations 300-303). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

7 thoughts on “U.S.A. – The Sociopathic Society

  1. One difficulty i have with this exceprt is it seems to make it sound like humanity has not always found reasons to make war. I think at all times and cultures and systematic societies people where at odds with themselves at times, other people inside and outside their group, as well had good social relations and bad, again, in and out of the group.

    Its kinda like a exotificatuon of otherness. Isnt that the problem he us niticing though?

    Like

    • To be fair he’s a sociologist not a historian in this work, so that his object is a specific registry of the sociology of sociopathy applied not to individuals but rather to society at large. So he’s not questioning whether other societies in the past were warlike or sociopathic (some may have been!), as much as he’s applying this to our global society and the U.S.A. in particular.

      I don’t think that was always true or universal Landzek. I’ll agree that when metallurgy and the great horse cultures that roamed from their territories, cattle cultures, and other herder base systems moved around war became inevitable. Yet, in the Neolithic age and pre-Neolithic stone age cultures its been shown that for the most part humanity developed relations not based on war but cooperation… even as late as the Americas with the sedentary or pueblo and farming cultures there was a certain amount of peaceful interaction… there have been as in Middle and South American Ameridian cultures as in Aztec, Mayan, and Incan and others certain dominative forms and social practices of sacrifice, etc. Seems that once leadership was more androcratic and male oriented each civilization became war like… Yet, some of the more gynocratic and female based systems of governance had less of this violence… the ancient sea faring people of the Cretan worlds up to the Mycenean invasions which were influx from Greece and Asia-Minor… African civilizations existed for long periods under peace up to… again the discover of metallurgy and the ability to provide instruments of war… etc. China, Japan, and others same… so there is not one specific pattern for cooperation or in turn violence, but one can point to the changes in nomadic bands and the use of metal implements for war as the beginning of larger conflicts and invasions…

      Like

      • But likewise i am not at war. Niether alienated . Niether is my nieghbor hood. We are peaceful. In general. But sure down the street there are gangs. And people string out. And people bring raped. The only inclusion i have to that, so far as a society=we, is as much as i think snout it. Am i supposed to foresake my peace to be at war with my warlike alienated surroundings or am i supposed to bring solutions?

        That being said:
        Yet, while i agree our system is based in wAr and alienation, it may nor be that ‘our culture’ or whatever has changed in its human nature. It may just be numbers. Though we have no good way of knowing, pethaps given a certain population of human beings, a certain segment will be –, and another –… Such that weve just reached a large enough number sccompanied by its corresponding technology that allows for that number to exist with all its human correspondence.

        Sure peaceful societies existed, but how many had people getting raped within it that we just dont know about because it was a kind of ‘social norm’? What about oppression of some and not others within the group?

        Do we conveniently forget that history is most often a ‘best version’ that justifies our needs to even have a ‘social we’?

        Or have We evolved beyond that?

        Like

      • That’s the point of his book, Landzek… he’s saying we live in a sociopathic world, a world of war, indifference, pain, suffering, manipulation, darkness, etc. A world where people manipulate others for profit, and throw them away when they can extract no more. That’s the point there is no evolution, no progress: the progressive agenda is just that a fiction, a myth. There is no progress, no moral foundation of civilized society, no contract that can unmask the truth of what we are… blood lust and sacrifice are all. We just displace the older forms into the agon of capitalist aggression for profit… market society. One that is de-totalized sociopathy: manipulative, warring, aggressive, and indifferent to the pain of others…

        There is no fixed immutable substance termed “human nature”… nothing essential, no eidos, no Platonic two-world bullshit… history as Nietzsche once stated is nothing but “interpretation”… there is no history without someone interpreting the facts of the matter. History doesn’t exist except for-us… we write it … history is another of those fictions we all agree on. That’s why there is no universal history, only a multiplicity of different perspectives on the past… not some eternal realm of Platonic substances.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s