Leuren Moret describes how the use of Uranium endangers us all.
Information about how the power and money elites are planning a global genocide.
Leuren Moret describes how the use of Uranium endangers us all.
Information about how the power and money elites are planning a global genocide.
I am not nervous of being physically injured because I know that no matter how far the other person takes it, I would take it farther, its like a game and I will not let myself lose. At a young age I discovered that being punched or tackled created an immediate adrenaline rush that seemed outweigh the negatives of being hit. Yes, it may sound unusual because I am telling you about myself right now, but but in the real world I only let people see or know the things I want them to know about me. I am in complete control of my actions at all times and can remain in any character according to each scenario. I also dont seem to experience or “feel” the same sense of fear as others do. I dont fear anyone because I believe in the end I will always have the last laugh. Fear does not play a prevalent role in my life however i constantly inflict fear upon others that enables me to control their actions through behaviour analysis and manipulation.
At no point during a relationship can I feel inferior to the other person; I must always be seen as superior not only to them but I must also view myself as having the complete upper hand. When a challenge is made for the upper hand/control of the relationship I cannot back down and I cannot allow myself to show any weakness. To me relationships are a game and its a game I do not lose.
Narcissist wolf says to everyone: “I’m a sheep, I’m a sheep, I’m in the sheep club. The sheep are the best. Those wolves are terrible. You have to be a special sheep to be in the high-wool club like me. If you don’t believe I’m a sheep then you are calling me a liar. I was only eating meat because my boss made me do it. I was howling at the moon because you made me angry. I have always been a sheep. You are paranoid, I don’t have canine teeth. You are imaginging it. I’m a sheep. I won best sheep of the year award. We have to be on the look out for SueTarget. She’s a wolf in sheeps’ clothing. I am the one that did all the work. SueTarget messed it all up. SueTargets’s fur looks fake. I’m the biggest sheep so I should be the boss. I have every right to punish SueTarget and eat her. It will be good for her, and teach her a lesson. I’m not doing it for me, I’m doing it for the team. I have to be the enforcer here and eat bad sheeps to help keep society clean. I used to be a vegetarian but because all these lazy sheep won’t do anything, I am forced into keeping order and forced into being the bad guy and have to do all the eating of sheep.”
Sociopath wolf says: “Become the sheep. Believe you are the sheep. Keep the wolf hidden. Don’t act like a narcissist and don’t try to “talk your way”. Become the sheep. Do sheep things. Behave like sheep. No one will see the wolf. Baa baa baa. Eat grass for a while. Give up meat for a while. Tell the sheep things that will make them feel good about themselves. Gain their trust. Be humble. Make them the center of attention. Get them to lower their defenses. Tell them you lost your teeth in a car accident and your parents could only afford wolf-teeth replacements. Keep past a secret so they don’t research. Let them do all the talking. Then when the time is right, devour! It is worth the sacrifice and the wait. Then on a polygraph when they ask if I am a sheep, I will have all the sheep memories because I became a sheep. I have memories of eating grass and living like a sheep. I’m telling the truth.”
Summary Of Sociopaths
1. They make you feel sorry for them.
2. They make you feel worried or afraid.
3. They give you the impression you owe them.
4. They make you feel used.
5. Sometimes you suspect they don’t care about you.
6. They lie to you and deceive you.
7. They take a lot from you and give back very little.
8. They make you feel guilty (and use that to manipulate you).
9. They take advantage of your kindness.
10. They are easily bored and need constant stimulation.
11. They don’t take responsibility but place blame elsewhere.
by Anna Valerious
Whom do narcissists malign? Almost everyone. If you suspect someone of being a narcissist, praise a person who obviously deserves it to him or her and observe their reaction. It shows.
Malignant narcissists speak well of very few others. Only their narcissistic parent (when no longer vulnerable to that parent) and anyone they can aggrandize themselves by association with at others’ expense.
For example, if you don’t get along with someone, the narcissist will say, “I get along with him fine.” He will have nothing but praise for that person. Likewise, if you got bad service at a restaurant, the narcissist will say, “They gave me excellent service.” The narcissist praises the other because it reflects badly on you and well on him.
Similarly, the narcissist with a trophy wife goes around praising her beauty. He’s aggrandizing himself by association with her. And at the expense of everyone not good enough to win a trophy wife like his. He’ll likewise aggrandize himself by association with some important person he knows, praising that person everywhere he goes to name-drop.
But such special cases are the only ones you hear a good word about from a narcissist. In fact, a narcissist will stubbornly refuse to admit any fault in them at all. They are ideal, perfect in his or her eyes.
But the rest of humanity get the opposite. Often, narcissists glibly sneak bad ideas about others into your head. They do this by chipping away at that person’s image subtly and relentlessly every time they mention him or her. Often perfuming the bad offering to cover up its smell.
by Matt Taibbi
The global economic crisis isn’t about money – it’s about power. How Wall Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution.
It’s over — we’re officially, royally fucked. No empire can survive being rendered a permanent laughingstock, which is what happened as of a few weeks ago, when the buffoons who have been running things in this country finally went one step too far. It happened when Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was forced to admit that he was once again going to have to stuff billions of taxpayer dollars into a dying insurance giant called AIG, itself a profound symbol of our national decline — a corporation that got rich insuring the concrete and steel of American industry in the country’s heyday, only to destroy itself chasing phantom fortunes at the Wall Street card tables, like a dissolute nobleman gambling away the family estate in the waning days of the British Empire.
Tuesday’s announcement of the Obama-Geithner recovery plan is basically an extension of the Bush-Paulson plan – yet more giveaways to financial insiders, with a view to concentrating the U.S. banking system into a cartel of just a few large banks. This is not altogether bad news for the still relatively healthy part of the banking system (healthy in the sense of still avoiding negative equity). Smaller, less troubled banks will be bought out by the large “troubled” ones, to the personal financial benefit of their stockholders. This cannot solve today’s financial problem: the fact that the debt overhead far exceeds the economy’s ability to pay. In fact, it will spread the distortions that the large banks have introduced, until the entire system presumably looks like Citibank, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo.
But this clearly is only Stage One of a two-stage plan that has not yet been announced, although the Wall Street Journal’s op-ed page has provided enough hints trickling out for the past three months to tip the hand of Wall Street’s “dream recovery plan.”
It is not exactly what most people are hoping for. In fact, it threatens to be a nightmare scenario for the economy at large. Watch for the magic phrase: “equity kicker,” first heard in the S&L mortgage crisis of the 1980s.
The first question to ask about the Recovery Program is, “recovery for whom?” The answer is, for the people who design the Recovery Program and their constituency, the bank lobby. The second question is, what is it they want to recover? The answer is, another Bubble economy, having seen the Greenspan Bubble make them so rich with his particular kind of “wealth creation”: wealth in the form of indebtedness of the “real” economy at large to the banking system, and unprecedented capital gains to be made by riding the wave of asset-price inflation.
For the financial elites, the problem is that it is not possible to inflate another bubble from today’s debt levels, widespread negative equity, and still-high level of real estate, stock and bond prices. No amount of new credit or capital for the banking system will induce banks to provide credit to real estate that already is over-mortgaged, or to individuals and corporations already over-indebted. All professional observers have forecast property prices to keep on plunging for at least the next year, which is as far as the eye can see in unstable conditions such as we are experiencing today.
While the Obama administration’s financial planners wring their hands in public and say “We feel your pain” to debtors at large, they also recognize that the past ten years have been a golden age for the banking system and Wall Street. The wealthiest 1 per cent of the population has raised its share of the returns to wealth – dividends, interest, rent and capital gains – from 37 per cent of the total ten years ago to 57 per cent five years ago, and an estimated 70 per cent today. Over two-thirds of the returns to wealth now go to the wealthiest 1 per cent of the population. This is the highest on record. We are approaching Russian kleptocratic levels.
Yet the financial Hard Right of the political spectrum – the lobbyists now in control of the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and the Justice Departments for starters – repeats the new Big Lie: that it is the poor who have brought the system down, “exploiting” the rich by trying to ape their betters and live beyond their means. Subprime families have taken out subprime loans, the lying poor have signed documents to obtain “liars’ loans,” as Alt-A, no-documentation loans are called in the financial junk-paper trade.
I learned the reality a few years ago in London, talking to a commercial bank strategist there. “We’ve had an intellectual breakthrough,” he said. “It’s changed our credit philosophy.”
“What is it?” I asked, imagining that he was about to come out with yet a new junk mathematics formula?
“The poor are honest,” he said, accompanying his words with his jaw dropping open as if to say, “Who could have guessed?”
The meaning was clear enough. The poor pay their debts as a matter of honor, even at great personal expense. Unlike Donald Trump, the poor are less likely to walk away from their homes when market prices sink below the mortgage level. In today’s neoliberal Chicago School language, the poor behave “uneconomically.” That is, they make choices that do not make economic sense, but rather reflect a group morality. This sociological gullibility is what made them rich pickings for predatory lenders such as Countrywide, Wachovia and Citibank.
As I said above, it was a golden age. The financial and real estate bubble is the world that America’s financial power elite would love to recover. The problem for them is how to start a new bubble and make yet another fortune. The alternative would be to keep what they have taken and run – not so bad, but a scenario that perhaps they can improve on.
Discussions about emergency bailouts have focused on putting in place enough new lending capacity by the banking system to start inflating prices on credit once again. But a new bubble can’t be started from today’s asset-price levels. This week’s $2 trillion or so in new bailout money for the banks (“capital,” and specifically finance capital, not to be confused with industrial capital) will only be lent out once prices fall by another 30 to 50 percent. So this can represent only Stage 1.
The question for Stage 2 is, how can the $10 to $20 trillion capital-gain run-up of the Greenspan years been repeated in an economy that is “all loaned up”?
One thing Wall Street knows is that to make money, you not only need asset prices to rise, they have to go down again – and up again, and down again. Without going down, after all, how can they rise up? The more frenetic the price fibulation, the easier it is for computerized buy-and-sell programs to make money on options and derivatives. What is being planned today looks like a similar up-and-down movement in real estate.
The first trick is to preserve the wealth of the creditor class – Wall Street, the banks and the other financial vehicles that enrich the wealthiest 1 per cent and indeed, the richest 10 per cent of the population. Stage One involves buying out their bad loans at a price that saves them from taking a loss. This is done by shifting the loss onto the “taxpayers” – labor, onto whose shoulders the tax burden has been shifted steadily, step by step since 1980, with the Greenspan Commission imposing an onerous Social Security tax on the middle class and using the proceeds to slash taxes on the higher brackets. Next comes an “aggregator” bank (sounds like “alligator,” from the swamps of toxic waste) to buy the bad debts and put them in a public agency. The government calls this the “bad” bank. But it does good for Wall Street – by buying loans that have gone bad – or perhaps nearer the truth, loans that never were good in the first place.
The harder part is to revive opportunities for creditors to make a new killing. (And it’s the economy that’s being killed.) Here’s how I imagine the plan might work.
Suppose a recent buyer has purchased a home for $500,000, with a $500,000 adjustable-rate mortgage scheduled to reset at 8 per cent. Suppose too that the current market price has fallen to $250,000 – a loss of 50 per cent by the end of 2009. After all, there needs to be enough time for prices to decline. Otherwise, there would be no economy to “rescue.” Mr. Geithner and Summers need to “feel your pain” to come out with the package that I’m describing. The government will swap “cash for trash,” printing new Treasury bonds (interest to be paid by “the taxpayer) in exchange for the $500,000 mortgage that is going bad, heading toward only a $250,000 market price.
The “Bad” bank that the Obama plan decided was not quite ready to be created this week will take the form of a public/private partnership (PPP), of the sort that Tony Blair made so notorious in Britain. It will be financed with private funds – in fact, with the funds now being given to re-capitalize America’s banks (headed by the Wall St. banks that have done so poorly). Banks will use the money they receive from the Treasury for selling their junk mortgages at par – along with other bailout funding – to buy shares in a new $5 trillion institution. Something like Fanny Mae or Freddie Mac will be created and its bonds guaranteed (that’s the “public” part – “socializing” the risk). The PPP institution will start with, say, $3 trillion in funds, and will have the power to buy and renegotiate the mortgages that have passed into the hands of the government and other holders. This “Middle Class Homeowner Recovery Trust” will use its private funding for the “socially responsible” purpose of “saving the taxpayer” and homeowners by renegotiating the mortgage down from its original $500,000 to the new $250,000 price.
Here’s the patter talk you can expect, with the usual Orwellian euphemisms. The “rescue the homeowners” PPP, a veritable Savior Bank, will go to a family strapped by its home mortgage debt and feeling more and more desperate as the price of its major asset plummets deep into Negative Equity territory. An offer will be made: “We’ve got a deal to save you. We’ll renegotiate your mortgage down to $250,000, the current market price, and we’ll also lower your interest rate to just 5.50 per cent. This will cut your monthly debt charges by nearly two thirds. You will escape from negative equity, and you can afford to stay in your home.”
The family probably will say, “Great.”
But they will have to make a concession. That’s where the new public/private partnership makes its killing. Its Savior Bank, funded with private money that is to take the “risk” (and also the rewards) will say to the family that agrees to renegotiate its mortgage: “Now that the government has taken a loss while we’ve let you stay in your home, we need to recover the money that’s been lost. So when the time comes for you to sell, or to renegotiate your mortgage, our Savior Bank will receive the capital gain up to the original amount written off. If we’ve made you whole, we want to be made whole too.”
In other words, if the homeowner sells the property for $400,000, the Savior Bank will get $150,000 of the capital gain. If the property sells for $500,000, the bank will get $250,000. And if it sells for more, thanks to some new clone of Alan Greenspan acting as bubblemeister, the capital gain will be split in some way. If the split is 50/50, then if the home sells for $600,000, the owner at that time will split the $100,000 further capital gain with the Savior Bank. The Savior Bank will thus make much more through its share of capital gains than it extracts in interest!
This plan will be even better for Wall Street than the Greenspan bubble was! Last time around, it was the middle class that got the gains. To be sure, it really was the bank that got the gains, because mortgage interest charges absorbed the entire rental value. But at least homeowners had a chance at the free ride, if they didn’t squander their money in refinancing their mortgages. And many did use their homes “like a piggy bank” to support their living standards.
But this time around, Wall Street is not obliged to make its money by making middle class homeowners rich. Debt-strapped homeowners are willing to settle merely for a plan that leaves them in their homes! It can get for itself the capital gains that have been the driving force of U.S. “wealth creation,” Alan Greenspan bubble-style.
The irony is that the only kind of policies that are politically correct these days are those that make the situation worse: yet more government money in the hope that banks will create yet more credit/debt to raise house prices and make them even more unaffordable; to inflate a new bubble; to give what really should be called the “bad banks” – the Big Four or Five where the junk mortgages, junk CDOs and junk derivatives resulting from junk mathematics are concentrated – yet more money to buy out smaller banks that have not yet been infected with reckless financial opportunism.
And by the same token, lobbyists for these bad banks are screaming at the top of their voices that all solutions to the problem are politically incorrect: debt writedowns to bring the debt burden within the ability to pay. That is what the market is supposed to do – by bankruptcy in an anarchic collapse, if not by reasoned government policy. The bad banks, after demanding “free markets” all these years, have stopped the free market when it comes anywhere near them and their bonuses. For them, markets are free of regulation against predatory lending; free of taxing the wealthy so as to shift the burden onto labor; free for the financial sector to wrap itself around the “real” economy like a parasitic vine around a tree and extract the entire surplus in the form of financial engineering.
This is a travesty of freedom. But worst of all is the “freedom” of today’s economic discussion from the wisdom of classical political economy and from the experience of economic history regarding how societies have coped with the debt overhead through the ages.
An alternative policy to save the economy from being “rescued” by Wall Street
There is an alternative to ward all this off. A debt writedown, followed by a land tax so that the “free lunch” (what John Stuart Mill called the “unearned increment” of rising land prices, a gain that landlords made “in their sleep”) would serve as the tax base rather than labor and industry being burdened with an income tax.
One move would be to prevent banks from lending against the land’s value. They could lend against buildings, but not land. This would cut the maximum permissible loan to 50 to 60 per cent of the total property price – unless the government did what classical economists advocated and tax the land’s market price (its rental value) as the tax base, shifting the tax back off of labor. This would achieve the kind of free markets that Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill and Alfred Marshall described, and which the Progressive Era aimed to achieve with America’s first income tax in 1913.
A land tax would prevent housing prices from rising again. This would save homeowners from taking on so much debt in order to obtain housing. And it would save the economy from seeing “wealth creation” take the form of the “unearned increment” being capitalized into higher bank loans with their associated carrying charges (interest and amortization). The key to real estate bubbles is to inflate site valuations.
Michael Hudson is a former Wall Street economist. A Distinguished Research Professor at University of Missouri, Kansas City (UMKC), he is the author of many books, including Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (new ed., Pluto Press, 2002) He can be reached via his website, email@example.com
By Mike Downey
Jan 19 2001
Inauguration day is a day away, but you can already picture it–a proud father standing in the background as George Walker Bush places a hand on the Bible and raises another, to take the oath of office:
“Quiet, daddy, I’m being ‘naugurated.”
“The other hand, George.”
“Left hand on the Bible, right hand in the air.”
“Yes, I’m sure.”
“And this one’s the left?”
“Got it. OK, go ahead, I’m ready to be sweared in now.”
Repeat after me, the 43rd president will then be told.
“I do solemnly swear … ”
“I do solemnly swear … ”
“That I will faithfully execute … ”
“That I will fatally execute … ”
“OK, that I’ll faithfully execute … ”
“The office of president of the United States … ”
“The office of president of the United States … ”
“And will, to the best of my ability … ”
“And will do the best of my ability … ”
“TO the best.”
“Do the best of my ability to the best of my ability?”
“No, TO the best of my ability … ”
“Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States . . . ”
“Preserve, protect and prevent the Constitution of the United States . . . ”
“So help me God.”’
“Help me, God!”
And that’ll do it. George W. Bush will thereupon become the occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania, the king of the hill, the top banana, the head cheese, the leader of the free world.
The first thing curious George will probably do in office is call a meeting of his top aides to ask: “OK, which part of the world isn’t free?”
The second thing he’ll do is find a closet where he can hang his 100 red ties next to his 100 blue ties.
The third thing he’ll do is put Dick Cheney’s and Colin Powell’s phone numbers on speed dial, for anything important that comes up.
And that’s just the first 24 hours of the next four years.
After the inauguration, there will be only 1,460 days or so remaining in Bush’s first term. We can start X’ing off days on our calendars right away, like convicts scrawling on cell walls.
It shouldn’t take very long for Bush to begin putting his personal imprint on the presidency.
For example, if the governor of Minnesota can do it, there is no good reason why President Bush can’t freelance as a TV analyst for the Xtreme Football League.
Furthermore, GWB’s fireside chats could become as popular as FDR’s. He can even reassure us in times of crisis … say if Saddam Hussein stirs up trouble and Bush has to threaten “to send American troops to Ireland.”
It’ll be President Bush who will give our next “State of the Union” address, saying that he’s pretty sure there are 50, including Alaska and Hawaii.
President Bush who will never be able to remember which one’s NASA and which one’s NATO.
President Bush who will think a subcommittee runs a boat that travels underwater.
President Bush who will hear about Burkina Faso and hope to meet her someday.
President Bush who will think the Bureau of the Census has something to do with sight, smell, hearing, taste and touch.
President Bush who will ask how many greens got damaged, because he’s heard about a hurricane hitting the Golf region.
President Bush who will say that he hopes to represent the American people just as our founding fathers like George Jefferson did.
The word inauguration comes from “to augur,” or to practice augury.
In ancient Rome, an augur was any of a body of officials who interpreted omens as favorable or unfavorable, at the outset of a new undertaking.
So, may there be no bad omens as our new president’s rule begins on Saturday.
Let us all pray for a perfect day, before George W. Bush begins fatally executing the office of president.
Mike Downey’s column appears Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Write to: Los Angeles Times, 202 W. 1st St., Los Angeles, CA 90012. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Exploring Types of Narcissism
Ben Bursten has identified four types of narcissistic personality:
A Craver may have a haunting sense of anxiety and a terrible fear of abandonment. There is always an edge of desperation.
The Craver has a bottomless well of need. It is experienced as an aching hunger that is rarely satisfied. He or she finds it hard to hold on to the experience of being loved.
The Special Lover is a true believer in the ideology of romantic love. A citizen of a far away land. Naturally a pure romantic is exciting, stimulating, even exhilarating. There may be a rich emotional life, full of feeling and perhaps selective empathy. Intimacy is easy based on unguarded self-disclosure. But there is an underlying theme of grandiosity: Our love is unique. No one can love you like I can. You may be in pain, but my love can heal. Initially there is idealization, then denial but eventually a realization of an unwelcome reality.
The Power Broker is in love with power. It may be expressed in bullying ways – humiliating and even terrorizing employees. Or it may be cold and bureaucratic. But power is embraced and used in an instrumental fashion.
Arrogance is the most obvious quality of the Power Broker who has arrived. Ambition is most apparent on the way up. There is a profound lack of empathy for others. Contempt is shown for “inferiors” who are barely recognized as human. Decisions are made without thought of the consequences for those affected. All that is important is the pursuit of career goals.
Although this description of the Power Broker is hardly flattering, such a person can be charming and have qualities widely admired in our society. Status and power attract. There can even be a genuine sense of benevolence towards others – though mostly in somewhat patronizing ways.
The Broker also finds it natural to also use power in relationships. A partner may experience this as being very possessive and highly controlling – or simply abusive.
The Body Shaper looks good! But the assets are all external. The values are familiar: image, fashion, glamour, youth and beauty. This form of narcissism is so much part of our times that it is hardly obvious.
What I am identifying is not just a office worker on the way to the gym for a regular workout but a disturbance in personality. There is an exaggerated need for admiration. Characteristics include self-esteem linked to body image, a nagging perfectionism, and an obsession with the perfect body.
The Body Shaper tends to externalize internal problems, as if adding muscle bulk or looking more beautiful will solve anything. Denial is the most common defense. It is a refusal to see what eventually extends to trying to fight the aging process. This is the ultimate narcissistic injury.
The Rager is a common and somewhat obvious narcissistic type of personality. A barely controlled rage simmers below the surface and often lashes out at anyone nearby.
What is most characteristic is hypersensitivity to any perceived insult – whether intended or not. Everything is taken personally and usually interpreted as an attack. What sparks the rage is narcissistic injury.
A relationship with a Rager is always exciting if only for the variation in emotions and unpredictable behavior. But this is not the whole story. Some Ragers can be very loving and generous in affection. The aftermath of even ugly conflict can be intense sexual encounters which feel all the more erotic because of earlier menace. The Rager can be intensely controlling and it is almost the norm that the relationship will be abusive.
The Trickster is charming and may have many social graces. Adjectives of first impression are easy to find: engaging, smooth and inviting. Unfortunately this attractiveness is a veneer on a disturbed personality. Behind the “trust me” messages you will find a malicious intent. It is the personality of the “con-artist”. The motives are covert and include exploitation, limitless entitlement and a cruel twist when the victim realizes the script of betrayal.
The Trickster is ruthless in relationships. He or she delights in fooling the trusting lover with betrayals such as sexual infidelity, fraud, or criminal conspiracy. Usually there is intrigue and considerable pleasure in the set-up. The theme of manipulation is always central. Inevitably trust is shattered. In this elaborate way the Trickster is justified in the contempt of victim “who was easily fooled”.
It is a cruel game. The impact on the victim is usually shattering. It can be likened to psychic vandalism. The resulting damage is not easily repaired and may take years of patient re-building of boundaries, finding ways of better self-protection and perhaps eventually the capacity to trust again.
Fantasy Maker has an elaborate inner world. All excitement is in the realm of fantasy. The real world intrudes, naturally, but it is exactly that – an intrusion and often resented. He or she may have an external appearance of superficiality, flightiness, and emptiness. There may also be considerable social anxiety and awkwardness. It is inner riches, outer poverty.
Just how is this narcissistic? After all some people are just being helpful. But the Rescuer has an hidden grandiosity: “It is only me that can really change things.” It is the grandiosity that distinguishes the Rescuer from what has been labeled codependency. The common ground includes: always remaining in control, emotional pursuing and unacknowledged needs. Both may be hidden in a helping profession including psychology, social work, medicine, pastoral care or counselling. Blurred boundaries are natural in this form of narcissism.
It is hard for the Rescuer to step out of role. It’s origin may be in childhood with the parentified child in a dysfunctional family. The difficult way forward is to break the stereotyped nature of relationships, allow more vulnerability to show, to both give and receive, and to even encourage the more childlike qualities of spontaneity, joy, emotional expression and playfulness.
There are no absolutely pure types. Narcissism, like coffee, usually comes in blends. For example a Craver who becomes a Rager when needs are blocked. Some types may be close such as the Power Broker and Rager, or Craver and Special Lover. Each of the types is a caricature but even an artificial schema can help to illuminate therapeutic issues.
This understanding of the types of narcissism is offered in the hope that it might be helpful to distinguish cold from warm varieties of narcissism. The more general DSMIV description is of a cold variety characterized by being aloof and arrogant. This comes through in types such as the Power Broker and Trickster. Perhaps also in cold types of the Rager. However it is equally obvious that some varieties of narcissism are warm and relationship centered. This will include the Craver and Special Lover. Some, such as the Body Shaper and Fantasy Maker, can be either.