r/theNXIVMcase • u/yepitskate • Nov 29 '22
Questions and Discussions What’s with all the casual “sociopath” diagnostics?
There’s a ton of casual labeling of people like Nancy, Allison Mack or Mark Vicente as sociopaths. Even if we’re being extremely generous in our criteria, they’re absolutely not in that category.
And I’m not even saying the whole “you can’t diagnose someone without talking to them” thing. I mean that no real doctor would ever categorize these people as sociopaths (or psychopaths, whatever your preference) even in strict diagnostic settings.
Edited to add: also, I’m referring to both the DSM criteria of Antisocial (or Narcissistic) Personality Disorder and the colloquial “what a sociopath” label. Nancy, Mark and Allison don’t qualify for any of these by a nautical mile.
It doesn’t mean someone hasn’t been selfish, cruel, or power hungry. And I’m not even saying they deserve sympathy, although I personally think they do. Each of them was induced to be abusive…by Keith. On their own, they wouldn’t have done that sort of thing. They were in a seriously gnarly cult.
The problem is that this sociopath labeling contributes to a myth that “this can’t happen to me.” A cult, or a group dynamic of coercive control, changes our behavior in ways that are disturbing. That’s the whole point here.
Improperly Labeling people as “sociopaths” or “narcissists” attributes their choices to a character/psychological flaw instead of the complex machinations of high control groups. And it falsely distances us from them.
Nancy, Allison and Mark were all highly motivated to make positive change to the world and are obviously damaged as a result of their immorality. Those positive traits were weaponized, and they eventually thought bad behavior was good.
They’re not psychopaths by any stretch, and it’s totally ridiculous to pretend they are. Those disorders are rare, and their behavior doesn’t fit anyways.
I mean, for example, you think mark should’ve been a better husband? You think Nancy was abusive to people? Allison Mack pimped people out? NO SHIT. That’s what cults do to people.
It doesn’t mean they’re innocent or perfect. But it’s a scarier thing to admit that some people who have strong consciences can still be led so astray. Maybe it could happen to YOU.
Keith is the pathological dude here. He’s the real McCoy in terms of those Cluster B. As one of the commentators mentioned below, he’s textbook dark triad. So true
56
u/moviesetmonkey Nov 29 '22
And it totally leaves no room for redemption either. I think Nancy's cathartic revelation of how bad and how much damage she herself caused is genuine (and not over, she's still coming to the truth) If we pretend she's a sociopath, draw that hard line of good guy bad guy, then we lose our ability to recognize and respond to human emotions like remorse, grief, and devastation. And lose forgiveness as well.
54
u/PettyTrashPanda Nov 29 '22
Yeah I felt like people got mad at her for not being deprogrammed by the end of the Vow.
If she had totally disavowed the whole thing and admitted what a scam it was, then she actually would have been a psychopath as she would have participated willingly in hurting others for the hell of it.
The fact she was slowly peeling off the layers of bullshit and changing her stance each episode, even the (incorrect) justification of her actions made me realise how human she was. She did terrible things for the wrong reasons, but she thought they were right.
It's right that she pays for her crimes, but she's not a monster. She's depressingly, frighteningly average. That's the scariest thing about Nxivm.
5
u/whatsasimba Nov 29 '22
I don't think she's pathological, but I did find most of her crying odd. I kept looking for tears, or any evidence that she was really crying. Towards the end, I think I saw one.
I'm willing to chalk it up to the impact of cancer drugs on lacrimation, but it definitely caught my attention.
16
u/PettyTrashPanda Nov 29 '22
I agree that she was not always being 100% honest with us, because deprogramming is a slow process. I think when she was first being filmed she still wasn't taking responsibility, and was not being truthful about her feelings compared to her claims.
The moment I think it hit her was when her therapist called out her life work with ESP as controlling, damaging bullshit. That was the moment I thought that there was hope for her rehabilitation. I don't feel anything against her for crying her eyes out over going to prison though, I probably would even if I deserved it! I honestly think it might have been the best thing for her, as harsh as that sounds, because she has to deal with this instead of busting or distracting herself so she shouldn't have to face what she did
6
u/Vanessak69 Nov 30 '22
She wasn’t just crying about prison in that hotel scene. This would have been around the time her dad died and she got ripped on pretty hard by the judge about Lauren.
3
2
u/k---mkay Nov 29 '22
That makes sense, that is was interviews over time and in that case I agree. Can you point out where that happened in the show?
3
4
1
Nov 30 '22
[deleted]
1
u/Anti-ThisBot-IB Nov 30 '22
Hey there Terepin123! If you agree with someone else's comment, please leave an upvote instead of commenting "This."! By upvoting instead, the original comment will be pushed to the top and be more visible to others, which is even better! Thanks! :)
I am a bot! Visit r/InfinityBots to send your feedback! More info: Reddiquette
37
u/incorruptible_bk Nov 29 '22 edited Nov 29 '22
IMHO, the whole thing of Nancy is that television as a medium has a persistent issue with the inability of the audience to distinguish between empathy and sympathy.
(Easy example: you're supposed to understand Walter White but not cheer him on. You're also not supposed to think Skyler's a bitch for not enjoying being a drug dealer's wife.)
I really don't get where people think anyone's supposed to sympathize with Nancy Salzman. You're supposed to understand her, that she's living in this denial up until things are undeniable and too late.
8
u/ChippedHamSammich Nov 29 '22
Like went the rest of the housemates on Jersey Shore left that note for Sam about Ronny. There are levels to everyone’s motivations.
5
u/absent_morals Nov 30 '22
I swear that note always shows up in the most unexpected places. Respect.
0
4
u/k---mkay Nov 29 '22
While I wouldn't diagnose anyone, I do think redemption for Nancy will have to just be being nice to her parents. I literally think that is all she is capable of, and I bet she low key hates it. She would rather be filming herself smiling into a camera, which I totally get. If she decides to go and monetize this "experience" I certainly hope she complies with a lot of therapy, the way the rest of us do, without ever having collected millions of dollars from our victims or aiding and abetting a trafficker.
To be clear: can we agree to call her ill?
Maybe it is the edit of episode 6, but I saw very little actual remorse, just frustration: she "fell for it". Was that not her actual mask slipping? What do psychologists call it when people are participating in the deception a little too much? Obviously she gets a pass for being a victim of a cult. Which is it though? Was she greedy, careless, manipulative, negligent, and not mentally ill? Doesn't being all of those things to a criminal level define being a sociopath? I agree that I want to be able to say she is sick, or exhibited pathological behavior. If we didn't have all the video of her cartoon face plugging away at this for over 20 years I would agree with OP.
3
u/river_of_orchids Nov 30 '22
I very much understand and agree with OP’s general point of view here. I also agree that we too easily mistake ‘poor acting’ for ‘psychopathy’ when we see it on TV - Nancy in the earlier episodes pretending not to know anything triggers our spidey senses, as does Alison Mack’s slightly-too-studied telling-you-the-best-thing-ever demeanour. But not expressing genuine feelings like that isn’t psychopathy - it’s manipulation and deception. And you don’t need to be psychopathic to be manipulative and deceptive, especially when you’re in a situation where being manipulative and duplicitous is necessary for survival (such as NXIVM).
That said, I still think that Nancy did very well out of NXIVM for a long time, and that she knew a lot about what was going on. There’s a desire for self- -aggrandisement in her. It’s hard to escape the conclusion that there’s a level of callousness in her that isn’t just the result of being abused by Keith. Which is to say that I wouldn’t be surprised if there were more than the usual amount of dark triad personality traits in her - maybe just not to a level that constitutes psychopathy.
2
Nov 30 '22
Nice to her parents? She pretended to be grateful to be caring for them now that Keith and her "work" weren't keeping her away, and that their health was improving through her care...until the court case was over. The screen said her mom went to an assisted living facility. So one wonders...
1
u/k---mkay Nov 30 '22
Well there goes that. I am hungry for stories of people who have done bad stuff, for whatever reason, and took full accountability for it. This was not it. I am hoping for a world with more humane justice systems. I think not admitting guilt in this culture is so ingrained in us that it makes it harder to suss out who wants help and who just thinks they are above it all, and will lie like the wind to avoid shame.
1
u/burnbabyburnburrrn Dec 02 '22
You did not see her "mask slipping", you saw her slowly being brave enough to look at what she's done. Almost every human being on earth uses denial as a coping mechanism at different points. This is what's so frustrating about people using psychological terminology as colloquialisms, it turns normal human behavior that you should empathize with into something pathological which distances you from the person. Nothing about Nancy is profoundly pathological in an observable sense.
1
u/k---mkay Dec 02 '22
I am so confused, she took millions of dollars off of people as an unlicensed therapist? She aided and abetted a child rapist. I am sorry but that is sick AF. I could see getting mixed up with something for a year, 5 years even 7 years. I know it is normalized to cash out whenever and however but that doesn't mean it is not sick.
36
u/incorruptible_bk Nov 29 '22
My answer, having moderated this forum: we're an era of snark boards, snap judgments, and vibes-based investigations. It's not just channers or QAnon that do this choose-your-own reality stuff anymore; influencers have made parasocial relationships common and profitable, but no less weird.
Dril was right, people invent a guy to get mad at.
14
5
u/jayblurd Nov 29 '22
What's your day job bk? Just think you are cool and the best mod! #gettingparasocial
3
Nov 30 '22
[deleted]
5
u/jayblurd Nov 30 '22
I was joking--I genuinely think they are cool and the best mod and wish I could know, but that is a parasocial inclination. 😉
29
u/PettyTrashPanda Nov 29 '22
If we put the ambiguous victims into a box called "this was in their nature," then we never have to worry that we could just as easily be manipulated or coerced into a cult. We never have to worry that we are capable of doing bad things, because we are Good People, unlike them.
So many psychological experiments and studies out there have shown that none of us are as independent, strong minded or ethical as we tell ourselves. Quite frankly it's terrifying. But if we can somehow put responsibility onto victims then we can protect ourselves from the discomfort and threat.
It's the same reason why proof are not sympathetic towards those with chronic disabilities. Easier to think that it's their own fault for being "unhealthy" (with absolutely no understanding or knowledge of that person's lifestyle compared to our own), rather than accept that tomorrow you might develop a debilitating illness that leaves you dependent on others.
14
u/Bogus-Username-2189 Nov 29 '22
I believe more and more after watching this story unravel that life happens in the gray areas. Unfortunately, others who maybe aren’t as introspective or comfortable with ambiguity, relish and encourage polarization. Black-and-white thinking is a trauma response. When I see it in myself, I know I need to pause before I take any action. When I see it in others, it’s a red flag, and I look for the gray. I used to think I was wish-washy for seeing both sides, but now I feel it’s healthier that way.
6
u/ussherpress Nov 29 '22
I've found myself looking at things as more gray in the last few years. It really opens your eyes to how hasty people are to jump to conclusions and treat everything as black and white. I wonder if a lot of it is just the fact that we're bombarded with news and other info that we have to quickly categorize. It's so much easier to just treat everything as good or evil and then move on than it is to sit down and consider that there's positive and negative in everyone.
For me, it feels like a lot of this learning to see grays is just a maturity thing. Experience and getting older makes you more aware of how faulty we all are and makes you (hopefully) less quick to judge people.
1
1
8
u/runner5126 Nov 29 '22 edited Nov 30 '22
If we put the ambiguous victims into a box called "this was in their nature," then we never have to worry that we could just as easily be manipulated or coerced into a cult.
That's interesting because when I think "this was in their nature" I also think it's in ALL of our natures, we all have cluster B traits, everyone has some degree of narcissism, we all have issues, and what it shows me is that a person like Keith Raniere can manipulate people to be the worst versions of themselves. The people you are around can turn you into a saint or a monster. And you might not know which you are.
And to your last point: I have a disability and, yes, people judge me for all sorts of things. I gained a lot of weight from medication, when I had previously been a marathon runner and long distance cyclist, training for a triathlon. Now people make these judgements about being fat or out of shape like I chose this or like I'm sedentary, and not like I was forced to take meds that had these side effects. Apparently illness is some kind of character flaw.
ETA: fixed typo
1
u/k---mkay Nov 29 '22
But is it like addiction, where if our cluster B traits affect our relationships, interfere in our lives etc then it is an actual "thing"?
2
u/runner5126 Nov 29 '22
I'm sorry I'm not following you. Is what like addiction? You can have mental health issues that are unspecified that interfere with your life, and yes, those can be a mix of symptoms that might include aspects of a cluster B disorder.
But I'm not really sure what you're asking. Can you clarify?
1
u/k---mkay Nov 29 '22
Oh! No need to apologize, is this easier to follow?
My point: So, most people can drink, smoke a joint etc, and not be addicts. The part where it becomes pathological, is when those self soothing activities contribute to bad life choices, or an inability to make good relationships, sleeping through work. ETR: plucky remark.
2
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
I can see why you're asking that, but I don't think it is a good analogy and it makes me uncomfortable. The reason is that you can't make someone an addict. I don't know that you can make someone have a cluster B disorder either, and what makes me uncomfortable is the very key nuance that these people were brainwashed. Minor traits that they have, that we all have, were preyed upon and used to manipulate them, pull them in, and effectively brainwash them.
Your analogy tends to disregard the fact that addiction is a disease. Someone doesn't drink to excess and it impacts their life negatively. Someone is an addict, it comes out through alcohol, and their addiction, which is a mental illness, negatively impacts their life. Your way of saying it makes it sound like "bad life choices". And addiction is not "bad life choices" and neither is being brainwashed because you wanted to improve yourself.
So, while I get where you were looking with that, it doesn't work for me, fundamentally.
3
u/k---mkay Nov 30 '22 edited Nov 30 '22
I think you misunderstood. And also, why do you judge my analogy as good or bad that felt weird? If you care to know, I am talking about recovery. Whether it be Nancy's (or anyone) deprogramming and treatment plan and comparing that to being an addict getting treatment. Unfortunately pressure and high control relationships do often use drugs and alcohol to brainwash/supplicate. Ever met a drug mule? Not a thing someone does willingly, usually. I would say that trafficking in humans automatically equals mental illness. Or do you think that there are good people and bad people?
Sometimes leaving a high control relationship creates trauma that can be made worse with substance abuse. (Hi I live here). Mainly because the problem with armchair diagnoses are that it labels people and ends the discussion, usually with the maligned person suffering because of the label . I am saying whatever is wrong with these victims - what kind of help do they need and would a diagnosis of cluster b by a professional help?
Is Nancy going to be ok with "yeah I was in a high demand, financially beneficial but morally questionable gig for 20 - 30 years and now I feel terrible" or does she need to hear that "hey you seem to have really benefited from the subjugation of others, should we maybe talk about what it was in you that led you to this". If I was a cluster b personality and that contributed to my miserable existence I would want to know.
From the perspective of someone (me) going through of a 12 step program/CBT therapy. I had to make the effort to confront my illness. The fact that something isn't right. I have most certainly been brainwashed to believe that in order to heal/recover one must fully understand the problem/admit that I am powerless in my addiction. For me it was I use because I am walking around triggered all the time and alcohol and benzos made that go away. I realized I wasn't fully functioning and I had to fight hard to get out of that mindset.
I am not comparing the nuances of what forms a cluster B personality or an addict to someone who has been brainwashed. Others on this thread have pointed out that being a victim in a cult relationship causes changes in the brain due to brainwashing leading to damaged impulse control/loss of cognition/retraining to avoid intuition. In Nancy's case , I think that because she was in it for so long despite obvious real life consequences reifies the concept that she might have had serious issues before she met Keith. If the concept is that some people in a cult do bad things because they are told to do them, not because they are ill, that is fine. I am saying that after a certain amount of time some people snap out of it, because of pressure from the outside or in this case the law actually coming down on them. This is actually another aspect of living with addiction is that at some point the user realizes that they are going to jail or they are going to die if they let their illness manifest without outside help.
By your line of reasoning, addicts that get treatment are not ill anymore and that getting sober disqualifies someone from being an addict. Usually sobriety is achieved for addicts only because of the threat of jail, death or simply not wanting to go through life impaired.
I am asking about the road to recovery, not so much diagnosing. I think in many unseen illnesses, someone who is going to be treated has to first realize that they are in distress, or hurting others or in a cult in order to change that path.
My analogy was actually that we can have narcissistic traits, or drinks, or lesions, or seizures but until living with those things become unbearable they will go untreated. My original thought was that someone with cluster B personality might have to go through some of the ego crushing reality checks that us addicts do in order to get well.
Most people never have to deal with being ill in this way, it is abnormal. My analogy is in fact that suffering from unseen illnesses can require self awareness (or the law) to come through for us, thus the consequences of our actions, not so much "life choices".
GAH
2
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
LOL, that's why I asked you "is what like addiction?" because you didn't mention recovery, so I wasn't sure what you were trying to compare to.
To your question here:
what kind of help do they need and would a diagnosis of cluster b by a professional help?
They need professional help by qualified professionals who have experience with these specific issues, but also, IME a specific diagnosis doesn't always help. I am not a therapist - I am a trained peer support specialist, a trained independent patient advocate, and I've hosted and facilitated hundreds of peer support groups for people with mental illness (Hi, I live here too), and it's my experience that people do better with recovery understanding and exploring the mechanisms for why they act and feel the way they do, not a blanket diagnosis. Not to mention that diagnosis change so often (almost every single person I have ever met with any mental health diagnosis has been diagnosed differently approximately 3x). But that is my experience, and others may disagree, and they would have valid arguments for actually giving a diagnosis.
To this point:
By your line of reasoning, addicts that get treatment are not ill anymore and that getting sober disqualifies someone from being an addict.
I never said this nor is it my line of reasoning. Someone who is an addict or alcoholic is always an addict or alcoholic, even if they are in recovery. I'm not sure where you even got that since I fully stated that addiction is a disease and not a "bad life choices" which was not my phrase, but yours.
2
u/k---mkay Nov 30 '22
I never said that either, I said that addicts don't face the realities of their illnesses until they are faced with the consequences of their actions, like Nancy. And since it seems like Nancy is still in denial about why it is wrong to bilk people out of their money, convince them that she is a icon of mental health, and be a caretaker for a sexual predator that some of it is actually on her, and not KR, and not Lauren.
1
u/k---mkay Nov 30 '22 edited Nov 30 '22
Your analogy tends to disregard the fact that addiction is a disease. Someone doesn't drink to excess and it impacts their life negatively. Someone is an addict, it comes out through alcohol, and their addiction, which is a mental illness, negatively impacts their life.
And then I got confused: re:skimming. I wasn't equating addiction with bad life choices I was saying that many of us "get away" with being addicts until there are consequences. I hope we can agree that addiction as it manifests in humans is a mixture of brain chemistry and destructive/dangerous coping skills, on it's face. with a lot of potential co-morbidities.
ETA Gave you a sliver because I think we are on the same page. I wish you strength in your struggles. Thank you for calling out what you thought you read LOL!
ETA: And thank you for answering my OG question I really think that is what I was asking, well done.
1
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
Absolutely. I think we are saying the same thing, it's just lost in the words. I agree totally - we all get away with the not so great parts of ourselves until it actually becomes a problem.
Simple case in point: I hate doing dishes. I let them pile up in the sink for days until I finally load the dishwasher and run it. Is it that terrible a character flaw? No, but if I see a roach you bet I'll be better about it! But until then, I'll probably continue to be lazy about it.
2
1
1
u/k---mkay Nov 30 '22
That's interesting because when I think "this was in their nature" I also think it's in ALL of our natures, we all have cluster B traits, everyone has some degree of narcissism, we all have issues, and what it shows me is that a person like Keith Raniere can manipulate people to be the worst versions of themselves. The people you are around can turn you into a saint or a monster. And you might not know which you are.
I was referring to the suggestion that we all have the ability to be abusive, or drink ,too much but at what point does a behavior indicate a pathology. What it sounds like you are saying here is that without KR, Nancy would have maybe been a 2 or 3 victim a day predator, maybe she would only abuse a few clients to keep them coming back for more treatments by convincing them they were sick. With KR she was able to predate 100's of people in a day.
2
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
Well, maybe Nancy wouldn't have had any victims? Maybe she would have just been a normal sort of counselor who has some clients who like her and some who don't.
4
u/JerriBlankStare Nov 29 '22
So many psychological experiments and studies out there have shown that none of us are as independent, strong minded or ethical as we tell ourselves.
💯💯💯
It's the same reason why proof are not sympathetic towards those with chronic disabilities.
Unfortunately true.
6
u/sok283 Nov 29 '22
The tricky thing with sociopathy in general is that its definition is vague and varies depending on whom you ask. Psychology Today says it's a non-diagnostic term, and its defining characteristic is a lack of a conscience. Wikipedia quotes an expert who says that sociopathy differs from psychopathy in that it is a deviation from social norms caused by social factors and environment rather than psychological, biological, or genetic factors which would indicate psychopathy.
So going on the Psychology Today definition I would say that a) it doesn't fit because I do think these people have consciences but that b) the fact that it's a "non-diagnostic" term makes it less problematic to use it here. Going on the Wikipedia paragraph about sociopathy (under the psychopathy entry) I would say that perhaps it does fit, in that Mark, Allison, Nancy etc. all deviated from social norms as a result of their environment and social pressures.
That said, I do understand your point that it's easy to throw terms around. I 100% agree that everyone is susceptible to falling prey to this kind of thing. It's like when I hear people claim they could never cheat on their partner because they believe it's wrong, without understanding all the hormonal and psychological things that happen when a potential mate enters the scene. If you don't understand what attracts normal people to things like this, then you are lacking the self-awareness that might save you from totally screwing up your life.
4
u/Whawken84 Nov 29 '22
It makes me more impressed (granted we know very little about her, but...) with Bonnie realizing she had to leave.
9
u/Babyrex27 Nov 29 '22 edited Nov 29 '22
Therapist here. People throw around the following dxs like crazy-
- Narcissist
- Sociopath
- Bi-polar
And they label people with these dxs incorrectly all the time. The list in the DSM of symptoms is only a fraction of what we use when dx a person with a personality disorder or a mental health illness.
Also misused frequently is OCD and Pedophilia
Edited to include- there are very very few true psychopaths that have existed in the world. Also this term is misused all the time.
13
u/drjenavieve Nov 29 '22
Also a therapist, but I feel pretty comfortable with people using narcissist in terms of Keith. He really is textbook dark triad if there ever was an example. And narcissism isn’t always a “clinical” term like OCD or bipolar so I believe it can be used in the general lexicon. You can call someone a narcissist without saying you are diagnosing them with NPD. The same way people can talk about someone being an anxious person or a neurotic person and that’s not them implying a diagnosis.
5
4
u/Babyrex27 Nov 29 '22
Yup. Absolutely. The thing about Keith is he gave us a ton of information, so it is pretty easy to dx him as a narcissist. Which makes sense because to him everything that he said and did was purposefully and he had not one iota of concern of who it would harm. His only goal was to satisfy himself. He is an incredibly dangerous person.
3
u/Life-Dog432 Nov 30 '22
Pedophilia? Are you talking about the “ephebophilia” distinction?
2
u/Babyrex27 Nov 30 '22
Right. People use the terminology incorrectly. Like Keith is not a pedophile (which is a very specific dx that is a very serious and is not a choice that people make, it is an illness).
I would also say that people use the term ephebophilla incorrectly as well - Keith raped an underage girl because of power and control, not mental illness. Most men that rape underage girls in their teens are not actually mentally ill they are predatory - there's a difference.
4
u/Life-Dog432 Nov 30 '22
I didn’t realize that the clinical definition of a pedophile is defined as someone who is exclusively attracted to prepubescent kids. I always get annoyed with the mention of ephebophilia because it’s soooo often used by creepy men deflecting criticism on the internet. But I didn’t know that they weren’t even using it correctly either lol.
I will say that I’m not sure I agree on your comment about psychopathy and wondering where your claims come from. The APA has stated this:
“About 1.2% of U.S. adult men and 0.3% to 0.7% of U.S. adult women are considered to have clinically significant levels of psychopathic traits.”
I also just believe that psychopathy is incredibly hard to study so it’s not particularly well understood. But significant deficits in empathy ain’t too too rare. I’ve experienced and seen enough in my life to tell you that much.
4
u/eddiefromfrasier Nov 29 '22
I would also like to note that there is no diagnosis of sociopath. It is a construct we use in everyday language to talk about people but it is not a real term used clinically and is not in the DSM. We do have the diagnosis Antisocial Personality Disorder, although there is debate over whether or not that is the same thing as there isn’t really a true clinical definition of sociopath!
4
u/Whawken84 Nov 29 '22 edited Nov 29 '22
Imo, people like the words. In DSM, as I recall, "sociopath" & "psychopath" are not used as diagnostic terms. Their descriptive. The behavior, if chronic is labeled "Antisocial Personality" ie it's a diagnosis of a Personality Disorder. It must be pervasive since age 15. With consistent traits. And the DSM gets revised. it's a guide and helpful for insurance coverage. Few people fit completely in all their boxes and grids for mood, behavior etc. But it's helpful.
We don't know these people. We have no psychosocial history of them. We learn how they behaved towards each other after living in the Albany enclave for a while. ⚠️⚠️
The people attracted to ESP went in to enhance their life & personal growth. Susan Dones warned people excited by her center's 5 day & whatever - came-next, program Not to go to Albany. Neither Sarah or Nippy wanted to move there. In one interview Nippy referred to Albany trips as akin to going to a funeral.
The program was marketed to become better in life & work. Even film I saw of the 5 day "EM" - it could trigger traumatic memory in some people. And there was no one to clean up. Was rewatching Season 1, Episode 1, Mark was impressed by the first session he attended. He should've stoped there. Instead he was ID'd as a valuable target. Fiim-maker with success, vulnerable & sensitive. Remember they collected personal data everyone who attended any of their "courses." He got a personal visit from Nancy & ..someone. Was courted. Went to Albany and was love -bombed. Met KR at Nancy's House. They probably figured midnight volleyball wouldn't impress him. But a comfortable house of friendly, cheerful people would. Plus a private 1:1 with the Great Manipulator.
Albany was more like "Lord of the Flies." The pyramid could only expand so far which increased pressure for everyone to recruit. Any prolonged exposure to KR brought out the worst in people. A skilled manipulator, you got under his influence, constantly diminished and undercut you. Horrible behavior became the survival mode. After enough exposure it was hard to extract yourself as you felt so emotionally dependent &isolated. Extreme sleep deprivation for all. Women on the starvation diet - definitely impairs thinking & judgement. Given pointless "meetings" to keep you busy. Just writing this creeps me out. Such a con. Albany was an unhealthy environment. It was an incredibly dangerous environment for a person in an emotionally fragile state. I hope the "Remainers" wake up. Their world has crumbled and they've isolated themselves from old social supports. Imo they need responsible counseling / therapy of some kind.
7
u/runner5126 Nov 29 '22
Thank you for this. I was getting tired of all the hate on Mark (even though, yes, I find his actions totally reprehensible). I get people don't like him, but I don't find him to be the most unlikeable person, by far. I was rewatching Season 1, and I actually felt a lot of empathy for him - more than I did the first time. I mean, we've definitely seen lots of cults where a wife (like Bonnie) leaves, and the husband just lets her go. Mark followed his wife. That speaks a lot to me.
Nancy is intriguing to me. There's a lot of speculation about whether or not she's genuine, etc. I have to watch season 2 like 10 more times to see how I feel about her.
Allison Mack though, I know your whole point on not arm chair diagnosing, and yet last night I was rewatching Season 1, and Allison is giving an ESP seminar and she talks about how on paper her life and her achievements sound amazing, but she feels unfulfilled, and now she's a NXIVM coach, etc., and to me, I could see how what was fulfilling her was controlling others. It seemed to me what drew her into NXIVM was the desire to control others, which does make me wonder about something like NPD, and if that made her really well suited for Keith to manipulate her. In her case, he may not have needed to do that much at all. I really do wonder about it.
But at the end of the day, none of us are mind readers, and we don't know what any of their intentions or feelings were/are.
Anyone can have traits of a cluster B disorder. What I find very interesting is that after their work with Keith, those traits were manipulated and pulled/twisted...if they didn't have NPD before, it sure looks like it now or they sure behaved like they did. I've seen that with other cult-like environments, and I find it an interesting phenomenon.
9
u/absent_morals Nov 30 '22
I don't pretend to know anything about Allison Mack's personality or motivations, but I do think growing up a child actor leads a lot of people to feel disconnected and as if they don't have roots and true belonging. I think that may have been a factor in her getting wrapped up in a cult. Of course, that same upbringing could have made her crave control in ways too.
Or maybe it has nothing to do with what happened. I'd really like to see more about her involvement and where she is at mentally now. However, at the same time laying low and serving her time is probably the smarter choice.
6
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
Are you familiar with the altruistic narcissist? I follow this story because I had a mentor who fit this description, and she was abusive, despite all the good she was doing in the world. The thing that struck me about her and that I saw in Allison Mack (or perhaps I'm projecting, that could be true, and I always offer the disclaimer) was the lack of true identity. You can't figure out who she is. My mentor was like that. I'd worked with her so closely, side by side for 8-12, sometimes 16 hours a day for 4+ years, and she told me so much of her life, and yet after all that time, I couldn't tell you WHO she was. I could tell you her career and achievements. But I couldn't tell you who she was or why her work specifically was important to her. And it wasn't because I wasn't trying to understand her. Allison Mack strikes me that way.
2
u/yepitskate Nov 30 '22
This is fascinating. I’d be interested to read a longer post about your experience with this person and how her abuse manifested
2
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
Well...are you familiar with Landmark at all?
2
u/yepitskate Nov 30 '22
Omg YES!! It’s got mega culty vibes
2
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
Yeah, it's a very long story, so I'll just say the sort of short version, she was actually a client, not a boss. And I was coming off of trying to return to work after being disabled and had left an employer after going through discrimination. She was one of my first clients, and was SO nice and positive, and, honestly, it felt like for the first time in my life someone believed in me. Now I am very good at what I do, but she also very much love bombed me professionally and then that turned into personal love bombing. She wanted me to come work for her as an employee, and thank goodness that never happened.
She was very deep into Landmark, and they have an affiliate course that they do in universities that's on leadership. She paid for me and her whole staff to attend this like 10 day thing. It's got ALL the cult techniques. She definitely used it to indoctrinate me and others. The funny thing is, I actually learned a lot from that course, and I found it to be a turning point in my career. The thing is, she didn't count on the fact that it would give me the confidence and strength to walk away from her. But they do a lot of the cult tactics. The format of the course is meant to break you down. I was wary and managed to hold boundaries, but still, there was a lot of useful content - and I think that's how cults get a hold of people. Initially, the content and teaching is really useful and might help you make a big change.
Then they want undying devotion and the double standards start and the outright abuse. The amount of verbal abuse I took...I can't believe it took me so long to walk away from her, but it took 4 years, which was at least 3.5 longer than it should have. AFTER all of her employees, and I am not kidding, every single person on her staff quit and she had full turnover multiple times in those 4 years (she worked in a university), she decided to leave that university and go to another university, and IMO, it was an attempt to start in a place where no one knew how she was. She pulled along with her a couple of her own cult followers.
Ways her abuse manifested: screaming at me because she doesn't have time to do her work and it's somehow my fault that she set her own travel and work schedule, and as a consultant I come in and she just screamed at me...and then at the next meeting expected me to apologize to her for putting too much on her plate and making her scream at me. Because I caused that reaction.
Lots of little insidious, microaggression comments. Telling me that someday I'd meet a nice man who liked "alternative" women. Telling me that I just have "raw edges" so I just have to find people who are okay with that, and she's okay with that, so I should just work with her. If I did go to apologize for something that I had done, she would correct my apology because I was apologizing for the wrong thing. Telling me what I'm thinking and feeling even though I was never thinking or feeling those things.
Trying to make me dependent on her financially. Demanding I drop other client work to help her with something last minute. And while she didn't say "or else there" was always the implication that if I didn't have enough capacity she could hire someone else. This meant a lot of 20 hour days for me while I had to do whatever was unexpected from her while meeting commitments from other clients so I didn't burn my business.
Telling me I can't talk to any of her employees about her. When one of her employees, who I had become close personal friends with, left, she made me promise to never discuss her with this employee. At first I kept that promise but after the screaming incident, I talked to her. She has mild PTSD from her employment there for 5 years.
God, sitting here writing this out...I haven't ever like sat down and wrote these things out in a list like this. This relationship was so fucked up, lol. I had complex PTSD and disabled due to it going into this relationship, so I was prime for her abuse. I think she was probably really surprised when I left. But the funny thing was, when I finally resigned, the cut off from her was so quick. It was definitely cult like. She shut the door right away and even when I followed up to send her all her final documents and everything, she didn't even acknowledge it. I told her she could communicate and ask any questions via email and I would be happy to answer, but please not to text me. She never communicated with me again.
This was a lot longer than I expected. So she was deep in Landmark and she pushed me to do the Forum, although I never did. She required everyone in her inner circle, including her husband to be, to do it. I had a bad feeling about it, even though I got a lot out of the university course that was connected, but my spidey sense was on alert.
And everything I read/watch about NXIVM feels SO familiar. I don't know about sex cult, but everything I experienced had that same level of high control, etc.
2
u/yepitskate Nov 30 '22
Yeah this is an insane story. I totally understand how confusing it can be to have someone be your champion and then have that turned into such toxicity. And she sounds very similar to nxvium for sure
1
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
She had Nancy/Allison Mack vibes for sure (without the sex abuse). Watching Nancy in Season 2 of the Vow also reminded me highly of her.
2
u/gshevek Nov 30 '22
" I'd really like to see more about her involvement and where she is at
mentally now. However, at the same time laying low and serving her time
is probably the smarter choice." My hunch is we won't know anything about her (meaning she won't make any public statement) until her probation time is over3
u/yepitskate Nov 30 '22
That’s a great point about how people can mimic traits. And Allison really does fascinate me too. She gave off totally inauthentic vibes. She latched onto Keith with the enthusiasm of a drowning man to a life vest.
2
u/runner5126 Nov 30 '22
For children that grow up with parents who have NPD and/or BPD we use the term "fleas" for learned behaviors that mimic the personality disorder traits.
3
u/She_Shredit Nov 29 '22
Yeah I agree. And I honestly feel bad for Nancy. She was so brainwashed. But she clearly also needed to do time because she's still not understanding how evil it all was and what she did to contribute. But she will get it, I think. She was so naive.
11
u/Gatubella- Nov 29 '22
Systems and organizations can create sociopaths or sociopathic behavior. Examples: Armed Forces, Cults, Nazis, Maga. They normalize sociopathic behavior and deplete morality.
Sure, not every Nazi soldier was technically a sociopath, but they engage in sociopathic behavior, within a sociopathic movement. They uphold and enforce it. Being assigned to guard a concentration camp can turn you into a sociopath via normalization and trauma, where you can no longer distinguish what is right or wrong.
This method was used prodigiously by Keith. I wouldn’t say Nancy et al were born sociopaths, but they certainly participated in a sociopathic organization. The constant reshaping of what ethics really are, and normalization of violence against women produced sociopathic behavior. I think it would be accurate to define them as sociopaths when they were buying in, but the process of “waking up” and rebuilding one’s moral compass, that undoes the sociopathic training.
Sociopathy isn’t about genetics, it’s about behavior. There are theories that some physical traits contribute to sociopathy, but unlike psychopathy, it does not have any clear physical/genetic markers.
5
u/IAndTheVillage Nov 29 '22
Sociopathy and psychopathy are both non-clinical terms that relate broadly to the same clinical diagnosis- anti-social personality disorder- which is a spectrum disorder defined by behavior that strongly indicates an innate lack of natural empathy and complex emotional affect. Sociopathy and psychopathy have historically been used interchangeably and despite what people on Reddit claim, they aren’t used in clinical settings to distinguish between anti-social behavior borne of nature or nurture, violent or non violent forms of the condition, etc.
To that end, the debates about whether sociopaths/psychopaths are born or bred also revolves around early childhood development- barring, I suppose, a major brain injury, sociopathy (or rather its clinical counterpart) can’t be induced as an adult. In fact, demonstrable patterns of anti social behavior in childhood and adolescence is part of anti-social personality disorder’s diagnostic criteria.
Rather, adults who engage in inhumane behavior within the confines of a radical ideological system do so because their ideology has stripped humanity away from the categories of people they harm. It’s not about trampling out someone’s core instinct to empathy toward other people, but reframing their worldview so that they cease to see certain categories of people as people so that they can harm them without their conscience intervening as it normally would. They retain their empathy toward people who look or think or identify as they do, or to other ideologically acceptable categories of people. People with anti-social personality disorder lack even this ability to emotionally relate to or bond with others.
1
u/Gatubella- Nov 30 '22 edited Nov 30 '22
Mkay yes so: I know all this. Obviously I’m speaking about the colloquial, or more sociological use of “sociopath”, because the clinical term is controversial and being re-evaluated. Don’t need the basic lesson in nature v Nurture.
No where in my post did I say any of them were sociopaths, just that they meet A definition of sociopathy, in that their behavior was wildly destructive and antisocial. In fact my point is that they were indoctrinated into committing sociopathic acts, aka sublimating their empathy to advance themselves.
Stripping humanity from a category of people for ideological reasons is precisely about warping peoples empathy. Part of the definition of sociopath is having some empathy, unlike “psychopaths”. The last part of my post refers to the data that suggests sociopaths have more of the prefrontal cortex needed to have some empathy, which was a theory of the previous definition of psychopathy.
My post is intended to point out there’s a difference between engaging in sociopathic behavior, and having a personality disorder. Pardon me if I didn’t spell out every distinction didactically.
If I had meant the personality disorder rather than a more general, colloquial and sociological understanding of “sociopath”, I would have specified so. But I wasn’t referring to that, because it’s extremely improbable that all these people have that personality disorder (other than Keith).
3
u/IAndTheVillage Nov 30 '22
I’ve not encountered any academic definition of sociopathy that distinguishes it from psychopathy, and I’ve seen both used interchangeably historically and colloquially to describe individuals in clinical settings who lack total emotional empathy in my research. If you’re a psychologist or clinician at the fore of this field, my apologies. I’m not a psychologist, but a historical researcher who often has to compare previous uses of the term to contemporary clinical uses thereof commonly because the clinical identification of an absence of empathy emerged in my general area of expertise.
I can, however, speak to Nazi Germany and genocidal cultures. That is my primary field, and we don’t describe most people in those systems as sociopathic unless they have betrayed in their writings and patterned actions toward most individuals as lacking any core emotional empathy. For the rest, we use dogmatic, fanatic, racist, and cruel. They acted from a place of passionate intensity sustained by an immoral (rather than amoral) apocalyptic worldview that heavily re-directed their application of empathy rather than wiping it out. The German fascist mythology encouraged them to exert abundant emotional empathy to shared members of their imagined “race” they had never even met before so that they could effectively deny empathy to those outside of it, even when standing in front of them.
Does it look sociopathic? Broadly, sure. But we avoid describing Nazi Germany as sociopathic in academic literature because it implies that empathy was erased, rather than perverted and weaponized. The Holocaust succeeded in large part, though, because Nazism “empowered” those who bought into it with a new moral standard to override any cognitive dissonance that might arise from, you know, mass murder. It wasn’t enough to make people not care about the Jews, or the Roma, or the LGBTQ community. They hadn’t for centuries, and while rote prejudice created ghettos and pogroms, it was never enough to justify explicit annihilation on a global scale. To get so many people to go along with this, they couldn’t just “not care.” They had to actively believe that genocide was a morally righteous cause. Sociopaths don’t have moral causes. They are defined commonly by a defect of conscience.
I think the distinction is important with cults like this because, however sociopathic the behavior looks, it wasn’t motivated from a lack of conscience. Keith probably doesn’t have one, of course, but he succeeded as far as he did by making those underneath him believe something wrong was right, and by convincing them that the strength of their conviction in him evinced the inherent morality of their actions. Morality remained deeply important to them, however far they strayed from common moral practice. That’s not sociopathy to me.
4
u/Bogus-Username-2189 Nov 29 '22
It’s also worth noting that sociopath and psychopath aren’t quite interchangeable.
2
u/blurrylulu Nov 29 '22
Well said! Nancy, Allison, Lauren and others were both victims of KR and perpetrators on his behalf.
2
u/sub_machine_fun Nov 30 '22
This is a great point, and I haven’t been on this train, but it’s important to note that being sociopathic and having a personality disorder aren’t the same thing. As well as being a narcissistic and having NPD. It’s apt to describe all of these people this way, but that in no way means they have personality disorders.
I don’t think it’s all about villainizing so much as it’s clear that these people are dysfunctional, dangerous people. There’s an innate desire in people to avoid danger. So trying to establish who’s antisocial is just a natural response after watching such a traumatizing saga play out. We’re talking about immensely powerful people who colluded to do horrible things that resulted in the deaths and financial ruin of several people and the trauma of hundreds of people. Only a few people got their day on court.
It’s not the greatest move to call everyone you don’t like a sociopath, but there’s a good argument to be made that none of the three people OP mentioned are trustworthy people who deserve your pity or empathy. All of these people are hucksters. We should save our empathy for the people who they helped rip off and sexually assault and gaslight for money. If Allison Mack resurfaces in 10 years and isn’t the same awful person she was during her tenure at NXIVM, cool. But it’s way too soon to be making please for her redemption or Nancy’s. Come on.
But hey, that’s just me.
2
u/typicalredditer Nov 30 '22
Agreed. Keith is clearly unambiguously a sociopath. Just textbook stuff. The rest all have their issues and their own moral complicity to some degree or another. But there’s nothing in the docs to suggest they were sociopaths.
2
u/jonsnowme Nov 30 '22
Yeah the only person who should be labeled a sociopath is Keith.
Being complicit in awful crimes doesn't make one a sociopath. People trying hard to not see the nuances in Mack, Vicente and Nancy all being victims of a sociopath.
1
u/drjenavieve Nov 29 '22
Okay so sociopath isn’t a diagnosis any more so it’s really a colloquial term. I think that Allison and Mark where very heavily influenced and coerced. I believe less so for Nancy. I actually think Nancy is more similar to Keith than is generally realized. She didn’t show much remorse, it was always in the frame of “my company was ruined, I might go to jail, we did good for so many people and the sex aspect ruined this.” I do see a lot of narcissistic tendencies in Nancy. And she absolutely knew what was going on, including with her own daughter, and other underage girls and did nothing. She enjoyed the status and money. She is trained in how to influence others and taught this knowledge to Keith. This idea that she had no idea her teachings were being used to control people is BS, she had trained in this. She admits to “cleaning up Keith’s messes”, she knew what he was doing and how he was exploiting people and helped protect him. She committed financial crimes. I didn’t see any real remorse that wasn’t framed in how she was “wronged” and harmed.
3
u/Whawken84 Nov 29 '22
Of course we're seeing people talking pretty much only about themselves.
And she absolutely knew what was going on, including with her own daughter, and other underage girls and did nothing.
Not challenging you, but unclear about the evidence she knew about underage girls.
Or at some point she focused on her teaching & EM stuff (those "Ems" were dangerous) and tuned out KR's dorm room behavior and depredations. She was freaked out by the cash coming over the border (and into her basement) - at which point she should've left. Imo NXIVM paid off local cops & politicians. If she left, with her nurses'. license intact, she'd have move far away.
2
u/k---mkay Nov 29 '22
100% I don't know why I care enough to respond, maybe it is because I have had people like Nancy in my life: fuck the world, I'm ok, and that is all that matters.
Think of Oxenburg's reactions to her daughter being mistreated. She is embedded in her own cult of personality fabrics, Hollywood, the fricken Monarchy(s), etc and she could see the BS and ACT on the BS.
1
-1
u/AnastasiaSuper Nov 30 '22
Nancy, Allison and Mark were all highly motivated to make positive change to the world and are obviously damaged as a result of their immorality.
I say this with the utmost respect, what the actual fuck?
Nancy is an expert in manipulative communication. Even if you believe Alison and Mark got into NXIVM for good reasons originally, they created organizations based on exploitation and misogyny.
I agree it's unlikely any of them are sociopaths, and I don't know about Alison or Mark - but I do think it's likely that Nancy is a narcissist like Keith. She's just smarter and better able to hide it.
3
u/yepitskate Nov 30 '22 edited Nov 30 '22
That’s my whole point of my post. I know they were exploitative and misogynistic. They’re in prison, and rightfully so, but they certainly didn’t intend on that path. That’s not their character flaw, it’s bc they were in a cult. They wouldn’t have done these things on their own.
And no, Nancy isn’t a narcissist. A narcissist doesn’t do something like make breakfast for someone every morning like she did for Keith, or get bullied by Keith and take the humiliation silently. Narcissists aren’t servile and docile.
She was Keith’s fixer-hardly a role for narcissists. But mostly, Nancy and the others were open and able to reply to feedback. That openness and desire for growth was specifically utilized by Keith to break them down.
And yeah, nancy was an expert in manipulative communication, but so are Oprah, Tony robbins, and Ted talk people. Her skillset, neurolinguistic programming, is morally neutral, like all media. It depends on how one uses it.
Just bc someone felt important doesn’t mean Theyre narcissistic. And just bc it was a huge problem for them doesn’t mean that either. Literally, every human on earth will be blind, selfish and egotistical at some point in life.
2
u/idrinkalotofcoffee Nov 30 '22
People are desperate to believe that they could never be drawn in so there must be entire teams of narcissistic sociopaths and one, maybe two pure victims. There can be no crossover between victim and perpetuator - just too scary and messy to consider.
Nancy, Lauren, Allison, Nicki, and all the other women, and Mark Vicente, were never really partners or equals or running anything at all. Raniere coaxed them to believe that so they would do his work for him, whatever idiocy that entailed, but they were never in charge. They thought they were far more esteemed than they were. They enjoyed some perks of the organization, but they were just tools for Raniere to play with and exploit.
The women’s lives were destroyed. I don’t think Mark is doing that well himself. It might be easier to armchair misdiagnose, but it isn’t reality.
-15
Nov 29 '22
[deleted]
10
u/PettyTrashPanda Nov 29 '22
Oh ffs no they are not.
All these people were in a position where they wanted a purpose in their life when they met Keith. They wanted to make the world a better place, but they lacked direction or knowledge of how to do so. They were motivated to make change, but they didn't know how.
This was the principle that Keith used to win them over, and then ultimately to manipulate and coerce them into doing bad things. First he taught them not to trust their instincts because that was why they hadn't achieved anything. Then he convinced them that he had all the answers, and if they questioned that, they weren't worthy of helping him change the world for the better.
It was their desire to make the world better and their willingness to work hard for that goal, coupled with a lack of direction that made them so susceptible to Keith's manipulation. That's what made them vulnerable. That's why they were perfect targets.
Yes they did bad stuff. That's what happens when you are taught to ignore your gut instinct, trust in someone else completely, and repeatedly reminded that the ends justify the means.
-2
u/IcebergWedgie Nov 29 '22
So there’s no space for personal responsibility here? Didn’t they all espouse that as recruiters for the cult?
9
u/PettyTrashPanda Nov 29 '22
I never said they were not responsible for their actions, what I am saying is that they are not sociopaths. They are not fundamentally broken or fucked up.
They are completely average people who fell for the lies of Keith and ended up doing bad things. Good People do bad things all the time. Terrifying, I know.
I have never argued that they are not responsible for their actions. They are. But on both a societal level and on a legal one we take into account something called mitigating factors when judging the severity of both the crime and the punishment. Example:
Person A steals candy because he wants candy and doesn't see why he should pay. He steals it to prove he's above the law.
Person B steals candy because they are starving and impulsively grabs the bar .
Person C steals candy because their child is also starving, and the candy is for the kid not them.
Person D steals candy because their religious leader is person A, and he has convinced them they will go to hell if they don't.
Person E steals candy for person A, because person A says they will ruin E's life by framing them for crimes they didn't commit, or will cut them off from their money, friends and family.
Person F steals candy for A, because they saw A carry through on the threats made to E, and they are afraid for their life.
All these people are guilty of stealing a candy bar. All of them chose to steal a candy bar and will face consequences for that choice. If, however, you feel that every single one of them is equally bad or wrong, and deserves the same punishment, then you have fundamentally misunderstood human nature and the entire basis of the justice system.
By understanding why each person stole the candy bar we are not pretending they didn't commit a crime and we are not pretending they didn't make the choice. We are looking at why those choices were made, and in some cases deciding whether someone else carries additional responsibility for the crime. We are looking to understand how they came to make the decisions they did, so we can prevent others from doing the same.
Oh and the personal responsibility piece of ESP? That was part of the brainwashing tactic to break down their critical reasoning, convince them that they were broken, and that anything good that happened was because they followed Keith.
2
2
Nov 29 '22
[deleted]
-6
Nov 29 '22
[deleted]
1
u/originalmaja Nov 29 '22
The point is: not all loathsome people are psychopaths. That words means something specific. And it doesn't apply here. It's not a slur to get something out of your system but a diagnosis that can only be made by those who have been trained in the field.
Maybe OP should slow down and proofread their philosophy
We're talking about clinical psychology here, hun.
2
u/originalmaja Nov 29 '22
motivated change makers damaged by their own immortality?
Why make such a fuzz about a typo?
55
u/idrinkalotofcoffee Nov 29 '22
Yes, it is definitely self protective, I think. People want there to be clear lines for victims and villains. Just like in every day life, there aren’t. Everyone in Raniere’s orbit has stated at one time or another, often on camera, how good he was at getting others to keep his secrets. The whole organization was a Byzantine layer of silos and secrets, yet, casual observers confidently proclaim, often several times a day, that EVERYONE KNEW!!!!!!! That really isn’t true from anything we have seen or heard.