Molyneux as a Narcissist.

Someone sent me a great podcast of the time when Moly is about to make the big move to leave his job in I.T. and go full time into Internet philosophy.  Christina is a big part of FDR's founding and ongoing operations.  She participates in 'Ask a Therapist' call in shows.  Moly says she advises him on matters psychological.  And she does an occasional joint podcasts with Moly.  But in this podcast she is resisting the idea of being a participant in the new 'full time' FDR.  I can't imagine why Moly made this private discussion with his wife public, but he did.  As Christina lays out here position that she simply did not want to participate in FDR, I had to listen in amazement at Moly's reaction.    I am paraphrasing here.  Feel free to listen to the podcast yourself if you want the complete details (FDR 724).

Moly pointed out that Christina's reluctance was a problem for his new full time endeavor. Why?  According to Moly, there would only be two reasons for her none participation.  Either "you do not believe in my efforts, which would undermine my credibility."   OR "You lack the courage to put herself out there  If that were the case, since self esteem marries equal self esteem, that would mean, (remember I am paraphrasing) I married a low self esteem person and my credibility would be shot."   I guess that since he already knew Christina's reasons, there was no reason for her to give her own.  She really should not have to give him any reasons.  IT is her free choice.  Still Moly is browbeating her and ultimately reduces the discussuion to how it makes him look.  Reminds me of the joke about the narcissist in a conversation with a long lost acquaintance.  He says, "I have been talking about myself for an hour.  How about you?  What do you think of me?"   

Anyone in a mature relationship can see the meta story behind this sort of husband/wife vignette.

Molyneux as a Narcissist - Part 2

Ran across a good article on FDR Liberated.  It notes the remarkable consistency of Molyneux's writings, podcasts, call in counseling sessions with 'splitting.'  Splitting is a hallmark diagnostic indication of Nacrissistic Personality Disorder.  FDR Liberated is a much better site than this one for understanding the nature of FDR and Stefan Molyneux. 

As a reminder to my dear readers, I used to listen to and enjoy Moly's podcasts.  As I read the FDR Liberated article I remembered when I first started to lose interest.  It was when he offered up sympathy for the 9/11 truthers (i.e. the belief that the U.S. government knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance and let them happen).  He said something like.  "I wouldn't put anything past a government as corrupt as this."  I remember thinking, 'OK. This guy is a little off his nut.'  As I read the article at FDR Liberated, I realized this was Molyneux doing a splitting thing.  There was no room for a inefficient, badly run, over reaching government.  It had to be totally corrupt. All bad.  No possibility of any redeeming characteristics.  So corrupt that it would murder thousands of its own citizens as a matter of course. 

Anyway, do please visit FDR Liberated if you care to get further thinking on the subject. 

Family relationships are more than just another adult relationship

Without a doubt the most asinine comments I get involve the observation that   “Molyneux isn't against the family.  He is only about voluntarily ending unhealthy relationships.” 

I have a question for those commenter's and anyone else who thinks that is “all Moly is saying”.  If the only thing Moly puts forth is this simpleton axiom, then why are you listening to him on anything related to the family? 

I suspect that the answer is because that is NOT all he believes.  Like all con men, he starts with an obvious truth and then corrupts it.  He drones on and on, as if he had a clue, as to what a healthy parent child relationship is about.  In the course of his never ending pod-casts  he offers one seemingly obvious but totally incorrect message.  Moly and his wife try to get you to believe that your relationships with your parents are no different than any other “adult” relationship in your life.  He claims that you should have the same standard with your parents as other relationships.  As reasonable as that sounds at first, if you take any time to consider it, you have to find that it is a truly silly construct.   

A healthy relationship with your parents is nothing like other adult relationships.  It shouldn't be.  A healthy relationship with your parents involves lots of things that would never exist anywhere else in your life.  If you are doing well and you are happy, your parents are happy right along with you.  No one else in your life cares about you in that way.  If you are screwing up, your parents will likely speak up.  If you have a brain, you will at least give their opinion some consideration.  If you reject their advice, they will take it in stride and wish you well.  In what other relationship in your life, can you just show up at their home and be welcomed in no matter what.  Your parents are planning on how they can give you their estate when they die.  Is there any other ‘adult relationship’ you have that involves estate planning?   Or how about simple table manners.  Your parents provided you with food, security, shelter and love for the first 20 years or so of your life.  They endured all your bad behavior and peccadilloes and still supported you and loved you.  As a matter of morality and ethics, you should return the favor and forgive them their transgressions.  Anyone can come up with countless additional examples of why the healthy family relationship is, and should be, fundamentally different from 'other adult relationships.'  

If you think differently, feel free to get a grip.