Donald Trump and DCP: A Tale of Two Narcissists

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Donald Trump is on the warpath. His narcissistic rage and wounded ego are causing him to lash out and attack anyone he perceives as his enemy. Narcissists like Trump will demonize and destroy anyone who gets in their way, and their list of enemies always grows because they are paranoid, and because their behavior provokes real opposition.

In the past, vengeful leaders would sometimes invade enemy territory and then scorch the earth by destroying fields, water supplies, villages and anything else of value. In ancient times, fire was sometime used and there are legends of conquerors salting the earth to damage crops and make the land barren.

Watching Trump's behavior over the last few days has brought back memories from 2012 and the very similar way DCP acted after he was fired from the Maxwell Institute. Many of you will remember how DCP adopted the scorched earth policy and attempted to disparage and destroy the Maxwell Institute and anyone associated with it. This warpath lasted for years and still continues today.

It's clear that both Trump and DCP are raging narcissists. I guess we're lucky that the only platform DCP has to spread his disinformation, lies personal attacks is SeN, with a readership in the tens.

[Moksha]

Trump is certifiable as a malignant narcissist. I think Dr. Peterson was mostly pissed off. He never possessed nuclear launch codes which he could have used against Drs. Bradford or Scratch in a pique of anger.

One thing is certain, Trump would never relax in a La-Z-Boy recliner with a snifter of orange soda while listening to Tannhäuser and reading Alfred Ploetz in the original German.

[Bought Yahoo]

Dr. Peterson is a wonderful person and does not deserve the narcissist label. Even though I have become the target of his ire.

[Gadianton]

Dr. Peterson is a wonderful person and does not deserve the narcissist label. Even though I have become the target of his ire.

Why is he upset with you, Bought?

[Shulem]

Dr. Peterson is a wonderful person and does not deserve the narcissist label. Even though I have become the target of his ire.

1. You have become a target and victim?

2. What negative label do you think best describes his personality?

3. Are you enjoying your *hiatus away from attending all those church meetings?


*Enjoy your freedom and live how you like.

[Moksha]

I am assuming Bought Yahoo was YahooBot on the old board and Yahoo Crockett on even older boards. Was becoming honest on the MD&D board the act which perhaps angered Dr. Peterson?

[Bought Yahoo]

Dr. Peterson is a wonderful person and does not deserve the narcissist label. Even though I have become the target of his ire.

Why is he upset with you, Bought?

In chron order, I think:

1. My sarcastic and bitter assessment of John Sorensen's work.

2. My disagreement with the conculsions of Nephi and his Asherah. That has brought me into collision with several people; most notably Kevin Christiansen (the "paradigm" and "Margaret Barker" fellow). Kevin is a super nice guy and I'm not. He's just wrong.

3. My criticism of Margaret Barker's conclusions. I could not be more opposed to her conclusions about the Temple and the Josian reforms.

4. My argument that BYU was justfied in terminating Dr. Peterson's involvement with leading the MI and editing its publications. I supported MI (and FARMS before it) with my money, and supported Dr. Peterson on numerous forums, but questioned the then-format of MI at any university.

5. My support for Brant Gardner's conclusions relating to Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon. [I'm not sure, however, that Dr. Peterson and I have ever discussed this.]

6. My questioning of Ye Olde English as having anything to do with the Book of Mormon and, more specifically, my questioning of the peer reviewed nature of the Interpreter. [In that regard, I consider the critical text project a collosal waste of time, energy and money. If the Church puts its imprimatur on the current text of the Book of Mormon, then other conclusions made by past leaders are irrelevant. For instance, before the Book of Mormon went into column format, there was a footnote that said that Lehi landed in Chile. I think Widstoe edited it out. What is the significance of that today?] As I am a peer reviewer and understand the concept, I just couldn't believe the Interpreter's format and claim to be peer reviewed. Rather than say, "Hey, you have your opinion. We do it our way to ensure accuracy," he rubbed my nose in the ground over the issue. [How could I know how Interpreter articles are reviewed? It is supposed to be a secret.] Not a problem, but an interesting anecdote in my life.

However, I have fond admiration for Dr. Peterson and what he has done in the LDS environment. The Church needs him and his writing, and in my view he is more deft at it than Dr. Nibley. I admire the fact that he rose from his resignation at MI and formed the Interpreter, which is better than the MI format and more in tune with the Internet. I admire his testimony and his intellect. He has saved many people. But he brooks no opposition and I simply question some of his positions. I suppose if he had the temperament of just another BYU professor he'd be quickly forgotten.

He is not narcissistic. He is simply an accomplished person. Quite different than the nasty bitterness I see on this board, but I understand it.

[Jersey Girl]

Hello Yahoo!

[mentalgymnast]

...Brant Gardner's conclusions relating to Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon...

Would you mind summarizing those conclusions the way you see it?

Thanks,
MG

[Lem]

6. My questioning of Ye Olde English as having anything to do with the Book of Mormon and, more specifically, my questioning of the peer reviewed nature of the Interpreter. [In that regard, I consider the critical text project a collosal waste of time, energy and money. If the Church puts its imprimatur on the current text of the Book of Mormon, then other conclusions made by past leaders are irrelevant.

Ouch. Questioning their "peer review" would definitely do it. But you make an excellent point regarding why the Interpreter is footing all the bills for the critical text project, and why publications about it are limited to the Interpreter. Correlating in Skousen's work would cause a lot of conflict.