6 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 5, 2014
the parent does, as irrelevant, or as
contemptible—i.e., greedy, selfish, weak,
morally abhorrent. This parent assumes the
posture of viewing dependency in others as
contemptible, delusionally imagining himself to
have transcended dependency. The traumatized
child who has been successfully indoctrinated to
view dependency as shamefully contemptible,
and who as an adult has denied her own
dependency and erected rigid, manic defenses
against shame can now become the traumatizing
narcissist—and as such, she may or may not be
on good terms with the parental narcissist. She
may even despise the parental narcissist and still
be unconsciously identified with the abuser,
going on to perpetuate the legacy of the
relational traumatizing of others for yet another
generation.
Delusional Infallibility and Entitlement
Second, the adult traumatizing narcissist is
obsessed with maintaining a rigid sense of
omnipotent superiority and perfection—of
infallibility, self-sufficiency and entitlement—to
the extent that she establishes an intensely
defended conviction of righteousness and
justification. In other words, she has adopted
the complementary moral defense. The
psychotic nature of this delusion of
righteousness should not be overlooked or
minimized: The traumatizing narcissist is often
intelligent, socially adept, and highly
functioning, convinced of her own sanity and
skilled at making others feel crazy. For the
traumatizing narcissist, maintaining a sense of
omnipotent superiority, delusionally believing
that she needs nothing that she cannot provide
for herself, defends against disavowed
insufficiency of any and all varieties. Because
the traumatizing narcissist equates insufficiency
with mortifying dependency and the ensuing
sense of impotence and inferiority, it is crucial
for her to keep the destabilizing shame of these
repudiated aspects of self from being released
into consciousness.
Externalization of Shame
Third, rather than feel self-loathing and the
helplessness of unrequited dependency needs,
the traumatizing narcissist arranges to keep
dependency and its accompanying shame
external, assigned and belonging only to others,
to protect himself from self-loathing and
ultimately from decompensation—literally,
mortification, or (psychic) death by shame.
1 He must continually demonstrate
contemptible, shameful
dependency/weakness/badness to be “out there,”
not “in here.” Bach (1994) has observed this
stance as well, stating that “the overinflated
narcissist can experience himself as cohesive
and alive only at the expense of devitalizing his
objects” (p. 32). To achieve this goal of
devitalization, the traumatizing narcissist
virtually colonizes others, using them as hosts,
as it were, in whom to project and control his
unwanted and disavowed affects and self-states
connected to dependency—especially the
shameful sense of neediness and inferiority.
1 For a fascinating depiction of the fate of this character type at its
most extreme, see Robert Jay Lifton’s (2000) account of the
Japanese guru Shoko Asahara, who led his follower group of
accomplished professionals in the science fields to release sarin
gas in the Tokyo subway system. Forced to appear in court and
stand accused, Asahara quickly decompensated to florid
schizophrenia.
Suppression of the Subjectivity of the Other
Fourth, the traumatizing narcissist’s child is,
unfortunately, an optimal target for the reception
of these projections, especially the projection of
shame regarding dependency. The traumatizing-
narcissist parent sees only her own needs as
valid—and she characterizes the child who tries
to express his needs as needy, selfish, and
dependent. At the same time, the traumatizing-
narcissist parent cannot bear the possibility of
being surpassed and not needed by the child, and
so must undermine the child’s efforts toward
independence. This is of course a perfect double
bind (Bateson et al.). Unable to be anything but
dependent, yet still attempting independence, the
child of the traumatizing-narcissist parent is
condemned either way. He comes to associate
dependency with shame and humiliation, and
independence with rejection and abandonment.
Unless he can adopt the counterdependent,
shameless stance of the traumatizing narcissist,
he lives instead in a post-traumatic state in
the parent does, as irrelevant, or as
contemptible—i.e., greedy, selfish, weak,
morally abhorrent. This parent assumes the
posture of viewing dependency in others as
contemptible, delusionally imagining himself to
have transcended dependency. The traumatized
child who has been successfully indoctrinated to
view dependency as shamefully contemptible,
and who as an adult has denied her own
dependency and erected rigid, manic defenses
against shame can now become the traumatizing
narcissist—and as such, she may or may not be
on good terms with the parental narcissist. She
may even despise the parental narcissist and still
be unconsciously identified with the abuser,
going on to perpetuate the legacy of the
relational traumatizing of others for yet another
generation.
Delusional Infallibility and Entitlement
Second, the adult traumatizing narcissist is
obsessed with maintaining a rigid sense of
omnipotent superiority and perfection—of
infallibility, self-sufficiency and entitlement—to
the extent that she establishes an intensely
defended conviction of righteousness and
justification. In other words, she has adopted
the complementary moral defense. The
psychotic nature of this delusion of
righteousness should not be overlooked or
minimized: The traumatizing narcissist is often
intelligent, socially adept, and highly
functioning, convinced of her own sanity and
skilled at making others feel crazy. For the
traumatizing narcissist, maintaining a sense of
omnipotent superiority, delusionally believing
that she needs nothing that she cannot provide
for herself, defends against disavowed
insufficiency of any and all varieties. Because
the traumatizing narcissist equates insufficiency
with mortifying dependency and the ensuing
sense of impotence and inferiority, it is crucial
for her to keep the destabilizing shame of these
repudiated aspects of self from being released
into consciousness.
Externalization of Shame
Third, rather than feel self-loathing and the
helplessness of unrequited dependency needs,
the traumatizing narcissist arranges to keep
dependency and its accompanying shame
external, assigned and belonging only to others,
to protect himself from self-loathing and
ultimately from decompensation—literally,
mortification, or (psychic) death by shame.
1 He must continually demonstrate
contemptible, shameful
dependency/weakness/badness to be “out there,”
not “in here.” Bach (1994) has observed this
stance as well, stating that “the overinflated
narcissist can experience himself as cohesive
and alive only at the expense of devitalizing his
objects” (p. 32). To achieve this goal of
devitalization, the traumatizing narcissist
virtually colonizes others, using them as hosts,
as it were, in whom to project and control his
unwanted and disavowed affects and self-states
connected to dependency—especially the
shameful sense of neediness and inferiority.
1 For a fascinating depiction of the fate of this character type at its
most extreme, see Robert Jay Lifton’s (2000) account of the
Japanese guru Shoko Asahara, who led his follower group of
accomplished professionals in the science fields to release sarin
gas in the Tokyo subway system. Forced to appear in court and
stand accused, Asahara quickly decompensated to florid
schizophrenia.
Suppression of the Subjectivity of the Other
Fourth, the traumatizing narcissist’s child is,
unfortunately, an optimal target for the reception
of these projections, especially the projection of
shame regarding dependency. The traumatizing-
narcissist parent sees only her own needs as
valid—and she characterizes the child who tries
to express his needs as needy, selfish, and
dependent. At the same time, the traumatizing-
narcissist parent cannot bear the possibility of
being surpassed and not needed by the child, and
so must undermine the child’s efforts toward
independence. This is of course a perfect double
bind (Bateson et al.). Unable to be anything but
dependent, yet still attempting independence, the
child of the traumatizing-narcissist parent is
condemned either way. He comes to associate
dependency with shame and humiliation, and
independence with rejection and abandonment.
Unless he can adopt the counterdependent,
shameless stance of the traumatizing narcissist,
he lives instead in a post-traumatic state in
