What Is Communal Narcissism?
While not recognized as a formal diagnosis, communal narcissism refers to grandiose, inflated perceptions of oneself within a communal environment. 1 Unlike traditional narcissists who crave personal glory, those with communal narcissistic traits focus on ...
Regardless, I still want to hear the answers for the questions that she raises. Candace asks questions and provides receipts when she has them. Call her crazy all you want but the questions still remain. Your dismissal of her also discards the questions... right?
So, why (just curious), are all the anti-Candace folks ignoring the many profound (yet obvious) questions she raises? Are you too, not curious? You might want to reconsider your position on her. Shutting down information is a very low IQ demeanor.
... just sayin
You misunderstand my question and its intent, THP. Please review the links I gave to Oregon in this post a few minutes ago, and then consider this question:
If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, and it swims like a duck, at what point is it really irresponsible of us to continuing following that duck?
I think you are missing his point. It doesn't matter if Candice is a bipolar, narcsisistic, man-hating, lefty commie. Throw any labels that you want at her but it won't a) shut her up and b) deny the questions about the case that she is asking. This tactic is a called ad hominum to get c) don't listen to her
I don't follow Candice and she may have ulterior motives and allegences but I like her work on this case. I think she genuinely loved CK which, in my opinion, can't be said about his wife.
Um, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. By this, I'm not talking about Candace. I'm talking only about the ad hominem.
Communal narcissists exist, and they do TREMENDOUS DAMAGE in our churches, our politics, and elsewhere.
I didn't call Candace a name. I used a term used by some researchers and psychologists to fairly and responsibly ask the question: In your opinion, do you see what I see?
Of course, with Israel's influence EVERYWHERE it's fair game to ask hard questions when 2 and 2 don't add up. But Candace doesn't stop at asking hard questions.
Here's a question for you:
When has Candace backtracked anything having to do w/ Charlie's assassination?
I ask b/c a person suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder cannot admit when they're wrong, not on this scale. Google "fragile ego" and NPD, and you'll understand why.
I agree but that is irrelevant. If a "communal narcissist" (whatever that is) warns you a tornado is coming do you ignore him? Probably not if there is corroborating evidence like high winds.
Yes you did. You called her a narcissist, communal or otherwise, and claim she should be ignored for that reason alone. As I said, in my opinion she is doing good work and asking good questions regarding the CK psyop. I don't care what her motives are nor her real or imagined psychological issues. You are free to disagree.
I don't follow her every vid so I can't answer that question directly. However, in the few vids that I have watched I have seen her admit to mistakes and correcting info in prior casts.
I know what a narcissist is and I don't really think she is one but, again, it is not relevant to her work. If I was dating her and you knew her personally (not just as a podcaster) and you told me to be careful because she might be NPD I might heed your warning but not in this case.
"Idon't follow her every vid so I can't answer that question directly. However, in the few vids that I have watched I have seen her admit to mistakes and correcting info in prior casts". Same here.
No, I didn't. I asked the question, Is she a communal narcissist? And you decided to attack the messenger instead of simply answering the question. Way to go.
Come on. You also asked many other loaded or leading questions
Your intent was clear and you aren't fooling anyone.
There's a big difference between intending to fool someone and having my own opinion and yet asking the question.
My asking the duck questions was intended to facilitate discussion, as noted by the flair for this post.
But rather than dive in and learn something together, 2/3 of readers - yourself included - want to use it as an opportunity to crap on someone with whom you disagree.
Good night. In the morning, when we wake, I'll still be an imperfect questioner of things. And you'll still be an insufferable ass. Sucks to be you.
I have seen her correct herself at times when she gets proof she was wrong about something.
On big potatoes or only small fry mistakes?
According to Monty Python, using the duck analogy is comparable to a witch hunt.
Waste of time and energy IMO... I dont like CO because she is a paytriot pundit. That being said, I do appreciate her pointing normies towards the irregularities, inconsistencies, and intrigue that surround the CK case.
It could be any other habbening shrouded in conspiracy: 9/11, JFK, Las Vegas, whatever... and hardly any anon would try to dissuade others from digging and questioning official narratives.
If you have to call her crazy in the title, it comes across like you don't have a real argument right from the get go.
I asked "How crazy is she?" The answer can be zero to 100.
And you're deflecting so you don't have to do the work of thoughtfully answering a hard question.
I'm in no way obligated to read any of what you linked. You created a post purely to attack her sanity, and phasing the title as a question doesn't fool anyone. Have a nice day.
Wow. A person I've never met knows my motivations better than I do.
It can't be that I used the phrase CRA-CRA to attract people to this discussion. It just can't be - because if it was, then you'd be wrong about me.
You seem sad. Like I said, have a nice day. 🙂
Wow. I must be feeling sad b/c a person I've never met who cast aspersions on my motivations in a chatroom said I appear so. As if!
Well, you just can't keep yourself from responding, for some odd reason. That's sad in my opinion. You don't even know what a chat room is. Also sad. So like I said, have a nice day.
Wow. I'm so stupid that I don't even know what a chat room is. I wouldn't be so stupid or sad if I simply agreed w/ everything MICHIGANisRED says about me.
Time to pull back the curtain after giving you enough rope to hang yourself:
Who assumes to know better the motivations of another? Who determines the emotions of another? Someone with some pretty fantastical ideas of their own abilities, that's who.
Good luck w/ that. Bye.
Wait…….is this about candice, or eerie-ka??😀
Look, some stuff shr is seeing i think she is correct. But that doesnt validate the other crazy shit she says or correlations/causations she may think she sees.
Exactly. Thank you.
Ducks have skills. They Repell water yet can find water miles out of sight.
Let's try again. Are you telling me - that when reading about the communal narcissist - you see NOTHING there to which you can point to Candace, not according to who she is, but by virtue of some of the outlandish claims she's made re: Charlie's assassination?
For the latest:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2026/07/11/candace-owens-charlie-kirk-conspiracy-tpusa-tyler-robinson-trial-00989161
From the good folks at Choosing Therapy:
"What Is Communal Narcissism? While not recognized as a formal diagnosis, communal narcissism refers to grandiose, inflated perceptions of oneself within a communal environment. Unlike traditional narcissists who crave personal glory, those with communal narcissistic traits focus on their moral deeds and acts of kindness, often to gain social status and attention. Communal narcissists often believe they have excellent social skills and high degrees of likeability and helpfulness.
"Signs of communal narcissism may include:
Extreme dedication to specific charities or causes: Their devotion may cause them to neglect other important tasks or step on the toes of others.
Often talking about having a mission or a calling: They consider serving the community to be of utmost importance, and they may deem any other interests as petty or selfish.
Stirring excess drama or conflict at charitable or work-related events: Rather than focus on achieving a communal goal, they may be more focused on hierarchies or self-inflicted politics.
Coming across as a martyr: They will mock or degrade people who do not also share the same martyr-like interests (i.e. if they are a vegan, they might lash out at people who eat meat. Or, they might “hate” wealthy people who do not donate most of their wealth).
Believing they are the best at something: They may have no evidence to substantiate this claim (and others might vehemently disagree with it).
Only seeming to show concern for societal needs in public: In private, they do not exhibit the same motivations. For example, they might donate lavish amounts of money at an important event, but they wouldn’t ever consider becoming an anonymous donor. Or, they might post about needing to save the planet on social media without actually making a personal effort to do so."
Source: https://www.choosingtherapy.com/communal-narcissism/
Please read the article in its entirety, not only for discussion here, but also to a) safeguard against you yourself falling for these charlatans and b) to help pull any loved ones you may have in the grips of such snake-oil salespeople.
Now back to our discussion: I'm counting at least 5 out of 6 here. What say you?
I have a masters in psych. Didn't go into the field further partly because its a tough haul for a conservative in the leftist dominated psych credentialing.
No Candace is not crazy. She is right on target.
Using Politico as a source to character assassinate someone is pretty lame. I don't see you disputing her evidence - just shooting the messenger. We are supposed to be better than that. Pay attention to the evidence. Do better.
Swing and a miss, OA2. I didn't say that the Politico piece reported the entirety of the evidence against Candace's claims. I only stated that it was the latest.
Here you go. Chew on this:
DataRepublican responding to Candace's reply to Andrew - https://nitter.net/DataRepublican/status/2075384791080280453
KanekoaTheGreat spilling the beans after his time working w/ Charlie and TP USA - https://nitter.net/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2075423654905802897
Question, why when offered $60,000 by Brian Atlas, to debate Andrew Wilson, who has been hired by TPUSA, as their "official debater", in "disputing her evidence" about Charlie Kirk's assassination, has refused? Another question, why hasn't she debated anyone, "other than" Victor Marx, who just won the GOP nod for governor, with opposing views different to hers? If "she is not crazy" and "she is right on target" " why the lack of courage? Victor Marx decimated her, as will Andrew Wilson, REASON she refuses. Since, between her and her husband, they have massive wealth, she can donate the $60,000 to the Palestinian people.
You tend to undercut your own credibility, here.
Candace Owens is a person who maintains that U.S. astronauts never landed on the Moon...which is an utter denial of provable reality. The radical denial of reality is typically called a "psychosis." Which would necessarily cast an impeachment on everything else she maintains to be reality. (She also maintains that "space is not real.") I don't understand how you can fail to see this, with your background.
I will be happy to mention I have three degrees in aeronautics and astronautics, specializing in applied physics (i.e., reality) and space transportation.
I'm not a Candace fan, matter of fact I don't listen to, read or watch any of the so-called influencers or politic pundits from either side of the spectrum. Too many are full of shit or have a hidden agenda and my time is too valuable to waste on bullshitters. The same goes for all of the leftist liberal media like CNN, Politico, The Hill, WaPo, etc. So this article, just like all the rest, is pure trash as far as I'm concerned.
Psychological disorders are all spiritual issues. Sense knowledge men cant discern the spiritual influences so science renames them to spell bind people and then promises cures, help which they almost never really provide. Big pharma loves the field so much they invented the psychologist amd psychiatrist to peddle their meds. What did we get, transexuals amd every devient that follows. We got libtards.
…and to think that she almost got into Congress.
EXACTLY.
Dinesh D'Souza describes her as a "malignant narcissist", a person who appears charming but reveal vengeful, abusive and ruthless behaviors when challenged. Hearing the Word of God, like the devil, enrages her. Example, Dana Loesch quoting the Bible, when Dana challenged her.
Dinesh flipped from being a good intel warrior to being a shill for Israel. Hard to tell if it was some influence his wife had on him or if he just liked the money. Maybe both.
I used to financially support him but cancelled. We don't need another Israel sycophant.
Candace is a Catholic.
So was my grandmother, who was the first person in my life who loved me as Jesus loved others: unconditionally.
she is very famous, and gets a lot of time in the media. How??
she has to be part of the 'plan' at some level...
I call them 'good guys playing bad guys', their purpose is to 'confuse the enemy'
AND our 'enemy' is INVISIBLE 👻
we're 'reversing' the 'spell'...
#4545
We are living in Biblical times.
Children of light vs children of darkness.
United against the Invisible Enemy of all humanity.
Q
...
#128
What is a spell?
Who is asleep?
Dissemination.
Attention on deck.
There is an active war on your mind