Mark Elliot Zuckerberg’s Behaviour – A Brief Outline

This outline follows my process for understanding human behaviour (including my own) developed from the work of Arthur Janov PhD, Alice Miller PhD and Theresa Sheppard Alexander. Detailed information is completely absent in the public domain in respect of Mark Elliot’s family relationships and therefore I must determine what might have happened that made him a control compulsive.

If you consider controlling the speech of hundreds of millions of people by one who is convinced he knows better than they as evidence of pathology, read on.

If I said that Hitler had wise parents who loved and respected him, how could you explain why he became a mass murderer? He was trying to help and got a little confused? It was a mistake, he thought Jews were evil and that he was helping god put the world to rights? He was upset about Germany losing the first world war and found the Jews to be a suitable scapegoat? Actually, that is what most so called mental health professionals would have you believe, particularly those dissociatives who follow the behavioral model, for example Jordan Peterson and cuddly Dr Phil.

Wikipedia and many other sources inform us that in pleasing his parents and teachers, Mark Elliot was a very successful boy. His mother, Karen Kempner, was a psychiatrist, his father Edward Zuckerberg, was a dentist. Mark Elliot had one older sister and 2 younger sisters. He was extremely successful at school, a brilliant student in both classics and sciences. In high school he was Captain of the Fencing team. He was every headmaster’s ideal, he was “well rounded”. It appears he had lots of friends and was popular. Of course he was, his mom was a psychiatrist and knew better than anyone how to respond to a child’s needs. No?

I wonder though, how things were with 3 sisters and a psychiatrist mom for the only boy? Where did this compulsive silencing of others develop from? Was Edward, his dad (another minority male) supportive of him? Did psychiatrist mom Karen Kempner understand Difference sufficiently to allow boys to be boys or did she, perhaps quite subtly and unconsciously, attempt to control little Marks’ behaviour, to tone down his natural inclinations to be boisterous and untidy? The internet is Silent on this. Because I have to tell Ed and Karen that their beautiful, talented, brilliant little boy has become a monster, not (yet) a mass murderer, but an active and virulent destroyer of all speech he disagrees with. Sorry, guys, you blew it, you created a greedy, spiteful, angry, dishonest, anti social little boy in a man’s body.

The first available indicator that all is not well emotionally with Mark Elliot, are reports from the time he was a Harvard student, when he developed Facemash, a programme comparing pictures of females allowing users to vote on which was more attractive. Facemash became “wildly popular”, but was shut down after the school administration deemed it “inappropriate” – just like Mark Elliot shuts down thousands of people in the present. Reports indicate many complaints from students whose details/photos were used by Mark Elliot without permission. Mark’s more recent behaviour has made us very familiar with his earlier penchant for using other people’s personal details whilst overruling any complaints. We might see, as the truth gets out, what kind of a creature he has become, how he responds to more probing questions about his development as a person. I wonder how he would like his personal stuff all over the town square.

My guess, and its only a guess, in the complete absence of public information, is that Mark was subjected to deceits, pretences, verbal injunctions, cautions, implied restrictions, inexplicable, covert, parental disapproval by means of gesture, body posture, nods, winks, face pulling as well as coded verbalisations, similar to the nightmarish descriptions of family/group pathologies in Ronald Laing’s The Divided Self. Mark’s computer programming interests derived from his discovery that information was control and with control he could DEFEND himself against the quiet middle class brutality of his family. Once his father had taught him the language of Atari BASIC when aged 12, Mark developed a messenger, called “Zucknet” which was installed on all his family’s computersThey were thus interconnected and could transfer information between them. Zucknet was used by Edward Zuckerberg so his receptionist could inform him when new patients arrived We can suspect Mark was able to control this flow of information between family members since we are so familiar with his control of OUR information in the present. We can reasonably suspect his need to control information was a DEFENCE arising in the quality of relationships within his family. This need for defence is the underlying driver of Mark’s behaviour in seeking to control the speech of others. Such a Defence is an unimaginably powerful force in a person. Most of us are unfamiliar with this idea and cannot therefore imagine the breathtaking power of such a driver. The need for a Defence is the same psychological force which drove Hitler, Ed Gein, Dennis Raeder and every other mass murdering sociopath down through history. These people were completely UNCONSCIOUS of their early personal suffering and the defences they had made against it. They had no idea what was driving them. In terms of his destructive behaviour in the present, Mark Elliot Zuckerberg appears similarly unaware of his personal drivers.