‘If God should speak to me and ask me what I desire most at the moment, though it would be either a reconditioned or second hand car, I would put country before self and say, I want to see the removal of the entire PPP presence from my country.’ (F. Kissoon, 21.02.11). I can almost hear the voice of God replying, ‘If I grant you this wish, then what will I say to the 400000 of my people who wanted this party to manage their country?’ In response, Freddie Kissoon  said,’ just tell them that Guyana is MY country.’ (Freddie’s country). Is this rational thinking of a man who is leading study programmes at the University of Guyana, a man who will put country before himself? If the Almighty did grant this wish, then who will manage the country? According to this man, the main opposition parties are spineless! And if they are spineless as opposition in parliament, then what magical thinking will suddenly transform them into a competent Government? Perhaps Freddie is seeing a chance for opportunity in the making? If there is no one to lead the country, then he will! He knows what is best for the country and its people. As we know, this is not rational thinking; it is just plain and simple arrogance!
Most God-fearing people believe that death is the will of God and therefore show gratitude through prayers for being alive. Even the very poor, when seeking God’s help, will ask for strength, guidance, peace, happiness and safety. Some people may see it fit to ask forgiveness for their sins committed, such as stealing books from the Michael Forde bookshop. But not Freddie Kissoon! Freddie will ask for a reconditioned or second hand car! Our reality is that we do exist in a material world and therefore there is nothing wrong with asking for something of material value from God.
But why would anyone who already possesses a second hand car ask the Almighty for another? After all, another second hand car will be as vulnerable to breakdowns as the one he currently owns. So why not ask for a new car, or the lottery?  Are we to believe this? Does he really believe that the Guyanese people are so fickle? Certainly not! This is just a good example of Freddie’s manipulative behaviour. Here, he wants to court the sympathy of the nation. He is not a greedy person; just poor, humble and in need of a car! But, look further! The caption of this article reads, ‘Goodbye Maniram and sorry for what happened.’ The article then moves up two gears in tone, focusing specifically on what Freddie wants, what Freddie thinks, what Freddie is – ‘a freedom fighter’ and finally blaming the government for Mr. Maniram’s  predicament. Does this sound like a meaningful Apology?
Make no mistake; he owes this gentleman a huge apology! But he said Goodbye first because he has used Mr. Maniram and now he has no further use of him. I ask, as a leading educator, did Freddie at any point stop to consider the welfare of the children he was transporting to HIS demonstration? Clearly not, otherwise he would have ensured their safety by organising transport which was properly insured for that purpose and fitted with the necessary safety equipment; after all road accidents are far from being an uncommon occurrence in the country. The Police was right about charging Mr. Maniram, but it was Freddie who deserved the blame, he was the organiser. Is he likely to offer Mr. Maniram some compensation? No, he has already said his Goodbye – purpose served!
I first read an article by Freddie Kissoon some 3 years ago. Then I thought there was something strange about the style of writing but gave it no further thought. I also recalled thinking that the quality of written English in several reports in Kaieteur News was also of a poor standard. Having recently returned to reading Kaieteur News, I have observed, from his writing, the arrogance, self indulgence, obsessive rants, manipulative behaviour, paranoid sensitivity to criticisms and disagreements, magical thinking and self admiration – the hallmark of a Narcissist!
From Greek mythology, there was a young boy called Narcissus. He was the son of a God and very handsome. He was also very self-absorbed. Many girls fell in love with him but he turned them all away! One of them was called Echo and she felt so rejected by Narcissus that she went and hid herself away in a cave. One day, whilst walking in the woods, Narcissus came upon a pond and saw his reflection in the water. He started admiring himself and as his admiration grew stronger, he was heard repeating the words, ‘I Love You.’ As his love for himself grew stronger, he was unable to leave the pond and stayed there until he died. At the spot where he died, a flower grew which was called narcissus. Today, one can also purchase a female fragrance called narcissus.
At the turn of the 20th century, several clinicians of Psychiatry and Clinical psychology had reported on observations of Narcissus-like behaviour traits, but the first published study of such observations was made by the Psychoanalyst, Sigmund Freud in 1914, which focused on the term Narcissism. Narcissism was seen as a pattern of behaviour traits symptomatic of a more serious diagnosis such as depression, Bi-polar disorder and Personality disorder. However, more recently, The American Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM4) included the diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. It is worth noting that Narcissistic personality Disorder and narcissism in diagnostic terms are not one and the same thing. The latter is often used to describe someone who shows a consistent pattern of behavioural traits, but which impact their life minimally.
In the arena of clinical psychology practice, the narcissist is described as someone who perceives him/herself as a model of perfection and superior to others. Their self expression conveys a high degree of self admiration whilst being disdainful of others. He/she views other people as an extension of oneself and believes that people exist for their convenience or benefit, which results in their difficulties of sustaining satisfying social relationships. Such lack of social boundaries often results in manipulative behaviour and disregard for the thoughts and feelings of others, hence their difficulty in showing empathy with others. The narcissist is vulnerable to feelings of shame but rarely expresses feelings of guilt or showing remorse for wrong doing. So if the narcissist commits a crime, then he/she will experience shame as a reflection of poor self worth: At the same time, they will deny wrong-doing.
Remember that the narcissist believes that he is a model of perfection, therefore he cannot accept doing or being wrong. He then turns to creating an illusion around his wrongful behaviour, and this is achieved by lies, using language that people cannot understand, making unreasonable comparisons to distort the facts or confusing events. Creating this illusion is commonly known as magical thinking. Finally, the narcissist is very sensitive to criticism – if one is perfect then there is simply nothing to criticise! Even the slightest disagreement can trigger a state of anger or uncontrollable rage.
When one looks at the writings of Freddie Kissoon, the behaviour and thought patterns of a typical narcissist almost jumps out at you! We are talking about a feature columnist who is given the opportunity to influence the public through his writing at least seven times per week. What he actually does is insult the readership with dogmatic rants, shows little respect for fellow writers and members of the public who dare criticise him or disagree with any aspect of his work. Yet, he allows himself the freedom, through his daily column, to attack anyone – from the President to the Opposition parties, the police and other public servants and, most of all, the Guyanese people. Frequently used words to describe and denigrate others are stupid, asinine, moronic, ignorant, imbecile, little dictators, illiterate, little Hitlers, baby Mubaraks etc.
At other times, he brags to the nation about what he is: i.e. a high-flying academic, an investigative journalist, a columnist, a political analyst and a freedom fighter; a dutiful husband who is still ‘in love’ with his wife after 32 years of marriage.  He enjoys listening to Pavarotti and is rarely out later than 9pm. Quite a model, one would think, who has no vice, never smoked a cigarette or consumed alcohol, and no clubbing. Ah! But he did steal some books from Michael Forde bookshop.
Let us put aside the latter for a moment. Does anyone think that something is not quite real here? Instead, let us look at his feature entitled: ‘From Senza Fine to Pink Martini.’ Freddie started off by describing the two nights when he was incarcerated in Brickdam jail with Mark Benschop. During the second night, he invited Mark to join him in some political analyses. He asked Mark what were his plans after the election, should the PPP win. As the senior of the only 2 remaining freedom fighters in the land, Mark opened up to him. Mark told him that he was feeling the stress of these activities coming from his family and girlfriend, who lives in the US. Wait for it, this is beautiful! Freddie looked at Mark and said, “well if you think that your girlfriend of 3 years’ duration is frightened, then just think what my wife of 32 years must be going through!”
In other words Mark, your problem is nothing compared to Freddie’s. He was totally unable to empathise with his friend. The rest of the analysis was about him talking about his dutiful wife. Suddenly, for a brief moment he was aware that the consequences of his behaviour could be impacting his wife in a horrible manner. But she will survive and this is called being in love after 32 years of marriage! The readers are still waiting for the political analysis! Is this a contradiction of terms? Similar examples can be found in other features.
On 13th January,2009, Freddie commented  to Harry Hergash that had Harry stayed on in Guyana during the Burnham era, Harry would have found out how ineffective the PPP were as an opposition party. On 26th February, 2011, Freddie cited the PPP party as the most effective opposition ever. In his recent exchanges with his colleague, Stella Ramsaroop, he fired the first shot by accusing her of lacking courage in her style of writing. Stella replied with diplomacy and tact by inviting him to talk matters through over a cup of coffee. A very civilised response, which he avoided and concocted some excuses. Stella could be forgiven for thinking that Freddie merely wanted attention. What Freddie really wanted was for her to join him in aggressively attacking members of the PPP. The most interesting part was his response to her caption, ‘Freddie, your fly is down.’ Here Freddie rattled off a list of hardships suffered at the hands of the Government, almost in a childlike manner, pleading for acceptance from Stella.
He also admitted, like a naughty little boy, to stealing some books from a previous employer and promised to be a good boy – a teacher’s pet presumably, because he will buy her a skirt and attend the next invitation to coffee. Having rattled Stella’s cage, he then pleaded poverty and persecution as a means of distracting from the point at hand: A wonderful illusion. Now  about those stolen books?
The problem in creating an illusion of oneself is that one has to tell lies and often it involves telling lies on top of lies. Eventually, one loses sight of the truth. According to Freddie, sometime ago The president accused him of stealing Sartre’s book on existential philosophy from the public library. (Someone else accused him of stealing from the Public Library and libraries in Canada). Freddie admitted to stealing the book from Michael Forde’s bookshop whilst employed there as a 17 year old. But in his last exchange with Stella, he also admitted to stealing some books from his former employer. He also referred to Sartre’s book, ‘that beautiful book.’ Firstly, there is now a discrepancy as to numbers. But more importantly, I asked myself, ‘what could possibly possess a 17 year old to steal Sartre’s work?’ Existentialism does not make for easy reading and certainly not for the immature mind. Then the exclamation, “that beautiful book,” as if it gives some automatic entitlement which makes it okay to steal it? I’m sorry, Freddie but this is far from believable. I do not believe that you had stolen Sartre’s book at age 17 and there is nothing beautiful about it. It is an excellent work but hard reading. If it was beautiful for you then it could have been for others too. I am of the opinion, that if you did steal Sartre’s book, then it was done much later than at age 17. Perhaps, President Jagdeo knows the answer!
It is worth noting that I am not the only person to have observed these problems of Freddie Kissoon. Both Ravi Dev (22.03.2010) and D. Bhagwan (16.09.2010) made references to his obsessional rants. Errol Archer (27.09.08) asserted that he lacks the character to engage in meaningful civil discourse. Randy Persaud (17.03.2010) accused him of making excuses when he is proven wrong. Harry Hergash (15.02.2011) described him as arrogant, superior and haughty. In their description of Freddie, the words chosen by these writers are almost textbook fashion in the description of Narcissism. So, why does Freddie behave in this manner? The answer lies in the understanding of his emotional drive state.
The narcissistic patterns are driven by a deep sense of shame resulting in low self worth, the feeling of low self-worth then drives a set of compensating behaviour aimed at making him feel good about himself, the illusion. The cycle is often triggered mid-teens to early adulthood. In Freddie’s case, the shame is generated by his belief that he is a failure. Yes, a failure! Despite having achieved significantly more than the average person academically, his meaning of success is about being a leader. I would imagine that Freddie joined the PPP party quite early with the dream that one day he will be someone special to the people, but that never happened. He went on to study political Science after which he was still sidelined by both the PPP and PNC.
At the end of the Jagan dynasty, he had hoped that the new President will offer an opportunity, instead he was left as a lecturer at UG. Even at UG, he was not promoted to any leadership roles. This persistent rejection by the main ruling parties served to further reinforce his sense of failure and shame. He feels helpless and cannot understand this rejection, therefore giving rise to frustration and anger directed at the political parties. At other times the anger is directed at the public for supporting the people he has come to despise. He believed that he was entitled to a leadership role in Guyana. As a result, he experiences strong urges to act the leadership role and therefore maintain the illusion of a leader. Note in his columns how much he enjoys speaking with authority and telling everyone else what to do. Freddie, leadership is a special talent. Some are born and some are created, but only a latent dictator believes he is entitled to be a leader.
I do believe that Freddie has the ability and skill to show a better side of himself, but first he must get some professional help. Nevertheless, I beg the question, why is he allowed to get away with such unprofessional behaviour? This is an unhealthy emotional state and by reinforcing this type of behaviour, his employers are not helping him. Finally, what responsibility does Kaieteur News accept towards the paying public for allowing this to occur? The media has a responsibility to the public for ensuring that the quality of the paper represents value for money. When they fail to uphold such responsibilities, then it’s time for the Government to act in the interest of the public.