Dealing with the Mentally Fixated Ideologue

Anyone who has been vicitmized by a Mentally Fixated Ideologue (MFI) can attest to the gamut of emotions that the experience evokes. It's sort of like encountering an IED with a graduate degree. Even if one does survive the outburst(s), there is usually collateral damage—like wives, friends, associates, careers and certainly reputations being assailed and one's quality of life in general being degraded. The MFI exhibits many of the recognizable traits of the traditional sociopath, a condition historically termed "moral insanity", "psychopathic personality", and more recently "antisocial personality disorder". Psychopaths are now segregated by definition from the less physically dangerous sociopath or mentally fixated ideologue and few MFIs are true psychopaths (though the convergence is not unknown). The MFI is typically glib and "catty", has a vastly inflated sense of self worth to the point of cerebral narcissism and is a pathological liar.

Like most sociopaths, the MFI feels no sense of guilt or shame for inflicting harm on others. It is, in fact, a form of self-gratification that appears to reach insatiable orgasmic levels. They invariably find blame in others for conditions that do not fit an often myopic worldview. Their own lives are often a textbook case of thwarted ambitions which are counterbalanced by a faux grandiosity. In general, they have no other life but the incessant battle that rages within them and could not envision a world without conflict—particularly without their role as a catalyst.

Dealing with the Mentally Fixated Ideologue is a challenge because the natural human reaction when under attack is to defend. The laws of physics teach us from an early age not to touch hot objects, not to pet a sleeping dog and not to throw rocks at a hornet's nest. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Responding rationally and logically to a MFI is no different. There will be an equal and opposite reaction—one that is irrational and illogical. In fact, the MFI often takes perverse delight in using sophistry to make the victim's words (and especially defense) seem suspect.

The most effective defense against a MFI is not to respond at all. The MFI appeals to an emotional reaction, not to a genuine threat. The old adage "sticks and stones...." is altogether true when dealing with the MFI. Any response at all merely fuels their aberrant libido. They have no authority base, no real power or influence and usually have disgusted even those of the same ideological persuasion who may have encouraged them at some level before becoming aware of a growing guilt by association. Most normal people do not want to be associated with a sociopath or MFI—not even when they advocate the same underlying principles. As painful as it may seem on any given day, in any given instance, the only effective way to deal with a MFI is to ignore them.

Guarding America?

"US Customs and Border Protection secures the homeland by preventing the illegal entry of people and goods while facilitating legitimate travel and trade." Or, so says the CBP web site. I guess the homeland security was in good shape then when UA flight 929 inbound from Heathrow landed at Chicago's O'Hare airport last Tuesday. As the passengers made their way through baggage claim to the first CBP checkpoint, Immigration, an agent politely asked where I had been and for what reason. The question and answer were innocuous enough, I had been to the UK for an academic conference at which I represented the ACCG as a speaker. When he placed my passport on the electronic scanner, I noted a slight hesitation. He looked at me, looked at the photo, made a penned annotation and then reached for an official looking stamp to apply to my entry card—passing me through without another word. About 50 feet farther down the corridor was another official, representing the Customs entry phase of my passage. He took one look at my entry permit and said, "please move over to aisle 2." Now, I had a pretty good idea that meant something because everybody else on the plane was zipping right on out the door without so much as a wink. Two customs agents met me at aisle 2 and had me remove my hat and jacket, empty all of my pockets and place my bags on a table. They then proceeded to remove all of the contents and disassemble every object in my luggage. They searched my wallet, unwrapped underwear, looked through books, etc. They made a point of asking me how much money I was carrying and reasking me. In short, they searched everything thoroughly.

I was a bit conspicuous standing there, since I was the only one being searched amongst this long line of passengers. So, I asked a simple question: "Am I on a watch list?" They looked at me with some surprise, like why would I know what a watch list is? They repeatedly asked me where I had been and what I was doing there. I wanted to say "Asked and answered", like they do on Law and Order, but thought it might not be good to taunt these fine gentlemen. And, in all fairness, they were indeed polite and professional. They found one of my business cards in my briefcase and made a big point out of the fact that I had put my home street address on my customs form and my business card had a P.O. box listed on it. They also made quite an issue out of my profession, which is listed on the card as "Numismatist, Author, Publisher." I had to explain in detail what a numismatist is because (they claimed) they had never heard the word. They seemed quite intent on getting me to say that I was in Britain on business - which of course I was not. Odd, if they had never heard of a numismatist, why were they so fixated on my business overseas? Well, the answer obviously was that they expected me to be doing business on this trip. SORRY to disappoint, but the only ancient coins I saw during my stay in Britain were during a quick visit to the coin study room of the British Museum on my final day (where, by the way, I was delighted to find Dr. Elizabeth Pendleton and Dr. Brent Upchurch, two staunch ACCG supporters).

Back to the watch list thing, I asked again. The agent pointed to a poster on the wall and advised me that the policies were posted there. OK. He didn't lie and he didn't deny it. So, I explained to him why I asked the question. That I'm the Executive Director of a non-profit organization that has filed a lawsuit against CPB and DOS. I explained about the Cyprus and China import restrictions and our importation of coins at Baltimore to challenge the restrictions. They were taking this all in with seemingly genuine interest. I explained about the problem with restricting coins by "type" and why we felt compelled to take the issue to court. By now, they were starting to pay more attention to me than to my bags, which they had pretty much annihilated anyway. I suggested to them that the only reason I was being searched was because I had been targeted by the "system" and of course that was not their fault. One of the two agents, apparently junior in grade, asked the other "if that were the case, how would he be singled out?" The more senior member pointed to my entry card—confirming my suspicion that the stamp applied back at Immigration was not the same stamp that everyone else on the plane received. By now, we were having quite a conversation and I thought, why not mention the bill before Congress to mandate Customs training? Yes, they knew about customs training on cultural property issues. I asked "Who does that training?" They both looked at me a little puzzled, so I helped them out, "Archaeologists". The senior fellow said "Of course, that makes sense." I abruptly interrupted him by saying NO, that does not make sense. Most of them know little or nothing about numismatics and they have an ideological agenda. Having them train customs agents is like having the fox guard the hen house. By now, the junior member was getting the drift pretty clearly and offered that archaeologists know about digging, not about coins. I don't know where he got that, but bless his soul. The senior agent wasn't far behind. He looked at me and said "You put US right in between you and the State Department." I immediately corrected him: "I" didn't put you there, DOS put you there. He nodded. I reached for the entry form, hopeful that I might get another look at it, but he was having no part of that. We shook hands and I went on my way to the gate for my final leg home.

In the final analysis, I was not harmed by the episode because our flight enjoyed one of those rare east to west jetstreams and we came in almost an hour early. But, I could have missed the connection if that had not been the case, and I would have ended up spending the night in Chicago. That would not have been on the top of my "things to do" list and my perception of the incident in retrospect might have been less tolerant. Still, the question remains as to why I was placed on a watch list. This was my first trip outside of the country since before the Trade Tower attacks, so it was not because I was profiled as a frequent traveler or an importer. Actually, the business that my partner John and I operate does very little importing. The vast majority of our stock and sales are of coins from collector or other U.S. dealer consignments. It is not possible that I was "selected" because of any business issue. Neither is it possible that I was randomly selected, as the agents themselves made clear enough. Therefore, one can only conclude that I was placed on a watch list by somebody in CBP officialdom — presumably because of the Cyprus/China test case. That is a rather disconcerting prospect. Would the U.S. government intentionally hassle me because I used the due process of our legal system to defend the rights of fellow Americans? As a staunch patriot, I wish I could believe that this was just a misunderstanding. But, that would probably be a form of denial. Is my experience part of a larger pattern? That is a question worth asking and worth investigating. I'd welcome comments or anecdotal information from any other coin collectors or coin dealers who feel they have been singled out because of a coin related issue. Contact me confidentially at wgs@wgs.cc

Civility

One of the most noted aspects of British culture is its tradition of civility. In the cultural property world, civility is a rare bird. But, every now and then even a blind squirrel finds an acorn and this past week I did indeed find a refreshing display of British cultural property civility. Not to say that everyone British is civil, I know a few who are not. In fact, they are undoubtedly more fixated already on me being a "blind squirrel" than on anything I might say hereafter. Last weekend I participated in "Portable Antiquities: Archaeology, Collecting, Metal Detecting", a conference hosted by the Council for British Archaeology and the International Centre for Cultural and Heritage Studies at Newcastle University.

The two-day conference included speakers from archaeology, collecting, metal detecting, museums and law enforcement presenting a diverse perspective and interacting as respectful equals. The CBA is a non-profit organization, called a "charity" in Britain that supports the goals and aims of archaeology, as their name implies. The countervailing view in Britain would, in a perfect world, have been the National Council for Metal Detecting (NCMD). For some reason vaguely and cryptically described, the NCMD chose to withdraw at the last minute from this conference. Not only was that in poor taste, it was terribly counterproductive. I contacted the leadership of NCMD as soon as I heard about their withdrawal and received back a canned response that essentially said "We'll tell you in our newsletter." Which they did not. Anyway, all was not lost because several NCMD members did show up as independent parties and shared their views with all. That was my first clue that civility is not dead. It was also my first clue that the problems in Britain are not exactly the same as they are in the United States.

The general mood of this conference was that everyone wanted to work together, within the law, to preserve cultural property. That's a pretty safe stance. The nuances of that position can sometimes create disagreements, but the overarching fact or "bottom line" is that most people do care about cultural property preservation. Over the course of two days, it became increasingly evident to me that the British are on the right path. Their main concern was not ownership, that was clearly defined by law as it is in the U.S., the issue was reporting. With an active and growing cadre of private citizens engaged in the hobby of metal detecting, a country rich in historical objects, like Britain, is constantly at risk of losing important information about the past. This has led to a situation where "responsible" detectorists report their finds and illegal "nighthawkers" don't. None of the latter bothered to defend their views at this conference, for obvious reasons. The parallels to collecting within the United States are not identical, but there are some similarities. Collectors who purchase coins without any concern whatever for their source may unwittingly become part of what a law enforcement officer at the conference referred to as the "disposal network." That is not to say that they themselves are breaking any laws, but they may be helping to enable a law breaker elsewhere.

This is not a new notion, the topic has been raised often in the past. The real question is one of controls. How does one insure that coins, for example, are properly recorded when found? If they were, the world would be a far more civil place. The answer, in my view, is for source countries to impose fair and incentive based laws that do not criminalize normal activities like trying to profit from finding something valuable on your own property. Once a coin has been removed from its find spot without recording, it is an orphan. It joins millions of other orphans that have been circulating around the world for centuries. Trying to prevent that by draconian restrictions is a pointless exercise. It is far better to engage the finder, at the time of the find, and extract the information. The British figured that out long ago and they have the most advanced system of cultural property management in the world. Yes, they still have squabbles over details but the basic premise works.

It was a refreshing change to see intelligent and reasonable people discussing common interests in a thoroughly civilized manner and I do have to thank British archaeologists for that.