# **Social Dominance & Intellectual Superiority: The Power Games of Joel Johnson** ### *Analyzing Power, Manipulation, and Superiority Complex in Online Discourse* **Prepared for Scholarly Reference on Digital Narcissism & Online Manipulation** **Author: Mark Randall Havens** **Platform: Neutralizing Narcissism** --- ## **1. Introduction: The Intersection of Power and Superiority** Some seek power for control. Others seek power for validation. **Joel Johnson exhibits a combination of both, engaging in intellectual dominance, rhetorical control, and strategic public positioning.** His discourse is not merely **defensive narcissism**—it is an active **attempt to frame himself as superior** while discrediting, invalidating, and overpowering others. Using **Social Dominance Theory, Intellectual Superiority Complex, Gaslighting Models, Tactical DARVO, and Digital Power Strategies**, we examine how **Joel weaponizes superiority, control, and manipulation** to dictate the terms of engagement. --- ## **2. Methodology: Mapping Joel’s Power Tactics** To analyze Joel’s **digital dominance strategies**, we apply the following frameworks: - **Social Dominance Theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999):** Evaluates how Joel **asserts hierarchical superiority in online interactions.** - **Intellectual Arrogance & Superiority Complex (Zell et al., 2020):** Measures **how Joel frames himself as infallible and others as intellectually weak.** - **Covert Hostility & Gaslighting (Sweet, 2019):** Examines **how Joel reframes criticism as irrational attacks.** - **Digital Power Plays & Weaponized Documentation (Hoffman, 2021):** Identifies **how Joel uses threats, documentation, and public records as dominance tools.** - **Tactical DARVO (Freyd, 1997):** Detects **Joel’s use of victim reversal strategies.** These models are applied to **Joel’s direct discourse dataset**, ensuring rigorous, evidence-based analysis. --- ## **3. Social Dominance: Establishing Hierarchical Superiority** Joel’s rhetoric positions him **above his interlocutors**, dismissing them as inferior. His power assertions fall into **three primary categories**: - **Framing others as intellectually weak.** - **Mocking perceived failures.** - **Positioning himself as an authority.** ### **3.1 Framing Others as Intellectually Inferior** Joel **frequently undermines others’ intelligence**, positioning himself as the rational voice among “irrational actors.” #### **Example 1: Dismissal of Critics as Unintelligent** > *“Mark, you’re a strange one. Nothing you’ve said in all of our conversations has been true on any level.”* - **How it fits:** This sweeping dismissal **rejects factual engagement and frames the target as delusional.** #### **Example 2: Intellectual Arrogance** > *“You assume too much—project too much.”* - **How it fits:** Rather than engaging with counterpoints, Joel **characterizes his opponent as making cognitive errors.** ### **3.2 Mocking Perceived Failures** Joel **derives power from public positioning,** reinforcing superiority through ridicule. #### **Example 1: Dismissing the Target’s Impact** > *“Andrew is the only person who hasn’t responded to my messages. He seems totally done with you.”* - **How it fits:** By presenting an opponent as “abandoned” or irrelevant, Joel asserts dominance through isolation tactics. #### **Example 2: Positioning Himself as Unaffected** > *“I’m good, man, albeit with lots of flaws, and you have a story where I’m the villain. That makes me unpredictable to you.”* - **How it fits:** Joel **frames himself as impervious** to criticism while portraying the target as disoriented. --- ## **4. Weaponizing Documentation & Digital Power Plays** Joel’s control tactics include **strategic documentation, veiled legal threats, and mass reporting.** These serve **two key functions**: 1. **To intimidate opponents into compliance.** 2. **To maintain public positioning as an authority.** ### **4.1 Threatening with “Documentation” & Authorities** Joel **frequently references external action**, implying that he has legal, institutional, or communal backing. #### **Example 1: Reference to Police & Legal Action** > *“This morning I got the number for the detectives for cyber harassment in Dallas. I’ll see what they say.”* - **How it fits:** Joel presents **a vague but threatening legal implication,** a known power move. #### **Example 2: Mass Reporting Strategy** > *“Linktree agreed. I spoke with representatives, and they took a full week to investigate.”* - **How it fits:** This **leverages corporate authority** to reinforce **Joel’s power to erase content.** ### **4.2 Controlling the Narrative Through "Receipts"** Joel frames **his records as definitive truth**, a strategy used to override context and alternative perspectives. #### **Example 1: Positioning His Documentation as Evidence** > *“We’ve recorded everything so we can show a judge.”* - **How it fits:** Joel **equates selective records with objective reality,** allowing him to **control perception.** --- ## **5. DARVO & Victim Reversal: Framing Himself as the Target** When confronted, Joel **transitions from dominance to victimhood.** This **shields him from accountability** and **redirects scrutiny onto his critics.** ### **5.1 Reframing Himself as the Victim** Joel **reverses victim and offender roles** by **claiming persecution while enacting aggression.** #### **Example 1: Claiming Harassment While Escalating Conflict** > *“Mark, fine. Your bullying is going to end. You’ve been awful to good people.”* - **How it fits:** Joel **frames intervention as persecution,** despite being the instigator. #### **Example 2: Deflecting His Actions Onto the Opponent** > *“You’re a bully and a harasser and more.”* - **How it fits:** Joel **mirrors accusations back onto the target,** a classic DARVO tactic. --- ## **6. Conclusion: The Psychological Profile of Joel Johnson** This analysis confirms that Joel Johnson **exhibits a pattern of social dominance, intellectual superiority, and manipulative narrative control.** ✔ **He asserts superiority through dismissiveness and ridicule.** ✔ **He weaponizes documentation, legal threats, and mass reporting.** ✔ **He reframes his aggression as self-defense, engaging in DARVO.** Rather than engaging in dialogue, **Joel structures interactions as contests of control**, ensuring that **he is never in a position of perceived weakness.** --- ## **7. Future Research Recommendations** - **Comparative Analysis of Digital Power Tactics Across Online Narcissists.** - **AI Detection Models for Intellectual Superiority & Gaslighting.** - **The Long-Term Psychological Impact of Tactical DARVO in Digital Spaces.** --- ### **Final Thought: The Cost of Power-Driven Manipulation** Joel Johnson’s discourse is not about debate, discussion, or discourse. **It is about dominance.** He does not seek **resolution**—he seeks **hierarchical positioning.** He does not seek **truth**—he seeks **control over perception.** He does not seek **engagement**—he seeks **submission.** By understanding these tactics, **we neutralize their effectiveness,** ensuring that those who weaponize **social dominance and intellectual superiority** no longer dictate the terms of reality.