Is Bush Unhinged?
Calling Hannah Arendt
Journalist Bill Gallagher of Detroit's Channel 2 News joins Andrew Sullivan in asking the increasingly unavoidable question: Is George W. Bush Criminally Insane? Gallagher writes:
' Bush's fantasies are even disturbing his fans. In a sit-down with wire-service reporters, Bush assured them that Rumsfeld, the most incompetent man on earth, would keep his job for two more years. Maybe in the last days of the Republican-dominated Congress, Bush can get him declared Defense Secretary for Life, sort of an American Raul Castro.
Gushing over Rummy and Dick Cheney, the two principal thugs who lied to get us into Iraq and designed the disaster, Bush claimed they "are doing a fantastic job and I strongly support them."
The remark prompted conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan to raise the question of Bush's mental fitness. Sullivan told CNN Bush is so delusional, "this is not an election anymore, it's an intervention."
Sullivan, long a cheerleader for the war in Iraq, said Bush is "so in denial" he simply can't come to grips with his failure: "It's unhinged. It suggests this man has lost his mind. No one objectively could look at the way this war has been conducted, whether you were for it, as I was, or against it, and say that is has been done well. It's a disaster."
Sullivan added, "For him to say it's a fantastic job suggests the president has lost it. I'm sorry, there is no other way to say it."
The president's nanny corps -- his mother, his wife, State Department hands Condoleezza Rice and Karen Hughes -- know he's unhinged, but are too loyal to share that disturbing truth with the world. Republican House Majority Leader John Boehner tried to shift responsibility for the Iraq disaster away from Rumsfeld. Boehner quickly filled the disgraced Tom DeLay's shoes as the most loathsome member of Congress.
Boehner told CNN, "Let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld. But the fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge, and he works closely with them and the president." '
My own answer: Bush is not insane, he is just not very good at putting policy into effect. That is, he is a mediocre leader who has to cover up his horrible mistakes with optimistic slogans because his lack of leadership skills leaves him with no practical alternative. Give me an example of any positive and successful accomplishment of his presidency, unmarred by substantial failures. Afghanistan? Israel-Palestine? Lebanon? Iraq? Al-Qaeda? Domestically, he has, by cutting taxes on billionaires, run up the national debt by trillions, and boasts in that insane yet just mediocre way of his that the deficit is "coming down." He put the expense of the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars off-budget, and somehow the business page journalists haven't managed to notice that the deficit is not actually less than $300 billion if you count the wars. Nor is adding even $290 billion a year to the national debt a positive accomplishment. We pay interest on that debt, folks.
posted by Juan Cole @ 11/07/2006 12:34:00 AM
|
Facebook
18 Comments:
When Bush first hit the world stage, the people of W Europe, America's most important allies, said the Americans have elected a chimp for president.
The ordinary Americans replied: you are only jealous because we are richer than you! I am sorry, but Bush is what America, voting him president twice, justly deserves.
Dear Professor Cole
It is with great trepidation that I venture into your professional area, the study and interpretation of History.
We decadent inhabitants of a peninsula of Asia are blessed with an educational system that exposes us to the three thousand or so years of recorded history.
I suspect that the US is cursed by having too little written history, as most of it seems to have happened in four hundred years.
During that time we have seen most of the manifestations of human folly which have resulted in great cost in treasure blood sweat and human misery.
Charlie Marx states in the 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon that "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce"
There is a need for a Herodotus or a Sun Zu to write a new manuscript on the latest manifestation of human nature.
There must be so many PhDs that can be justified based on comparisons between the influence of Marx writings and Professor Huntington's effort.
The obvious parallels between the sacking of Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade after the Venetian commercial interests hijacked the enterprise and the Oil Companies interest in the Tenth Crusade are striking.
We have watched with awe the parallels between the antics of Charles the XII of Sweden and young Mr Bush, and know only too well that poor Charles eventally had to escape to Turkey with a few aides after he lost his army in the Ukraine.
We have studied the Roman Emperors and noted their decline and fall as the Praetorians seized control and made the Emperors their prisoner.
We know only too well that coming unstuck at Stalingrad not only loses you an Army but that it gets you invaded by the other side.
I am saddened that some of our own leadership bought into the bill of goods offered by our ally despite the best advice of their more experienced colleagues.
The later chapters of Herodotus wonderful book describe the Persians crossing the Helespont. Perhaps there is a warning here.
The collapse of the Roman Empire is followed by the so called Volkerwanderung.
I really would love to see some speculation from the professionals on how the world will shape up now the American Era is over.
Dear Professor Cole:
Many thanks for your fine work on this blog as always; however this morning let me take some exception to your assertion that Bush is merely mediocre and not criminally insane.
Is the mocking of a death row inmate the action of a sane individual? Is the razing of Fallujah the action of anything but a sociopath? Does the reversion to interrogation techniques practiced in the Gulag constitute anything other than willful sadism?
And such acts have not been conducted by a "banal" and incurious clerk, but by a president who has willfully, actively, vigorously lobbied to obtain the position and power to rule based on the principle, oderint dum metuant - "let them hate provided that they fear".
Nor is it surprising that Bush has attracted similarly cold-blooded characters to his inner circle. These creatures somehow have a way of congregating one around the other.
So, mediocre? By all means. But he also harbors thoughts that he will act upon that no sane person would desire to see carried out. "Heads will roll" he said in the wake of the contractors killed in Fallujah. "Please don't kill me", he mocks at the death row inmate. But perhaps this is not all that surprising, given that he is, after all, the spawn of Barbara "so-this-is-all-working-out-very-well-for-them" Bush. Empathy seems to have long since been bred out of that family.
What is most disturbing is that it appears to have also been bred out of large segments of the American voter as well.
By tomorrow, Republicans are going to have need for a scapegoat. Rumsfeld would have fit the bill perfectly, but now Bush has taken him off the table.
What's "insane"? Bush certainly has an unusual relationship to "reality", but perhaps that is as simple as a unique form of narcissism. Dumb, smart, and insane, I think all these metaphors are inaccurate for describing Bush peculiar form of delusion. With all the evidence that has accumulated from insiders it is very clear that Bush does not accept facts that run counter to his interests so that suggests a major psychological problem. Personally, I think there are multiple causes. It is clear that he was spoiled as a child and always rewarded for failure. Second, he was a heavy drug and alcohol abuser that has made him into a bit of a pothead that cannot concentrate on anything and can no longer logically connect his thoughts. Third, there is something oedipal about righting his father's wrong. Fourth, there is the dry drunk syndrome which is related to his messianic feelings and the black and white distinction between good and evil that justifies any form of immorality. I am certain psychologists would have a field day, but right now it is our military experts, journalists, and policy experts that are dealing with it wondering if US foreign policy has some aim, rationale, or secret and hidden purpose. My guess is that no, Iraq is the most obvious manifestation of an unshaped personality and damaged mind and our whole nation is living out his damage.
re.Andrew Sullivan - its notable how intellectuals (in the loosest sense of the term) have such a keen nose for where power lies and how a sense of where the political wind is blowing helps them maintain their influence as individuals.
Just as the intellectual's journey from left to right - i.e. in the direction of power, is a familiar one (Hitchens), so the conversion of Sullivan, Perle etc should hardly come as a surprise (nor should Rice's evolution from neocon to realist - she obviously read the memo that bit earlier).
Given the current political mood over Iraq, new opinions are now required for the intellectual, commentator or policymaker interested in keeping their career on track.
What this demonstrates more than anything is irrelevance of moral or factual concerns for most of these people, whose opinions are dictated not by morality, rationality or the facts, but by how how tight an orbit they can hold to the centres of power.
Sullivan, frankly, will say whatever's necessary with as much hysterical passion as he employed saying something diametrically opposite two years ago. It gives you the measure of mainstream political debate and illustrates by contrast the importance of the work done here Juan Cole's site for example.
Regarding Bush, Juan asks "Give me an example of any positive and successful accomplishment of his presidency, unmarred by substantial failures." Of his presidency? Of his life! The Bush story is one failure after another. Given his resume, it's amazing that we hired him.
I am not a professional, but am a card carrying historian with one whole book to my credit. I suggest that the "American Century" ran from the death of Lincoln to the death of Kennedy. The current situation is a typical Parkinsonian case of a fish rotting from the head down.
It is typical of decedent cultures to become obsessed with ideological trivia, while allowing important problems to grow unmanagable due to ideological stasis. I cite "abortion" versus "Global Warming".
It's all so typical. The Bush Axis of incompetence is based on the children of middle level managment types with a massive case of entitlement.
You can easily see that the real American innovators of this generation, like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, have little interest in politics, while small brained hacks like Tom DeLay and George Bush revel in the fray. Most sad, and inevitable.
Dr C;
Blair has said he's against the death penalty for Saddam(although I wonder if he'll fold--and of course I imagine it won't move GWB.)
Keeping Rummy is expedient, not crazy. His job is to take the criticism for "implementation" of the policy. As long as it remains plausible that the problem is with the D.O.D., Bush's "moral vision" is properly rejected as incoherent and utterly misguided. No prospective replacement for Rummy could successfully run this war. Replacing him can only be done after deciding on a significantly new policy.
Great post by Frank, above.
To paraphrase Craig Crawford {National Journal, MSNBC]
"It is that time of year every two years when Bush wakes the bats in the GOP belfry like that Wicked Witch of the West sending out her flying monkeys. And there's no telling what he's going to say"
To the extent that I understand the president's history he seems to have been involved in a number of failed efforts despite the help of family friends.
This did not teach him humility, he rationalized and convinced himself he was briliant.
Finally family contacts got him a position were he was able to have a city condemn land at one third value and build him a baseball park.
Note his hold and that of his followers on reality is so scant that they dondemed recent court rulings allowing the use of eminent domain for private purposes.
There is a huge distortion factor here. Most of us have rationalized and shut out realities that don't fit our imagined self, Bush has a history of doing so with o consequences.
Now he is in a role of "great leader" with the reality distortion field that so often entails, especially with an imperial presidency that out does Nixon's dreams.
Throughout history we've seen many individuals and institutions directing great events from fantasy. WWII has many examples including the leaders of the many warring parties and especially the czar and then after the war the frequent German belief that they had won, but bbeen stabbed in the back by enemies within. Note how frequently this identical idea occurs among Bush and his followers.
Are they insane? I would say pragmatically yes, medically they don't cross the line in most cases, they have simply created a social environment which supports their delusions.
Bush is not insane he is just in over his head. It was obvious from day one of his presidency. Look at his intellectual rigor, life experiences, and the fact that he had only made one foreign trip before he became President (China with his father).
I think most people knew that, even Republicans, but the excusses that I heard from Republicans were that he has surrounded himself with experienced smart people. Unfortunately, the people he surrounded himself with, it turns out, value politics more than sound intelligent judgement. It is all about maintaining and protecting power.
Re: Frank's comment on Empires -
I don't think the end of the American era is upon us yet... If the Bushiites survive today's polls and then wage war on Iran or Syria or both THEN we'll be truly replicating disasters of the scale of Stalingrad...
Re: David Wearing's comment on Andrew Sullivan -
Spot on! I am still seething from Sullivan's energetic support of the neocons and their attempt to use war to extend US stability (read Hegemony). Sullivan went on pushing the Iraq War, most recently by touting the Iraqi elections and Maliki government as signs of Bushiite success...
I am not, however, convinced that Sullivan's change of heart is entirely based on sniffing the change of the winds of power... I think Sullivan was genuinely hurt and upset over the Bushiite support for the gay bashing that was center stage of Republican politics over the last three years...
Some gay activists are opposed to Arab and Muslim challenges to U.S. values (read power) precisely because gay-bashing and intolerance remains an unfortunate pillar of many foreign societies...
However, gay activists like Sullivan are now discovering that the Bushiites they have supported in order to beat down the Muslims and Arabs are equally bigoted. While at their political parties and extravagant bashes the republicans may well display homosexual love in all its closeted splendour, the truth is that the same righteous bigotry that drives their Xenophoebia is easily recast on the political stage as righteous gay bashing.
In the end, Sullivan and his ilk of liberal neocons are fools for believing that they can convince Right-wing Republicans to follow liberal domestic policies in exchange for support for their war policies.
Seems to me that bush's life has been about having big ideas about doing big things, failing to accomplish these big ideas and having someone else clean up the mess as he moves on without looking back at the damage or learning anything from his experiences. When he said it would be up to future presidents to determine the outcome in Iraq, that was proof that he has no intention of even thinking about this war for two more years. My fear is will he have another big idea during that time.
Prof. Cole:
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines Bush's condition thus:
"megalomania
One entry found for megalomania.
Main Entry: meg·a·lo·ma·nia
Pronunciation: "me-g&-lO-'mA-nE-&, -ny&
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin
1 : a mania for great or grandiose performance
2 : a delusional mental disorder that is marked by feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur."
I noticed the simptoms of this particular afflcition early in 2004. I caught one of Bush's many speeches in front of his prepackaged adoring crowds. At one moment in the speech, Bush stood silent, seem to step back for a second and watch the crowd applaud him. Many speakers portray a happy face or bow their heads or even show a bit of impatience. Mr. Bush's face looked bewildered, his eyes were wide, as if he was drinking in the adulation. I would dare say that he was feeding from it.
He came into office as the annointed puppet of the neocons and the conservative pseudo-Xtristians, but as Perle and others are now discovering, the puppet strings pull both ways. And cosidering his recent attacks on the Constitution, the right of Habeas Corpus and his infatuation with war and torture, he seems to be pulling world down by the same strings.
I'm not sure that thinking about Bush is useful. It's more important to think about the less visible stuff that's going on behind the curtain. Bush shows all the signs of being merely the front man. Cheney, Rummy, and Rove are the triumvirate actually running things, and none of them can get rid of any of the others because they all know too much. I don't see why people are surprised at Bush's feet-in-concrete support of Rummy. On some level, Bush knows that his con game could blow up if he annoys the man too much.
On most levels, though, I think Bush is too full of himself to realize he's being used. The bratwurst really does seem to think that he's The Great Decider. He, together with most of his family, really does seem to have the kind of brain damage that leads to complete amorality. Alcohol and drugs have nothing to do with that. He's been that kind of sociopath all his life. The alcohol and drugs have obviously destroyed other cognitive functions. Just look at that amazing clip comparing his performance in a debate during the race for Texas governor many years ago, and one of his recent displays of incoherence (during a debate in the 2004 run for president?). Definite degeneration.
In future years, I'm sure people will look back on all these very obvious points and wonder how so many people could continue talking as if the emperor was wearing clothes.
I don't think Bush is insane, certifiably that is. Borderline personality, sociopathic and psychopathic tendencies. Narcissistic. Stupid as a construction brick seems like a solid bet. At any rate the current global debate regarding his mental state doesn't make him look too great.
"Spin proof" I don't think America justly deserves Bush, let alone the rest of the world which also must live with him and the cabal backing him. It sounds anyway like the Americans never really elected him last time around... they just got stuck with him anyway...
Post a Comment
<< Home