|
Bill's
Brain |
|
|
Bill's
Brain |
|
| Analysis | Generalized Organizational Psychosis |
This psychosis was clearly on display when president Bush spoke in Latvia recently and commented on the state of democracy in Russia and Russia’s relationship with surrounding countries. In one of the more blatant examples, Bush warned Russian president Putin that "no good purpose is served by stirring up fears and exploiting old rivalries." Compare this statement to the actions of Bush and his administration in their push to attack Iraq and you’ll see how Bush is projecting his own actions onto others, in this case the Russian government, and accusing them of doing what he himself has done. In the months before the Iraq war Bush and his neocon co-conspirators repeatedly “stirred up fears” in the American people with their false tales of Iraqi WMDs and fabricated threats to America’s security. This manipulation of the public’s emotions was done in an effort to use fear to build support for their invasion plan. The Bush administration used this same technique again during the 2004 election campaign, repeatedly issuing frightening warnings and elevating the terror alert level whenever Bush’s standing in the polls began to slip. Bush’s comment about Russia “exploiting old rivalries” is a particularly revealing example of the GOP projection phenomenon, as this is exactly what Bush and the neocons did as part of their push for the invasion of Iraq. In fact, they even put it in writing in 2000 in a paper for the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses - Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century” in which they advocated the attack of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. In the paper they discuss their objectives, including the establishment of a permanent US military presence in the Gulf region, and ways that they might be able to justify an attack on Iraq as a first step toward achieving their goal. The paper states that “the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf region security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.” What is most notable in this context is the statement that the “the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification” for US military action in the Middle East. The “unresolved conflict” (or in other words, “old rivalry”) that the Bush administration neocons are referring to is the first Gulf war, in which the US drove Iraq out of Kuwait. In the PNAC paper they point out that they can “exploit that old rivalry” by using it as an excuse (“immediate justification” in their words) to invade Iraq and establish a military presence there. Once again we have a textbook example of Generalized Organizational Psychosis in the GOP, denying their behavior, projecting it onto others, and accusing others of doing what they have done. First they stirred up fears and exploited old rivalries to push forward the biggest and most costly debacle in American history (the Iraq war), and then they criticized Russia’s actions saying "no good purpose is served by stirring up fears and exploiting old rivalries." How unfortunate it is for the American people that Bush didn’t take his own advice before dragging the country into the cesspool of the Iraq conflict. This is not the first time that president Bush has exhibited the GOP neurosis when discussing Russia, it was also apparent when he accused Russian president Putin of consolidating power in response to threats of terrorism. Since the 9/11 attacks the Bush administration has taken unprecedented (and often illegal and unconstitutional) steps to subvert the American system of checks and balances and consolidate more power than ever before in the executive branch and the office of the president. Some of Bush’s actions in this regard have been nothing short of stunning, the kind of tyrannical measures that one might expect from a repressive despot devoid of respect for human rights. For example, Bush has claimed that he has the right to take American citizens, strip them of all legal rights, ship them off to an island, torture them, and hold them indefinitely with no charges, no legal representation, and no due process, all during peacetime. In essence, Bush has asserted that he is above all law (and above the Constitution) and that he has the right to treat anyone that he chooses as a non-person, at his whim, without justification or recourse for the victim. This is the antithesis of the kind of behavior that is expected from the self-proclaimed “leader of the free world.” Some readers may say that such measures can be justified because the US is at war, fighting Bush’s so-called “war on terror,” but I will refer those readers to Article 1, Sec. 8(11) of the US Constitution, which clearly states that only Congress, not the president, has the power to declare war. Congress has not declared war since World War II, and therefore the United States is not “at war.” For president Bush to claim that “war powers” give him the right to do what he has done means that he is either ignorant of the Constitution or he is deliberately lying. Regardless of the reason, Bush’s actions clearly violate the very Constitution that he swore to uphold and defend. Thankfully, the US Supreme Court has defended the Constitution against Bush’s attack, again asserting the fundamental concept of “inalienable rights” that the founders of our country believed “all men” inherently have and which no government has the right to take away. However, with Bush’s ongoing efforts to fill the courts with ideologues who place their personal agenda before the good of the country and mankind, the victory may be short-lived. After this blatant attempt by president Bush to consolidate unprecedented “God-like” power in the White House he then demonstrated classic neurotic behavior, projected his actions onto others, and accused Russian president Putin of attempting to consolidate too much power in the Kremlin. If Bush did things of this sort only occasionally one might be able to attribute it to nothing more than a combination of astounding ignorance, denial, and hypocrisy, but the fact that he has consistently exhibited this behavior throughout his professional and political life indicates that a mental disorder is the likely cause. There are many more examples of how this Generalized Organizational Psychosis manifests itself within the Republican party, enough to be the topic of a full-length book, and who knows, there just might be a Bill’s Brain book on the subject one day. For now I’ll just note some of the more common symptoms of psychological disorders that can be frequently seen in the Bush administration. George Bush’s stubbornness and refusal to change course when things are not going well is a classic sign of a psychological disorder. “A personality disorder is generally defined as inflexible, maladaptive patterns of thoughts, emotions, behavior, and interpersonal functioning … A psychologically well-adjusted person can exhibit a fair degree of flexibility and adaptiveness. In contrast, a person with a personality disorder, despite the fact that his or her maladaptive personality traits consistently cause personal, and social turmoil, he or she refuses to see that his or her inflexible style of thinking or behaving is at the root of personal and social difficulties.” (1) A review of general
information about psychological disorders reveals many other behaviors which are
frequently seen in the current Republican organization. If you’ve been paying
attention to what Bush and his crew have been up to over the past several years
you’ll easily recognize the following behaviors:
President Bush and his administration have exhibited all of these traits in abundance. Indeed, while researching the characteristics of psychological disorders for this article I couldn’t help but feel like I was reading a “How-To” guide to the Bush/Rove/neocon way of governing. But what are we to do now that this delusional gang has taken over America? First and foremost we must do whatever we can to limit the amount of damage they do to the world, to America, and to the American people. We must also shine a spotlight on their actions, publicize them, and help all Americans to understand how the administration is hurting them and the country. We must also do everything we can to ensure that they are removed from power as soon as possible. Beyond that, as one source says, “If all else fails, particularly if the person is a risk to themselves or to other people, it may be necessary to seek admission to hospital.” (2) References: (1) Psychological
Disorders, Del Mar College, Corpus
Christi, TX (2) Mind (National
Association for Mental Health) |
