« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Fear and Loathing of Obama
As a clinical psychologist I have been watching John Mccain’s behavior toward Barrack Obama with increasing concern. There have now been several small incidents that indicate that McCain is actually having a very paranoid reaction toward Obama, and I fear that the recent descent of the McCain campaign into unacceptable levels of hatred may be a result. Here are the incidents that concern me:
McCain’s denunciation of Obama in letters exchanged in 2006 on ethics reform.
McCain’s being unable to look Obama in the eye during the first debate.
McCain’s obvious reluctance to shake hands with Obama on the Senate floor.
McCain’s claim that Obama is ‘touchy’ and ‘angry’.
McCain’s reference to Obama as ‘that one’ during the second debate.
McCain’s addressing a crowd at a rally as ‘my fellow prisoners’.
By themselves, none of these behaviors would amount to much, but taken together, they demonstrate the pattern of fear, animosity, and distorted perception that are characteristic of paranoia.
McCain’s extremely insulting written accusations of lying in 2006 because he and Obama disagreed on a minor procedural matter was very disproportionate, indicating strong animosity and possibly distorted perception. His being unable to make eye contact is (as was pointed out by an animal behaviorist) an indication of both submission and fear, as avoiding eye contact is a signal from subordinate animals to dominant ones that they wish to avoid conflict. This is also a signal of subordination is many human societies. McCain’s reluctance to shake hands shows animosity, as hand-shaking is a signal of mutual respect and cooperation.
McCain also claimed that Obama was ‘touchy’ and ‘angry’ when McCain himself was repeatedly showing these behaviors and being criticized for them. This is an example of projection, a primitive defense mechanism in which one’s own emotions are ‘projected’ onto someone else, usually the object of one’s own emotions. Since Obama is clearly the object of McCain’s hostility, he would become the one onto whom these feelings are projected, and this is exactly what happened. Projection is an example of distorted perception, and is also a characteristic feature of paranoia.
McCain referred to Obama as ‘that one’ during the second debate, an unusual reference to a person who is standing right next to you. This is referring to a someone as an object rather than as a person, and so is dehumanizing and therefore disrespectful, again showing animosity.
The oddest example of McCain’s recent behavior (and the one which motivated me to write this) is his addressing a crowd as ‘my fellow prisoners’. It is notable that he made this slip when he switched from talking about his policies to talking about his opponent. This is an intrusion into his thinking from more primitive emotions, and its paranoid tinge is unmistakable. What this certainly suggests is that thinking about Obama triggers and activates memories of his captivity, and this activation caused the intrusion into his speech.
The conclusion to be drawn from all of this is that McCain now experiences Obama as not simply out-competing him, but as actually dominating him. This activates emotions associated with traumatic memories, in which he was dominated by captors who were clearly evil. Because of this, McCain sees Obama as ‘other’, ‘not one of us’, ‘not what he appears to be’, and therefore as dishonest, hostile, and frightening.
Ordinarily, I would just regard this as the folly of a flawed candidate who is self-destructing, and would feel no need to write. What disturbs me, however, is that paranoia inevitably produces hatred. I believe, based on the above, that McCain harbors feelings of hatred toward Obama, and that consequently his campaign is now giving tacit permission to others to hate him as well. This is unbelievably dangerous. There is an extremely angry radical fringe on this country’s right wing that has been demoralized lately by lack of popular support, but it could be aroused and mobilized by any hint of sympathy from a major party candidate. There are signs that this is already happening, with McCain supporters shouting ‘terrorist’ and ‘kill him’ at campaign events without reprimand by either of the Republican candidates.
When I was young the country was rocked by a series of assassinations of Democratic leaders. Perhaps unfortunately, Obama combines the physical grace, intellect, and coolness under pressure of the Kennedys with the oratorical brilliance and African descent of Martin Luther King. In other words, he is all the things that frighten right-wing extremists and thereby incite them to hatred. The last thing we need is for a major-party candidate to give out a constant stream of hints that he feels the same way.









Comments (4)
That resentment will build in John McCain, Sarah Palin and their supporters after they lose.
I wouldn't be surprised if the next Tim McVeigh is a McCain/Palin fan, nursing a big grudge and willing to act out large.
October 8, 2008 9:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you! That put the finger on my uneasiness at how lightly all of the hate-filled talk and race-baiting were being treated.
I've been commenting up and down urging people to speak up against these kind of remarks and this irresponsible behaviour. It's like we're back in the fifties or the sixties.
Dangerous, dangerous, dangerous. Despicable.
October 8, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
". . . . captors who were clearly evil."
Excuse me!?
1. Those who allegedly tortured McCain were in their own country.
2. McCain was -- with the US -- illegally in their country, and bombing civilian infrastructure, which was a war crime.
3. When he was shot down he landed in a lake. In view of his injuries, he would have drowned had the "evil" "enemy" not rescued his ass.
4. They didn't summarily execute him, though even the US would justify doing so were the situation reversed.
Ain't it so easy to call others "evil," in keeping with right-wing supremacist foreign policy, so as to go-along-to-get-along and not be attacked for having a different point of view which renders one instead "evil".
"Religons" talk about "good" and "evil".
Science -- which psychology is claimed to be -- doesn't use those terms.
October 8, 2008 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
JNagarya, I should have been more clear. What I meant was that they were clearly evil to McCain because they were torturing him.
October 8, 2008 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment