Time to Face the Truth
This is what the Republican Party has become.
They offer discrete pieces of legislation on the basis of insane rumors. They propose fixes for complex problems that are completely unmoored from clearly inevitable consequences. They propose sweeping policy solutions based upon counter-factual revisionist history, imaginary narratives and works of fiction.
During the Bush years, the anti-intellectualism that used to just be a talking point for them became so deeply imbedded in the party's catechism that anything that smacks of empiricism is acknowledged by them only for the limited purpose of heaping vitriolic derision upon it. They live in a self-constructed alternative reality composed of dubious anecdote, hysterical and paranoid rumors, prejudice, outright fiction, and magical thinking.
The systemic GOP reality impairment is now so complete that, beyond not being able to distinguish fact from fantasy, they respond to people who talk about objective reality the way sane people respond to the ramblings of a schizophrenic in the subway. Any Republican who ever-so-gently suggests that they have to start dealing with objective reality if they are going to recover as a party is subjected to the kind of hysteria once associated with Cotton Mather and Joe McCarthy.
Even the ones who do have some inkling that a reconnection with reality is critical to the party's survival, people like David Frum, Gingrich and David Brooks, are capable of engaging reality only to the extent that it does not require them to reevaluate musty Reaganite "truths" dictated by their dogma. The result is a bizarre kaleidoscopic mishmash of sane statements about the causes of the sorry state of the GOP followed by more reality-impaired kooky-talk when they discuss prescriptions for the problem.
It is increasingly easy to envision future historians (with apologies for the self-indulgent link) drawing a straight line for the party from Reagan, to Bush-Rove-Cheney to the ash heap of history. It is exceedingly difficult to see a day when the mainstream of their party's thinking isn't grounded in abnormal psychology.
This is not necessarily about the rank and file of the party. This is about the elites, the officeholders, the activists and the people doing what passes for the big picture thinking in the party, and those in the base who are hoplessly in thrall to them. There are still many sane people in the general population who identify themselves as Republicans. There are many more who would likely recover their own sanity if they could break out of their co-dependant relationships with the crazy people. Nor is it about ideology. This is not about being of one ideology and arrogantly insisting that all who disagree with us are not sane. Mere social or economic conservatism does not make one insane.
However, the times are simply too dire for us to continue indulging ourselves in the luxury of avoiding the hard truth about what the GOP as an organization has become. We are so used to them always being there, often in power, always in opposition to us, that the degeneration has been easy to overlook. We have observed it and often commented on even as we overlooked--failed to face it and its consequences head on-- not least because what has happened to them is so disconcerting, so upsetting and with consequences and implications that are so terrible to contemplate that avoidance and denial is a natural response. It's like the denial that happens when a family member slowly slips into madness or senility.
We cannot put it off any longer. We as a society, have to come to grips with the fact that, as an organization, the Republican Party is simply insane. Not in the metaphorical sense. Not in the pejorative, "isn't it fun to call the other side names" sense. In the literal sense, definition number 1 of the adjective "insane" in the dictionary. They are insane and, yet, they are still treated by the MSM as if they were, and deserved to be, the dominant policy voice in nation and the world. They still get more face time on the Sunday shows than the Democrats. Their most fatuous vaporings are regularly treated as worthy of serious while almost banally conventional policy proposals, like increasing government spending in response to a catastrophic drop in aggregate demand, are treated with near incredulity.
To summarize, if I read you correctly:
You are correct that insanity is lack of reality-testing. However when a whole group does it, you call it a cult.
March 9, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quite correct. There's a thin line between personification and diagnosis when you're not really a clinical psychologist.
On the other hand, some would argue that the difference between a cult and a religion is a little longevity plus political power plus, maybe, a successful handoff of leadership to a new generation.
March 9, 2009 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Personally I think cult is even worse than insane. As a meme.
March 9, 2009 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
To TheraP: agreed that 'cult' is apt.
To NC: Dead on. The whole thing.
It's more than ironic that the ideas of Ayn Rand--everything entailed in objectivism and her characters--are just as pick and choose to these cult members as the bible.
Howard Roark, the hero of "The Fountainhead", constructs magnificent buildings as extensions of the natural environment--in harmony with natural law. A regular environmentalist.
John Galt, the hero of "Atlas Shrugged", fights--not against socialism--but against "The Aristocracy of Pull." He fights against the State which misrepresents objective reality--the non-contradictory world in which A = A. Galt's central battle is against the anti-science party.
Fascinating. The cornerstone of conservatism is these imaginary characters and their principles. Not only is this cult out of touch with reality, they cannot manage to consistently represent their fiction!
March 10, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
What ailes (oops, ails...either way, come to think of it) the Republican Party is a pathology for which there is no cure at this point.
Which wouldn't be so horrifying were it not for the fact that most news organizations (blogs excepted) appear to operate from the assumption that Republicans know what they're talking about, while Democrats, well, are perpetually worried or in disarray.
We also have news organizations just disappearing, on a daily basis, it seems.
What does this add up to? A diminishing press that is unaware or doesn't care that Republicans shouldn't be taken seriously at this point and fewer and fewer opportunities for the public to get a balanced version of what's happening in government.
It's a disturbing and dangerous recipe.
But maybe I'm just grumpy because rumors are floating around that there are going to be massive layoffs in my organization. Thanks to the fabulous wonderful miraculous years under Bush and the Republicans.
March 9, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, and I work in one of those "recession proof" industries: education. Higher education, to be specific.
March 9, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Higher education recession proof? Never heard that one. I work at a major university (as staff, not faculty) and we've already had 1 round of layoffs, and are expecting another within the year.
March 10, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I should have been more specific: higher education with a very strong group of unions, for faculty, and staff.
March 10, 2009 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Steve, they are sane. That is the problem. At least the ones in government that call themselves repubs.
They do not believe in anything. Rove never prayed to anyone,or anything. His emails, those from his office would make fun of the fundis. dicky c never believed in anything but halliburton, big contributors, MONEY.
What legislation is going to help the richest, the most powerful.
Then you hire your ad men, your spinners, your propagandists.
March 9, 2009 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem with people who are psychotic is that they really do not believe they have a problem. It's everybody else who is insane. That is why they have to be institutionalized and sometimes restrained.
C
March 9, 2009 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Uhhh . . .
Don't ovelook what Vonnegut said about the Bushies and the rest of these nuts back in 2003:
And Kurt went on to clarifiy exactly what he meant:
And I agreed fully with Kurt -- as I clearly stated in my intial blog post here in the Cafe back on Independence Day in 2005.
~OGD~
March 10, 2009 3:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
That is a beautiful excerpt.
March 10, 2009 5:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for posting the link to the Vonnegut interview. God bless you Mr. Decoy.
As to NCSteve's piece: I'm not sure if a group of people acting in a way that benefits themselves but with disasterous cosequenses for the rest of the world makes them insane. It does seem obvious that those actions will come back to bite these same people in the end but that is debatable and in any event may be just poor judgement. Is irrationality really a mental illness or just plain stupidity?
The GOP is certainly raving and running around like chikens with heads cut off right now. After thirty years of spouting such dimwitted drivle as supply side economics, racist/sexist/homophobic bluster, inane deregulation of everything potentally harmful, paranoid bomb the world to peace ravings and I could go on... while hearing nothing but what cleaver fellows they are from the press and their friends and families while being given vast wealth to boot suddenly (so it seems to them) just when they finally got the total control they craved it all is crashing around their ears. Of course it is that total control that allowed them to do anything they want that is causing it to crash but that is apt to make anyone act as if insane.
And of course they certainly can't admit that they were intentionally leading the country and world to this place. The only real problem as they see it is that having had so many people buying their BS all these years they really don't understand why nobody is buying anymore. Insanity or bad judgement? It all works out to much the same thing.
March 10, 2009 6:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
My only quibble with the quote is that psychopathic (or you can use sociopathic) is not "nuts." It's not insanity. These are people perfectly capable of deciding to do the wrong thing. They know right from wrong. And choose to do wrong.
It's important to see that distinction because if someone is "insane" they are in effect 'absolved' of intentional wrong-doing due to insanity.
The folks who perpetrated these things Steve is writing about knew what they were doing and are completely responsible for their behavior. They should be held accountable.
It's very important not to call things insane when they're not. Or you may imagine that mental illness is the cause of what happened.
Yes psychopaths, sociopaths have a diagnosis. But they have a character disorder.
March 10, 2009 7:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
.
Ah yes . . . Thera
Thank you for chiming in with your clinical perspective of insanity.
Using an overused cliche: Bush and his crew of cronies were as "crazy" as foxes. Appearing foolish yet actually very cunning.
~OGD~
March 11, 2009 2:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
So it goes.
March 10, 2009 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed, and this concerns me in that (as a "centrist"-ish guy, registered Democratic, which does not mean the same thing here in Utah) we, whoever "we", are, no longer have a functioning Loyal Opposition.
The country can afford to "veer leftward" for quite a long time, since we are so far right that center looks left. But it would be good to have some sort of balance, eventually.
March 10, 2009 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would love to have known Vonnegut's reaction to the line from Hannes Holmsteinn Gissurarson, author of "How Can Iceland Become The World's Richest Nation?", when he answered questions regarding his involvement in the mania and meltdown in Iceland---
"Indirectly, I take some of the blame for it, but, if you think about it, it's not my fault. It's the fault of the left-wing intellectuals, who should have been giving a counter-view!"
March 10, 2009 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Steve, one of your usual well written posts.
I've been repeating the following observation of the GOP, since last year. Which is that they are being consumed by zealotry. From supply-side trickle-down economic zealots, to neocon foreign policy zealots, to christian-right social zealots. Zealotry now defines who and what they are. That's why Limbaugh has been such a problem for them. He has become the face and the emotional leader of those zealots.
It seems to me that the GOP and it's media allies cultivated the zealotry which is now consuming them like some metastasized cancer. Frum, Ginrich, Brooks, I doubt any of them can remove it now. The GOP rode the proverbial tiger since 1980 and now, surprise(not), it's eating them alive.
I suppose such was always inevitable. When your true and natural constituency is the rich, how do you get elected to power? How do you get the masses to vote for your candidates, and against their own economic self-interest? The answer was the now (in)famous strategy to inflame and divide on us on cultural issues. The Republican promise of the intellectual/philosophical correctness of their policies, which further enrich the rich, has now proven not only wrong but disastrously so. As Obama says, the verdict is in on trickle-down economics.
What remains of the GOP is a party dominated by it's base of zealots who have been misled and emotionally inflamed. My main concern at this stage is that the Republicans don't drag the rest of the nation down with them as they are consumed. The country need for the GOP to gently implode rather than violently explode.
As we know only too well, zealots can be extremely dangerous. They want to believe what they want to believe, facts be damned. Closed minds such as that can't be reasoned with, as can be witnessed in our sparring with some of them here at TPM.
March 10, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I very much consider myself a conservative--I have been one ever since I saw how liberals ran my home city, New York City, in the 1960s and 1970s.
But before you throw me out of here, I have something to say: The conservative movement, of which I was a part, has now turned inward. It is less concerned with attracting new adherents, than it is in remaining within its echo chamber of blogs and talk radio, its current adherents concentrated in a little group of remaining Red States. In a troubled time, reassurance from the echo chamber counts more than anything else.
When I have asked these conservatives how THEY would attract voters in Purple and Blue States, I rarely got an answer. Finally, I did. They said they don't care if the GOP wins national elections anymore, as long as it continues to reflect their views. And on that note, I bid them goodbye. I'm now registered as an Independent.
Ok, I'm done. You can take my account and password away now, as all those right-wing blogs did. :-)
March 10, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking for myself, you are welcome here. Reason and rationality are always welcome. Open and honest consideration of alternate perspectives and differing analysis are critical components of the boiling down process which moves us closer to discovering "truth".
I don't believe that I'm always right. Far from it. Opinionated, yes, always right, no. I pray that I always remain open to the possibility that I may be wrong in my thinking, else I become a zealot. Just my two cents.
March 10, 2009 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Insanity? I don't think so. I think we have groups in humanity that have decided blind spots.
One group states that they are following God to live right and expect the rest of us to fall into line. The higher the expectation that we sinful folk have to "fall into line", it seems to me the higher the likelihood that these folks are Republican.
Another group believes in social Darwinism and that everyone should rely on themselves and on no one else. Again, the higher this believe in self-reliance to the exclusion of the larger society, the higher the likelihood that these folks are Republican.
From my reading of history, it seems to me we've had these religious and aristocratic forces in play for quite some time. America is where we said "no" to them....but that doesn't mean that they have gone away. They are still with us.
March 10, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink