|
| |
The Gadfly Bytes --
April 21, 2003
Can an Entire Country go Mad?
By Ernest Partridge
| |
"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes.. .. A wise
man fears, and departs from evil: but the fool rages and is
confident."
Proverbs
|
Can an entire country go mad?
Of course it can!
And history provides many examples: the Salem Colony during the witch trials
(and its 20th century counterpart, the McCarthy mania), Nazi Germany,
Cambodia under Pol Pot, and arguably the United States under George Bush.
Worse yet, most people living at a time of
national derangement, perceive that condition as perfectly
normal, and even “moral.” And pity the poor soul who sees things
differently: the “one-eyed person in the land of the blind.”
If we are even to suggest that the American public has, by and large, gone
bonkers, we should begin with a definition of “sanity” and, by implication,
of “insanity.”
Perhaps Sigmund Freud said it best: a sane person is someone with an
operating “reality principle” – someone who checks his beliefs against the
readily-available promptings of “the real world.”
Of course, each and every one of us falls short of complete congruence with
“reality” – it’s the price we pay for our finitude, our mortality.
“Sanity” does not mean perfection; it merely means sufficient commerce with
the real world to allow us to survive both day-by-day and in the long term –
thus “sane” individuals obey traffic laws, learn from their mistakes and
practical experience and, in the case of moral sanity, they recognize in
others their worth and their capacity for joy and suffering. Furthermore,
sanity implies a capacity to critically evaluate one’s experience, to
distinguish fact from fiction, and to further adapt to the real world
through that experience and knowledge.
Insanity, by implication, suggests a kind of “habitation” in an unreal,
made-up world. The megalomaniac who believes he is Napoleon, to put it
bluntly, is not Napoleon. The schizophrenic hears voices that nobody in fact
utters. The paranoid is in constant fear of non-existent threats. The
psychopath can not recognize the human worth and the capacity for pleasure
and pain in others, and so on.
A deranged society is often, but surely not always, made so by a deranged
leadership. This is especially likely when that leadership has effective
control of the media. Then the leaders possess the means to convey their
delusions to much of the public at large.
Now I don’t wish to claim that one George Bush has lost all his marbles,
though I suspect that he may be “a few bulbs short of a full marquee”
(Garrison Keilor). George Bush’s “world” may, to a disturbing degree, be out
of sync with the real world.
That’s a startling charge to level at “our leader” and, by extension, at our
compatriots. So let’s look at the evidence:
“National Solipsism.”
“Solipsism” is the philosopher’s term for the assertion that “all
that exists is my mind and its ideas.” It is epitomized by the opening
sentence in one of Arthur Schopenhauer’s books: “the world is my idea.” Of
course, no sane person believes this (including Schopenhauer).. However, the
challenge of “escaping solipsism” leads to the core issues of epistemology:
how do we demonstrate the existence of other minds and of an independent
“outside” physical world. (My late friend, the novelist Edward Abbey, had an
ingenious solution: “if someone tells you he is a solipsist, throw a rock at
his head. If he ducks, he is a liar.”)
Now, of course, Bush and his gang are not solipsists, and the term,
“national solipsism” is meant figuratively. (Literally, the term is
self-contradictory – “national” entails a plurality of minds).
In this figurative (and I suspect original) sense, “national solipsism” is a
belief, still better an “attitude,” that the world beyond our borders is
just what I want it to be and believe it to be, and nothing more. To Bush
and his neo-con “handlers,” ours is an uncomplicated world free of
unintended consequences. This world need not be studied in order to be
understood – the opinions of “experts” are of no interest. Rather, the state
of the world is best apprehended
by “gut feeling.”
So we are free to violate a batch of treaties, to defy the United Nations,
and to invade an unthreatening country. And what will the excluded
“community of nations” think of this behavior? How will the Arabic and
Islamic nations react? Can they retaliate in any troublesome way? We don’t
know and we don’t care.. Anyhow, we can always bribe or bully our way
through, as we did when we collected the “coalition of the willing.”. In
brief, in the world of the “national solipsists,” our nation is the sole
actor; all other nations are completely passive.
Case in point: Syria. When asked “what is the message of the Iraqi
attack” to other countries in the region,
Richard Perle casually said: “you’re next!” To Perle and
others of like mind, the governments of Syria, Iran, North Korea, or
wherever, upon hearing this and contemplating the fate of Iraq and its
leader Saddam, will simply passively await their fate in fear and dread,
making no alliances or other preparations that might surprise us. Instead,
they will wait helplessly, like condemned prisoners in their cells, awaiting
the sentence of the court.
And that kind of an assumption is just plain crazy.
In point of rational fact, the remark “You’re next!” must surely provoke
strategic planning in Syria, etc., and for that matter in numerous nations
throughout the world. Similarly, reactive strategic planning is the certain
response abroad to the Bush regime’s flagrant violation of treaties, and its
disregard of international law and institutions. We are not the only nation
on earth with “national interests” to attend to, although the neo-cons
behave as if this were so..
Suppose one were to directly confront Perle, or Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld with
the question, “Do you really believe that other countries will stand idly
and passively by as they contemplate the fate of Iraq, as they read the text
of ‘Project for a New American Century,’ and as they hear that taunting
remark, ‘you’re next’?” Surely they would reply, quite truthfully, that they
don’t really believe in the complete passivity of nations abroad. But the
essential point is that they act as if they believed this!
Provocative remarks (‘you’re next!”), violations of treaties, habitual
lying, unprovoked attacks upon harmless and disarmed countries – all this is
done by the Bush team as if they firmly believed that the U.S.
government and its military can do whatever it damned pleases, without fear
of “surprises” and retaliation from other regimes and non-governmental
organizations such as al Qaeda.
In short, their beliefs in rational reflective moments are fundamentally
disconnected from their actions and their policies. And that is
clinically insane behavior. Moreover, to the degree that this
disconnection between certifiable knowledge (“justified-true-belief”) and
operative foreign policy doctrine infects the general public, via the
“vector” of a compliant media, that public “catches” a bad case of the
crazies from its government.
Sooner or later, the Bushistas and the American public will find out, to
their astonishment and chagrin, that “the world” beyond will not tolerate
this behavior much longer, and moreover, that the community of nations,
comprising the “other” 95% of the world’s population, is quite capable of
devastating, albeit non-military, retaliation.
Science be damned -- “the world is my idea.”
Solipsism, or “subjectivism gone mad,” is reflected in
Bush’s
attitude toward science, and in the consequent policies of his
administration. According to the Bushevik subjective metaphysic, the
physical world is also just what we want it to be, scientific expertise and
proof be damned. And so, when the threat of global warming is affirmed by
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, consisting of 2000 of the
leading atmospheric scientists of the world, and when the IPCC findings are
confirmed by the National Academy of Sciences, the Bush regime responds by
“shooting the messenger” – by arranging the firing of the IPCC Chairman,
Thomas Watson. Furthermore, the Bush EPA then removes a section on climate
change from its annual report. Similarly, Bush energy policy is apparently
based on the
belief that petroleum reserves are infinite – contrary to
scientific information and economic statistics.. “We don’t want to believe
what the scientists tell us, so it ain’t so.”
Economics is not a “hard science” – to say the least of it.
Nonetheless, there are a few compelling economic principles that are ignored
at the peril of society. One is that huge deficits far into the future, with
no indication of reversal, leads inexorably to fiscal collapse. Another
principle is that the way to “stimulate” an economy is to direct funds to
those who will spend and/or invest in the near future (that’s most of us),
and not to those who will send these funds to offshore banks or to set up
low-wage industries abroad (i.e., to the fortunate top 2%). But never mind
all that. George Bush has “a promise to keep” – to his political
contributors. And, at least in this case, he keeps his promises.
Another bit of economic lunacy: “Compulsive behavior” – persisting in an
activity that has clearly been shown to be useless or even
counter-productive – is a compelling indicator of some loose screws in the
cognitive clockwork. In extreme cases, it calls for strait-jackets and
padded cells. Now consider “supply-side,” “trickle-down” economic policies
(i.e., “reverse Robin-Hoodism" – throwing money at the rich), which proved
to be a colossal failure during the Reagan and Bush-I administrations. When
Bill Clinton dumped “supply side,” two conservative Texas Professors of
Economics, (and Senator and Congressman respectively) Dr. Phil Gramm and Dr.
Richard Armey, predicted economic disaster. Instead, there followed eight
years of unprecedented growth and prosperity. But never mind that, with Bush
the Sequel we get supply side, the sequel. Experience refutes supply-side
economics, and eight Nobel Laureate economists have denounced it. But so
what?. George Bush’s “gut” says otherwise, therefore “supply side” theory is
true.
Psychopathology: “Who cares what you think?”
Psychopathy – the failure to recognize, much less to empathize with,
the personal human dignity, rights, and feelings of others, is displayed in
the Bush administration de-funding of Medicare, Social Security, veterans’
benefits, and furthermore, in the callous disregard of the lives and safety
of the unfortunate Iraqis beneath the U.S. military’s cruise-missiles,
shells, and bombs. Sure enough, the Bush word-smiths recognize compassion as
a politically potent concept – hence “Compassionate Conservatism.” But the
astute citizen will (untypically) follow Richard Nixon’s advice: “don’t pay
attention to what [they] say, pay attention to what [they] do.”
“The Truth is Out There.”
The Bush administration has an uncanny ability to concoct lies and, when
“found out,” to “move on” unscathed. This accomplishment stands as a tribute
to their mastery of the black arts of public relations and propaganda.
Consider the “justifications” for the attack on Iraq – in particular, those
presented by Colin Powell to the UN Security Council. (a) Saddam Hussein is
producing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), and (b) Saddam Hussein is in
close cahoots with al Qaeda terrorists. As it turns out, the case for WMDs
was based on
a collapsing structure of plagiarized term papers, forged
documents, rumors and false reports, even as the UN inspectors were failing
to find any independent evidence of WMDs. And even the CIA reported that
there was no evidence linking Saddam with al Qaeda. Furthermore, it was a
plain verifiable fact that none of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi. And yet,
so effective is the Bush propaganda machine, that a majority of the American
public now believes that Saddam had WMDs “at the ready,” and that Saddam was
involved in the 9/11 attacks. Significantly, the corporate media has taken
no great pains to disabuse the public of these flat-out misconceptions.
In other words, the American public’s “reality principle” was, in these
cases, deliberately and effectively sabotaged, resulting in a case of
mass-derangement.
And yet, “the truth is out there.” The facts about Saddam, WMDs, al Qaeda,
9/11 are not secret, nor are the opinions of atmospheric scientists,
petroleum geologists. The opinions of world-renowned economists are on the
record, and if that doesn’t suffice, the economic statistics – unemployment,
consumer confidence, inventories, stock prices, etc. – are published for all
to see.
Yet, to the neo-conservative and fundamentalist dogmatists in the Bush
administration, none of this matters. “Screw reality, we have our doctrine –
and we have the interests of our ‘sponsors’ to tend to.”
Likewise, although the facts are out there in front of the eyes of the
public, yet they refuse to see. Meanwhile, the subservient corporate media
have instituted a successful campaign of “mass distraction,” while the
Congress and the Courts are no help, since they no longer work for “We the
People.”
Corruption and despotism, like cockroaches, scurry for cover when the light
is cast upon them. Thus the most dependable route out of this pit that we
the people find ourselves in, is the route prescribed by Thomas Jefferson
and fellow founders of our republic: a free and diverse media, a vigorous
and well-funded system of education, and the resulting open discussion of
competing ideas. Unfortunately, now that the corporate media at home have
abandoned us, we must now look to the foreign press and the internet for our
news and information.
So wake up, America. Reality calls!
And reality won't budge an inch to accommodate our fantasies.
Copyright 2003, by Ernest Partridge
|
