Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
ravi wrote: Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? self-importance? determinism? is that a neurosis? Leftists doesn't point to just one way of thinking, feeling and acting does it? I suspect it's possible to find varying degrees of psychopathology among those self-described as leftists. The combination of a feeling of grandiosity with perception of the self as fragmented and completely controlled by external forces, for instance, is explained in Kleinian psychoanalysis as the product of mechanisms of defence against psychotic anxiety. The combination characterized at least two of the founding minds of modernity - Newton and Hume - both of whom had psychotic breakdowns. The materialism associated with this is attributed (I think mistakenly) to Marx by some leftists. This determinist version of materialism is connected by Marx himself to vanguardism. The materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that the educator must himself be educated. This doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society. Klein, by the way, also provides an account of the strong integrated ego relatively free from psychopathology. She identifies it with an idea of wealth very like Marx's. If in our earliest development we have been able to transfer our interest and love from our mother to other people and other sources of gratification, then, and only then, are we able in later life to derive enjoyment from other sources. This enables us to compensate for a failure or a disappointment in connection with one person by establishing a friendly relationship to others, and to accept substitutes for things we have been unable to obtain or keep. If frustrated greed, resentment and hatred within us do not disturb the relation to the outer world, there are innumerable ways of taking in beauty, goodness and love from without. By doing this we continuously add to our happy memories and gradually build up a store of values by which we gain a security that cannot easily be shaken, and contentment which prevents bitterness of feeling. Moreover all these satisfactions have in addition to the pleasure they afford, the effect of diminishing frustrations (or rather the feeling of frustration) past and present, back to the earliest and fundamental ones. The more true satisfaction we experience, the less do we resent deprivations, and the less shall we be swayed by our greed and hatred. Then we are actually capable of accepting love and goodness from others and of giving love to others; and again receiving more in return. In other words, the essential capacity for 'give and take' has been developed in us in a way that ensures our own contentment, and contributes to the pleasure, comfort or happiness of other people. Ted
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Ted Winslow: Leftists doesn't point to just one way of thinking, feeling and acting does it? I suspect it's possible to find varying degrees of psychopathology among those self-described as leftists. The combination of a feeling of grandiosity with perception of the self as fragmented and completely controlled by external forces, for instance, is explained in Kleinian psychoanalysis as the product of mechanisms of defence against psychotic anxiety. Psychotic anxiety? That's a new one on me, and I've read my Deleuze-Guattari. The materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that the educator must himself be educated. This doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society. Is this Melanie Klein or Dr. Irwin Corey? Klein, by the way, also provides an account of the strong integrated ego relatively free from psychopathology. She identifies it with an idea of wealth very like Marx's. If in our earliest development we have been able to transfer our interest and love from our mother to other people and other sources of gratification, then, and only then, are we able in later life to derive enjoyment from other sources. Remind me to take this up when I deal with the Brenner thesis applied to American slavery. Louis Proyect, Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
hey, my question was a joke. i think that the idea that there's a psychology specific to conservatives (causing their conservatism) is silly. Jim -Original Message- From: Ted Winslow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sat 8/16/2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve ravi wrote: Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? self-importance? determinism? is that a neurosis? Leftists doesn't point to just one way of thinking, feeling and acting does it? I suspect it's possible to find varying degrees of psychopathology among those self-described as leftists. The combination of a feeling of grandiosity with perception of the self as fragmented and completely controlled by external forces, for instance, is explained in Kleinian psychoanalysis as the product of mechanisms of defence against psychotic anxiety. The combination characterized at least two of the founding minds of modernity - Newton and Hume - both of whom had psychotic breakdowns. The materialism associated with this is attributed (I think mistakenly) to Marx by some leftists. This determinist version of materialism is connected by Marx himself to vanguardism. The materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that the educator must himself be educated. This doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society. Klein, by the way, also provides an account of the strong integrated ego relatively free from psychopathology. She identifies it with an idea of wealth very like Marx's. If in our earliest development we have been able to transfer our interest and love from our mother to other people and other sources of gratification, then, and only then, are we able in later life to derive enjoyment from other sources. This enables us to compensate for a failure or a disappointment in connection with one person by establishing a friendly relationship to others, and to accept substitutes for things we have been unable to obtain or keep. If frustrated greed, resentment and hatred within us do not disturb the relation to the outer world, there are innumerable ways of taking in beauty, goodness and love from without. By doing this we continuously add to our happy memories and gradually build up a store of values by which we gain a security that cannot easily be shaken, and contentment which prevents bitterness of feeling. Moreover all these satisfactions have in addition to the pleasure they afford, the effect of diminishing frustrations (or rather the feeling of frustration) past and present, back to the earliest and fundamental ones. The more true satisfaction we experience, the less do we resent deprivations, and the less shall we be swayed by our greed and hatred. Then we are actually capable of accepting love and goodness from others and of giving love to others; and again receiving more in return. In other words, the essential capacity for 'give and take' has been developed in us in a way that ensures our own contentment, and contributes to the pleasure, comfort or happiness of other people. Ted
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? Moral masochism? Self-denial, self-marginalization, and love of suffering?
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Devine, James wrote: I wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? Doug: Moral masochism? Self-denial, self-marginalization, and love of suffering? strength of character, an unwillingness to sacrifice principle to the demands of the moment? an ability to understand that even though the world as we know it is a bucket of sh*t, it could be better? commitment to working together with others rather than succumbing to narrow-minded greed or narcissistic depression? Probably both Doug I are right. We both are. I was just being gloomy.
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: ravi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 9:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L] Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1017505,00.html Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve Julian Borger in Washington Wednesday August 13, 2003 The Guardian A study funded by the US government has concluded that conservatism can be explained psychologically as a set of neuroses rooted in fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity. As if that was not enough to get Republican blood boiling, the report's four authors linked Hitler, Mussolini, Ronald Reagan and the rightwing talkshow host, Rush Limbaugh, arguing they all suffered from the same affliction. All of them preached a return to an idealised past and condoned inequality. Republicans are demanding to know why the psychologists behind the report, Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition, received $1.2m in public funds for their research from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. The authors also peer into the psyche of President George Bush, who turns out to be a textbook case. The telltale signs are his preference for moral certainty and frequently expressed dislike of nuance. This intolerance of ambiguity can lead people to cling to the familiar, to arrive at premature conclusions, and to impose simplistic cliches and stereotypes, the authors argue in the Psychological Bulletin. One of the psychologists behind the study, Jack Glaser, said the aversion to shades of grey and the need for closure could explain the fact that the Bush administration ignored intelligence that contradicted its beliefs about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. The authors, presumably aware of the outrage they were likely to trigger, added a disclaimer that their study does not mean that conservatism is pathological or that conservative beliefs are necessarily false. Another author, Arie Kruglanski, of the University of Maryland, said he had received hate mail since the article was published, but he insisted that the study is not critical of conservatives at all. The variables we talk about are general human dimensions, he said. These are the same dimensions that contribute to loyalty and commitment to the group. Liberals might be less intolerant of ambiguity, but they may be less decisive, less committed, less loyal. But what drives the psychologists? George Will, a Washington Post columnist who has long suffered from ingrained conservatism, noted, tartly: The professors have ideas; the rest of us have emanations of our psychological needs and neuroses.
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? self-importance? determinism? is that a neurosis? --ravi When I told my psychiatrist I was having an identity crisis, he said, Just who in the hell do you think you are? Dan Scanlan
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? - we are not worthy, we are not worthy J.
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Jim wrote: Hmm... how would Lenin score? Any guy allowing himself to be photographed scratching a cat, with his legs crossed, is flexible on your F-scale. Ken. -- The awareness of the ambiguity of one's highest achievements (as well as one's deepest failures) is a definite symptom of maturity. -- Paul Tillich
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Geez, Jim... This should be some kind of Lefty U. screening test. Ken. -- The advantage of a bad memory is that one enjoys several times the same good things for the first time. -- Friedrich Nietzsche Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? self-importance? determinism? is that a neurosis? --ravi
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Congratulations, Ravi, you passed. Gene ravi wrote: Kenneth Campbell wrote: Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? self-importance? determinism? is that a neurosis? --ravi Geez, Jim... This should be some kind of Lefty U. screening test. huh? --ravi
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Did you notice how, in the movie Forrest Gump, when Forrest flashes the Peace Sign to Jenny as she leaves on the bus - he also makes a Peace Sign with his lowered left hand as well ? ( http://members.cox.net/gumpisms/ - according to this site, 34% of the people who voted Republican in the last election believe that Forrest Gump was a documentary). J.
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Geez, Jim... This should be some kind of Lefty U. screening test. Ken. The Frankfurters produced the F-test (F for fascism) that tested for the presence of the authoritarian personality. (It seems to be an intellectual precursor of the study that the GUARDIAN reports on.) So only those people who scored _low_ on this test would be given the leftist membership card, secret handshake, decoder ring, etc. Hmm... how would Lenin score? Abbie Hoffman? (An ex-girlfriend of mine once did research giving the F-test to various cults. The Moonie leadership wouldn't participate, but the Hare Krishnas did, scoring very high. Maybe she dumped me because of _my_ score?) Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Kenneth Campbell wrote: Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? self-importance? determinism? is that a neurosis? --ravi Geez, Jim... This should be some kind of Lefty U. screening test. huh? --ravi
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Devine, James wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? self-importance? determinism? is that a neurosis? --ravi
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Jim writes: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? I thought Mr. Coyle had the funniest response to that... What Should We Do? Organize to free Mumia. (He caveated his comment, as do I.) If there is a leftie syndrome, it's the decentralization of the whole body. Over-focus on your own particular concern. The right is luckier in that they have a small group of people calling the shots. The executive board is a good business tool. I think that is why Lenin wanted to model something after it (in times of real revolution) -- one executive command against the other. Works in war. Ken.
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
Hmm... how would Lenin score? Abbie Hoffman? Lenin would say I'm not scoring, I'm having a glass of water. Abbie would say, steal this survey. Seriously though, a distinction ought to be drawn between authority and authoritarianism. For most of his life, Lenin did not have much authority other than moral, intellectual and personal authority, established through incessant political activity and publications. Even in negotiating the Brest-Litovsk Treaty with the German High Command, he failed repeatedly in his bid to assert his authority, his own position was dodgy, and he threatened to split from the party and set up a new one. The concept of the authoritarian personality is possibly a bit mythical or one-sided, because it abstracts from the social relations or social environment which allows an individual to become authoritarian. In other words, a psychological reductionism to personal authoritarian impulses is involved. Quite possibly there is a little Hitler in the heart of everyone, the question is under what social conditions that little Hitler might be able to assert itself, bring it out of the closet so to speak. In addition, the conceptualisation or theory of what personality is, assumed by personality tests, is not uncontroversial, and generally implies personality is a static, objective quality, measurable regardless of a person's self-concept, something which is often questioned in these postmodernist times full of identity politics. The Bush personality is largely a media image. Jurriaan
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
I'm no expert on the Frankfurt school, but I'd bet that they'd agree that The concept of the authoritarian personality is possibly a bit mythical or one-sided, because it abstracts from the social relations or social environment which allows an individual to become authoritarian. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Jurriaan Bendien [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 11:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve Hmm... how would Lenin score? Abbie Hoffman? Lenin would say I'm not scoring, I'm having a glass of water. Abbie would say, steal this survey. Seriously though, a distinction ought to be drawn between authority and authoritarianism. For most of his life, Lenin did not have much authority other than moral, intellectual and personal authority, established through incessant political activity and publications. Even in negotiating the Brest-Litovsk Treaty with the German High Command, he failed repeatedly in his bid to assert his authority, his own position was dodgy, and he threatened to split from the party and set up a new one. The concept of the authoritarian personality is possibly a bit mythical or one-sided, because it abstracts from the social relations or social environment which allows an individual to become authoritarian. In other words, a psychological reductionism to personal authoritarian impulses is involved. Quite possibly there is a little Hitler in the heart of everyone, the question is under what social conditions that little Hitler might be able to assert itself, bring it out of the closet so to speak. In addition, the conceptualisation or theory of what personality is, assumed by personality tests, is not uncontroversial, and generally implies personality is a static, objective quality, measurable regardless of a person's self-concept, something which is often questioned in these postmodernist times full of identity politics. The Bush personality is largely a media image. Jurriaan
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
according the singer-songwriter Todd Snider, 84 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine ( http://members.cox.net/gumpisms/ - according to this site, 34% of the people who voted Republican in the last election believe that Forrest Gump was a documentary). J.
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
I wrote: what kind of neurosis -- or psychosis -- do we leftists suffer from? Doug: Moral masochism? Self-denial, self-marginalization, and love of suffering? strength of character, an unwillingness to sacrifice principle to the demands of the moment? an ability to understand that even though the world as we know it is a bucket of sh*t, it could be better? commitment to working together with others rather than succumbing to narrow-minded greed or narcissistic depression? Probably both Doug I are right. Jim
Re: Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve
I'm not either, I largely stayed away from that. The most interesting figures from my point of view were Walter Benjamin and Erich Fromm (the French Marxisant Michael Lowy made a study of Benjamin). The problem or limitation here is that a lot of this type of research is theoreticist and speculative (Left-Hegelianism), rather that experientially-based, empirical and action-oriented. It often conveys a rather sombre picture of monumental domination and oppression, ignoring the attempts at revolt against that, attempts to overturn that, subvert that, change that. Hence, the Frankfurtian implications for politics are often conservative, rather than radicalising, feeding middleclass despair more than inciting workingclass revolt. In addition, in my opinion, it often confuses the continuities and discontinuities of Western culture, which is markedly different every new decade, i.e. the operation and use of the media is prone to change as well. The school claims to be critical and historical, but often isn't. Ernest Mandel maintained contact with Helmut Dahmer, but unfortunately Dahmer's very interesting books have not been translated into English as far as I know. My remark about the Bush image is based on skimming the biography of Bush, as compared to the media presentation of Bush, and the fact, that the image of political personalities these days is shaped and changed to fit with where the electorate and the elite is at. I consider - as I have mentioned before - that in reality, although the American Left heavily focuses on Bush (because of his limited public speaking ability), Bush is not even the politically most important figure in the Bush administration, more the figurehead. The American Left seems to make very little attempt to relate the rise of Bush to the social totality of American society, to political selection processes, and explain why the circumstances of the elite might push Bush forward and institutionalise him. Thus, in Marx's old language, the American Left often tends to operate with an idealist or mechanical materialist view of politics rather than a dialectical, materialist one, it often cannot find the mediating links between objective trends and political personalities. Be that as it may, the Frankfurt School often offers useful heuristics, and this is particularly evident in the writings of Jurgen Habermas (I have not seriously studied his entire oeuvre though). Regards Jurriaan
