Tuesday, July 10, 2007

NARCISSUS RUNNING WILD

This caught my attention today as I was browsing The Corner:


It's All About Me [Michael Ledeen]
Here's a primal scream that appeared in today's WaPo. It's from a woman in Arlington, Va., whose Marine son is headed for Iraq in a few weeks. She's upset, and who can blame her? She's doubly upset since she thinks the war is senseless, and I understand that. She's triply upset because she wrote a Master's thesis some years ago at Columbia about Iraqi Kurds, and there she begins to lose me. And then she tells us about the view from her old office (of Arlington Cemetery), and about her grim feelings when she hears flyovers for the funerals there. Indeed, the whole thing is not about him at all, but about her. Her feelings, her politics, her history. There's really nothing about him at all (nor about his father, for that matter), except for dark thoughts about what might become of him. He'll be changed (of course he will), maybe he'll be wounded (the odds are against it, but yes, he might. He might be killed, as he well knows). In short, both she and her Marine are victims.

Not. He chose freely, he was not compelled to join the Corps. Why did he make that choice? Surely not because his mom told him to. And surely not, as so many would have it, because he's from the underclass and has no other way to earn a living. But he, the Marine, doesn't get a word. We get her memories of his early childhood, but nothing about the current man.

Narcissus running wild as he so often does in our world.

I have written about this sort of malignant narcissism (masquerading as "selfless" concern) that motivates many members of the antiwar crowd. Particularly the "gimmicky" exhibitionists like Code Pink or those who prance around in the nude for "peace" and scream hysterially about impeaching Bush and Cheney.

As Ledeen notes, it is all about them; and it is the equivalent to shouting LOOK AT MEEEEE! at the top of their lungs because their thoughts, their feelings, their policies, their moral righteousness are the only things that are important.

If the peace movement really were a peace movement, its members would be denouncing the true threats to peace and trying their damndest to disarm and neutralize the likes of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah etc. etc. Instead, they champion these groups, demand cease-fires with them-- never acknowledging that there is no way to hold them to account when they break the ceasefire, as they inevitably do, and say little about their standard operational policies that deliberately target the innocent. But the brave peace activists march in solidarity with these foul groups; and proudly wear the latest "hate couture", thinking it shows how tolerant and compassionate and virtuous they are; unaware of the irony that it serves instead to demonstrate the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of their pacifist ideology.

If only the mother Ledeen comments on could actually see her son's choice to enter the military and go to Iraq as his choice; i.e., the choice of a grown individual who is separate from her, she might indeed be sad or even very upset at his choice but not suffer such a severe narcissistic blow to her sense of self.

If she could see her son as a man separate from her own self; with ideas and beliefs of his own; entitled to make his own decisions and live his own life, she might be able to cope better. But what individuals like herself and Cindy Sheehan share is not some "higher moral authority", but one of the most serious defects in narcissistic development.

They fail to see others as separate human beings and relate to them only as extensions of themselves.

Motherhood is a deeply joyous, but ultimately a strongly narcissistic endeavor; and it is never easy for any mother to appreciate that her son or daughter has grown up and is a separate human being. But doing so is a crucial psychological signposts of adult maturity--even mothers must accept this reality.

Those who do not get beyond this point in their development and expect others to have the same feelings, goals and priorities that they do are doomed to a life of constant frustration with outbursts of narcissistic rage and inappropriate behavior demanding that the universe conform to their wishes and desires--or else.

Becoming "antiwar protesters" or embracing one of many leftist-inspired maneuvers that help them to delusionally believe their narcissism makes them more "sensitive" and "caring" and, of course, obviously morally superior to the rest of us losers. Armed with such entitlement and basking in their own self-righteousness then feel justified in forcing their thoughts, feelings and wishes on you "for your own good". The self-deception of these do-gooders is breathtaking.

Antiwar protestors always make a point of asking rhetorically what war is good for? You have heard them chanting this query at almost every one of their peace marches. The truth is that no sane person wants war, but aggression may be the only possible response to evil.

The only response to mothers like the one above--0r all the Cindy Sheehan wannabees--is to suggest that they act like adults and not children. "Narcissisus running wild" may be cute in a toddler, but it is rather pathetic in a grown person.

Monday, July 09, 2007

SANITY SQUAD SUMMER VACATION



Because of various personal and professional responsibilities, The Sanity Squad will take a break from podcasting this summer. We hope to come back stronger and more controversial than ever in the fall--just in time for an analysis of the Presidential race, and all the other political insanity out there.


So, stay tuned! Feel free to make any suggestions for future topics and/or format; as well as possible guests come September.


You can also go and listen to previous podcasts of The Sanity Squad here; and you can download the podcasts (to listen to at the beach, for example!) them from iTunes. (search for Pajamas Media)



The Sanity Squad cartoon is drawn by Eric Allie, whose collection of political cartoons can be found here and here).

SPEAKING OF THE WONDERS OF SOCIALIZED MEDICINE...


AN ILLNESS OF THE SOUL



Sometime back, Val at Babalu Blog discussed "Cuban mythology", particularly the recurring theme about how wonderful Cuban health care is:
Every single time the island of Cuba and fidel castro's revolution are covered anywhere in the media one of the points always mentioned is Cuba's free healthcare. You can practically time it. If it's in print, you get the lead issue in the first and second paragraph, a mention of fidel castro or one of his cronies in the third paragraph and then the plug for the lauded free healthcare available to Cubans in the fourth. I dont think Ive ever read an article about castro or Cuba where the "healthcare" isnt mentioned.

Every single castro supporter clings to this healthcare thing like it is some kind of holy grail. In a debate, the fact that Cuba has the most political prisoners in the world is ignored. The fact that Cubans on the island lack even the most basic of necessities is ignored. Tourism apartheid is ignored. Everything is ignored save for the free healthcare and 100% literacy.

Of course, none of these Free healthcare! cheerleaders have ever been to a Cuban hospital. They've never been to a Cuban clinic. Hospitals and clinics serving the average Cuban, that is.

All the usual gushing praise for Castro's healthcare system has been resurrected more enthusiastically than ever since the glowing report from Michael "Sicko" Moore, who gleefully exposes the dirtly little secrets about American health care, giving example after example of how insurance companies and "the system" have screwed average American citizens (and interestingly, not the poor). John Podhoretz, who reviews the movie has this to say:
Sicko is pointedly aimed not at the almost 50 million Americans who don't have health insurance but, rather, at the 250 million Americans who do. Moore wants universal health care run by the government.

Usually, calls for this radical solution to America's health care ills are laden with appeals to the conscience of those who have coverage about the nightmarish lives of those who don't. Cleverly--and Moore is nothing if not clever--Moore is trying to convince people with health care coverage that they might even be worse off than people without. At least the uninsured don't believe they are covered, only to discover their insurance company won't pay for treatments it considers experimental. The sad tales on display here, and they are undeniably sad and infuriating, involve not only the failure of people to get proper treatment but also the profound disappointment they felt at being turned down by their insurer.

Fortunately, Moore proposes a cure for the disappointment with a sweet, uncomplicated message. We can have it all: great medical care with no bills, administered by loving institutions, and practiced by happy doctors. That's the way it is in Canada, Britain, France, and even Cuba, according to Moore. And we won't even have to pay for it, the way we do now.


I have worked in the American healthcare system most of my adult life. I have watched it become more and more "socialized" and less and less market driven (at least the part where the doctor and patient interact); and as it has gone in the socialized direction, it has slowly but surely gone down the toilet. With every new government-mandate (and they come out daily, believe me; emanating from the concerned state and federal level as fast as our beloved representatives can write them) ; every cost-saving restriction; every righteous criminalization of physicians; the quality of care has deteriorated proportionally and the quantity of paperwork escalated in equal measure. No longer are patients responsible for paying for their health care, some "third-party" is (usually the government). There is now a huge industry of middlemen and women who exist solely to stand between doctor and patient and shout, "NO!" to both of them.

In other words, the problem with American healthcare is that there is already too much government control, and too few payers (there should be millions of payers-- each and every person must take responsibility for their own precious health and that of their loved ones-- and not pass off the responsibility to the collective who basically doesn't care about them as individuals in the least. To the extent that our system today rigidly determines what kind of financial transactions and treatment options are permitted, you have a sicko system indeed.

But to suggest that MORE government and less individual responsibility is the solution to today's " health care crisis" is not only disingenuous, it is absolutely ludicrous.

As someone once famously said, if you think healthcare is expensive now, just wait till it's free.

For Michael Moore to pimp for Fidel Castro and it mythologically "wonderful" healthcare system is beyond despicable. It reveals either a profound ignorance about the real world manifestations of commmunism; or fanatic dedication to an abstract ideology and not to real people in the real world.

I grew up during the Cold War. I was assailed with stories about the Soviet Union and its "scientific and medical achievements"; as well as its "economic progressiveness". I had the impression that the USSR was a serious rival of the U.S. in all these areas. After all, didn't they launch the first man into space? A remarkable achievement, right?

Some years later, I was sent to the USSR on a NASA trip at the height of the Cold War to meet with some of the researchers at the Institute for Biomedical Problems (IBMP). From the moment I arrived in this people's republic, it was obvious that I was in a 3rd world country. Everything was grungy and dirty. And I mean everything. The sheets at the slummy hotel I was staying at were filthy. I shared a bathroom with two other rooms, both occupied by men. The bathroom was so disgusting that for two days I couldn't bring myself to take a shower (the tub was crusted in dirt and didn't look as if it had been cleaned in years). There were dead bugs on the floor of the room. The radio in the room did not work. The window in the room could not be completely closed (it was November and the outside temperature was about 18 degrees). Did I mention that this was an ELITE hotel for academics visiting the IBMP and other Soviet institutes?

As I wandered around Moscow, the only people I saw were standing in lines to get food. There was one line for bread. One for milk. One for meat. The faces of the people were dull and resigned. Faceless women wrapped in scarves for warmth sluggishly swept the dirt on the sidewalks from one side to the other (I could never figure out why). Above the streets, on the buildings were old banners that proclaimed in Russian "Glory to Soviet Science".

When I tried to buy something in a "tourist" store (under the supervision of several Soviets assigned to me) the clerks (there were four of them, although there were very few people in the store) completely ignored me for the longest time; then when I went to pay they never once spoke to me or looked at me. They kept up a conversation among themselves that seemed to have something to do (as far as I could tell from my limited Russian)with the last time they had bought meat it had been bad.

At the IBMP, scientists I was supposed to confer with on psychological issues in space, spent most of their lecture time talking about the "wonders" of Soviet science. Their papers were peppered with such phrases. In private, when they were sure none of their bosses were listening, they would plead with me to tell them what other researchers were doing in their field. Did I think that their research was interesting or useful? Most places I have travelled in the world to visit scientists, I would be queried at length about my work. But the Soviet scientists were desperate to know what was going on in their fields. They were not permitted to read "outside journals"; there was noone who could review and critique their work, except their immediate colleagues. All too often, the political considerations overrode scientific ones.

Every evening these scientists would quietly apologize to me and others in the group because they had to publicly denouce us as "capitalist liars". Over and over again we were told, "We have to say these things to get along here."

It was an eye-opening experience for me to see up-close how totalitarianism chips away at the human soul and at human dignity; destroying any talent; encouraging mediocrity; crushing independent thought; and eliminating initiative. The evidence of this simple truth was all around me.

Take a close look at the pictures over at Babalu Blog linked above. What you are seeing is the world of people who don't care anymore. I saw the same thing in the Soviet Union in the 80's. The stench of hopelessness and mediocrity is unmistakable. These are the symptoms of a slowly disintegrating human soul.

Which is why something like this is so incredibly appalling. That artists would defend Castro and his oppressive regime is the height of self-delusion and is a betrayal of the human spirit that art expresses.

That Michael Moore wouls say such things and prefer the Cuban system over the U.S. is not in the least shocking. The man is an idiot; specifically, the variety that loves to bash American and capitalism at every opportunity, even as he cashes in and personally benefits from his association with them.

For every instance that Moore presents, I can give you a dozen counter-examples of how the doctors and healthcare professionals I have worked with have done extraordinary things for patients.

And if you are, like Moore, inclined to think of Cuba as a "worker's paradise" you might just read this post by an EMT who was stationed at Guantanamo for a while and is now in medical school. Here is some of what he has to say:

We deployed in the vicinity of the fenceline. We met the refugees as they approached, and with weapns in hand, denied them entry to the base. They had managed to traverse a kilometer deep minefield covered by towers with machine guns to get to this point. They had left everything they had ever known in order to get out of there. And we stopped them. We had orders. We had our orders, so we followed them. After enough shouting and threatening, the refugees eventualy gave up and headed back. Back into Cuba. While I was sweating my balls off under the hot sun, these refugees made a mistake. They had gotten through the minefield the first time, but they had not followed in their own footsteps going back. While I was thinking to myself how I wish these people would hurry up and go back so that I could head back to someplace with air-conditioning, one of them stepped on a landmine.

That explosion touched my world.

Then, I witnessed the worst thing I ever saw in my life.

As the dust cloud wafted away from those refugees, nobody ran. Nobody screamed. Nobody said anything.

They just laid down to die in the middle of a minefield that was the sun's anvil.

Think of how badly you would not want to die like that. Think about that real hard. Think about slowly dying of exposure in a minefield. Think about what would make you risk such an outcome. Think about it real hard, and then remember that as bad as that was, it was better than going back.


The apologists of tyranny are again hard at work trying to redeem the one of the last outposts of communist enslavement. They see a "worker's paradise"; a "healthcare utopia", but underneath the civilized veneer of Castro's Cuba is the same deadening illness of the soul that infected all the other failed communist and socialist "paradises".

And for that illness, the only cure is Freedom.

Sunday, July 08, 2007

GROUP THERAPY IN THE SAND DUNES

The Mental Health News Network presents Dr. Sanity's first group therapy session with dysfunctional Arab leaders.

Every effort was made to protect the confidentiality of the sorry, pathetic Arab leaders participating.

Dr. Sanity is not amused at their lack of insight. She will redouble her efforts to make reality a part of the Middle Eastern mental health landscape.

UPDATE: GM Roper has been doing some research and thinks he's come up with a new diagnostic category for the next edition of the DSM:
Following DSM IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (of Mental Disorders) Forth Edition - Text Revision) one has a diagnosis and then criteria that meet that diagnosis. There are of course other factors that affect the making of the diagnosis, so I'll post those as well albeit briefly. So, for your reading pleasure I present:

300.9 Acquired Green Delusional Syndrome (AGDS)**.

Diagnostic Features: The essential feature of Acquired Green Delusional Syndrome is a belief, learned from others and not based on one's own research or knowledge that global warming is a fact, that rock concerts burning huge amounts of fuel, using massive kilowatts of electrical power and attended by a few but supported by many, that using ethanol is a energy saving device and that replacing all electrical bulbs with CFLs will make a significant difference in the global climate.


Read it all!

While this does not relate directly to group therapy of the dysfunctional Arab leaders, it is worth mentioning because Mark Steyn recently discovered that Jihadis are now using climate change as a rather clever rationale for their behavior. But clearly, it will take more than that little ploy for us to consider them either sane or rational.

CARNIVAL OF THE INSANITIES

Image hosted by Photobucket.com Time for the weekly insanity update, where the insane, the bizarre, the ridiculous, and the completely absurd are highlighted for all to see! This has been a week of rare idiocy (as always!). So, if you want to remain sane, the best thing is to poke some fun at the more egregious absurdities.

Send all entries for next week's carnival to Dr. Sanity by 8 pm ET on Saturday for Sunday's Carnival. Only one post entry weekly per blogger, please. And you might read this before submitting an entry.

**NOTE: I am now getting many more submissions than I can possibly include in the weekly Carnival. Please don't be offended if your submission is not used (oh, okay, be as offended as you like) as it only means that for a variety of reasons I wasn't able to fit it into the "flow" as I put together each Carnival.

REMEMBER, THERE ARE SO MANY INSANITIES AND SO LITTLE TIME!!!

1. Politically incorrect truths about human nature !

2. Approved semantic substitutions. for the war on terror. Thank goodness it was a "diverse" group..thus keeping them on the proper side of political correctness. Deep down, even Abu Mazan knows the truth. But truth is not PC these days either.

3. Arab Chutzpah. Unbelievable. these people are sicko. (Clearly they need Michael Moore to show the way).

4. Ride on the peace train. Jihadists against climate change....hey! It could catch on!

5. I believe I mentioned the hazards of building sandcastles in the last carnival. Too bad these guys and gals weren't the helpless victims of a tragic sand collapse.

6. "Good" censorship and then there's bad censorship: "I am not a socialist; I just play one on State TV. "

7. Bullies united: "Go die of your anger and sadness" Nope. No violence here. Move along.

8. First it was "quite elevated, indeed", but then the stalwart Brits lowered the terror threat to "amusing".....

9. It's good to know that the Quran approves of transvestism. It's hard out there for a martyrdom pimp.

10. Is this a trick question? And, this is a googled question that key Dems are desperately searching for an answer to. They went to the wrong place. Big deal. Most people are in contempt of congress.

11. And speaking of chutzpah (see #3 ), Chutzpuh's just another word for Hillary and Bill . They're technically correct. He wasn't convicted of lying by a jury...he openly admitted he lied in a plea agreement. All this makes Reidie Rage Boy ...enraged.!

12. A good old-fashioned anti-American 4th of July! It's irrelevant anyway. He left his heart in San Francisco....Desperately Delusionally seeking a sense of courage and nobility

13. Some things the Founding Fathers never said....and wouldn't even be caught dead saying, I bet.

14. What would you do to get out of debt? Something principled, I would hope.

15. Jogging is right wing? Too refined a concept for the masses, I guess. Through a glass darkly ...and leftwise.

16. Presidential style and how to save $387 on a haircut.

17. How about a dead earth concert? Monkeys shiver. Damn those selfish vegans! An important UFO update!! Aliens will save the planet, never fear.

18. A mist opportunity...a job no male could pass up! Aren't there parallel opportunities for women? Or don't men sunbathe in the nude?

19. Lowering parental expectations always works!

20. Baby Jedi mind tricks?

21. The process of becoming a mummy is a difficult one for any sane person. Sounds like they would need some universal health coverage! Or maybe its a diet Michael Moore could appreciate.

22. Very compassionate. Of course, we used to call it enabling behavior, but who am I to quibble with such loving, caring people?

***************************************
Carnival of the Insanities can also be found at The Truth Laid Bear's ÜberCarnival and at the BlogCarnival.

If you would like to Join the insanity, and add the Carnival of the Insanities button to your sidebar (clicking on it will always take you to the latest update of the Carnival), click on "Word of Blog" below the button to obtain the html code:


Heard the Word of Blog?

Saturday, July 07, 2007

"DIZZY WITH DISINFORMATION" AND DROWNING IN DELUSION

Signs at the most recent anti-America rally in San Francisco, infiltrated by Zombie (you won't believe some of the posters and the incredible hatred directed at America and President Bush...oh wait, you probably will believe it):

[TO: The World
From: Capitalism

EAT $HIT ...We want you to be satisfied]



and, "Capitalism is suicide"




What do we want? WE WANT SOCIALISM! When do we want it? WE WANT IT NOW!



Presumably, in the minds of the so-called artists, socialism will (1) will satisfy you and not give you $hit and (2) is life-affirming. It is very interesting, don't you think, that in the real world exactly the opposite is true? How many people are desperately trying to enter Castro's Cuba or Hugo's Venezuela to escape from the poverty of capitalistic countries? And how many people risk their lives and sacred honor to escape from those regimes--and many others who live under the boot of communist and socialist thugs? How many of our privileged Hollywood elite seek their medical care in Iran or Cuba or North Korea (perhaps Michael Moore will be the exception) ?

These posters, the artists who created them, and the useful idiots who celebrate them are examples of a pervasive intellectual trend in the West that seems to mindlessly bash capitalism, private property, business, and free trade at every opportunity; while simultaneously enjoying the benefits of all of them.

Our academics--even the ones who teach children as young as 4 and 5 years of age-- rail against business and private property. Our government constantly seeks to control them. Our youth are propagandized to death about its evils from pre-school through college.

Students from kindergarden through college are indoctrinated by dedicated idealogues into the "perfection" of systems like communism and socialism and encouraged, not to think but to cultivate an unquestioning obedience to the collective.

While our popular culture sensitively refrains from prtraying Islamofascists as villians in movies out of political correctness (yet another aspect of socialism's quest for "social justice"); it does not hesitate to make businessmen the bad guys, always evil and malignant oppressors of the innocent. Individualism, the pursuit of profit, and private property is always portrayed as bad and everyone must bow to the will of the collective. Islam (the name even means "submit"), even in all its terrorist varieties, does very well by this perverted moral standard.

The truth about communism was exposed in the last century; and even with all the millions of lives it destroyed and the economic misery that it instituted wherever it had been forced on humans there are few movies that have come out of Hollywood that depict it as villainous or evil.

In the minds of all the neo-Marxists, dead-end communist stooges and anti-war idiots who participated in the anti-American 4th of July protest in San Francisco, cosmic megalomaniacs and dedicated communists like Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Hönecker, Ceaucescu, Kim, and Castro are simply misguided humanitarians whose atrocities are not worth mentioning--especially compared to the crimes against humanity perpetrated by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

There are few people--even among those who stalwartly defend the free market, who understand and appreciate the essential morality of capitalism.

In the free market of ideas, socialism and communism have had their chance and they immediately shut down any ideas that threatened them. In the real world they have been show repeatedly to bring human misery, slavery, death and oppression--notwithstanding all that glorious rhetoric and propaganda about their wonder achievenments and the ideological purity of their healthy youth as depicted in the third poster above, marching in lockstep to bring the wonders of communism to a skeptical world.

In every place that communism has had a foothold, the first step is to close the minds of the young and banish any critical thinking capability. The leaders know that their scam cannot work unless they "stack the deck" and take absolute control over the thinking of the utopia's future citizens.

On some level they even understand that the very foundation of capitalism is human freedom in its most classical, liberal tradition. And that frightens them to death. That is why both they and the Islamists hate it with a passion that is unsurpassed in its virulence.

Capitalism's incredible production of wealth is the economic side-effect that occurs when political freedom is present. Capitalism can certainly exist where there is no political freedom; and to the extent that it is allowed in places like China, for example, it benefits even systems that are dedicated to crushing the human spirit.

It has been argued, and I agree, however, that both economic and political freedom are absolute prerequisites for moral behavior. And, where one or the other is missing, moral behavior stagnates.

Communist and Socialist systems--all collectivist systems, in fact--are immoral because they have, by their very nature, eliminated individual moral choice and given that perogative to the state or collective.

The moral case for capitalism is not taught in our schools, nor is it argued much in our culture. In fact it has been more or less universally accepted by the intellectual elites that systems such as communism and socialism are "morally superior" to capitalism (hence more "socially just")--even though in practice such systems have never made good on their promises and only created universal social injustice and poverty.

The truth is that neither socialism nor communism nor any kind of religious fundamentalism is compatible with morality at all.

If one's actions are coerced by the state or religion, or both; if human activity is indoctrinated, legislated, regulated and ordained down to the last minute detail--particularly to the degree we see in other countries of the world (e.g., Cuba, China, most Middle Eastern countries, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran--then how can it possibly be argued that one's actions are moral?

Human behavior under such systems is not voluntarily chosen, but actively coerced.

Morality, though, must always be a matter of choice, and not a mandate.

One cannot hold a person responsible for actions that are coerced or forced from him. Morality can only exist when freedom of action exists; and thus moral actions in any field of human endeavor require freedom.

Conduct may only be thought of as moral or immoral when it is freely chosen by the individual. It is only then that the moral significance of the action can be assessed. It is only when we are free to act that we can exercise moral judgement.

Which brings us to a capitalist economic system. Only in a free economic system within a free political system is it even possible to be moral, since benevolence toward others; compassion, charity, and generosity cannot exist without freedom. Benevolence, generosity, charity, and compassion that are mandated by the state, or by a religion (on pain of death or other consequence) ; or by any regulations on behavior; or by force--are meaningless insofar as individual morality is concerned.

In a previous series of posts on Narcissism and Society I said,

We have seen that the development of a Cohesive Self is dependent on two separate, equal and parallel developmental lines that arise originally from the biological and psychological fusion of the Infant and Mother early in life. If each of these lines are not interrupted in their normal evolution the Infant will eventually become an Adult with both narcissistic poles adequately developed and be able to function in the world in a healthy way—both in his attitude toward his own physical and psychic self; and in his attitude toward other human beings.

In some ways, the rise of human civilization from the cave to the present day has resulted because of attempts through the Rule of Law and social controls to set limits on the unrestrained Grandiose Self. This is primarily due to the destructiveness of the Narcissistic Rage generally associated with that part of the Self.

Because of this, the Grandiose Self has received a bad reputation philosophically, morally, and politically. The natural development of Governments and Religions (which ultimately are an expression of the Idealized Parent Image/Omnipotent Other side of the Self) have all too often attempted to ruthlessly suppress the Grandiose Self--much to the detriment of the individual AND the success of the particular society or religion.

In fact, despite the obvious truth that governments, nations, and religions are in a much better position to wreak far more systemized misery and death on human populations, it is almost always the Grandiose Self that gets the blame. As Wretchard at The Belmont Club pointed out in a recent post, a review of the 20th century, for example, shows that all the "people's revolutions" supported by the Left and purportedly for the purpose of "freeing" large populations of people; resulted instead in enslaving them and increasing authoritarian rule.

Without a political or economic framework that is able to incorporate what we refer to as "human nature" into its calculations, all so-called "perfect" societies and ideologies will at best simply fail in the real world; and at worse cause untold human suffering. With the best of intentions (this is perhaps debatable), the social engineers of philosophy, political science, and economics have caused so much more slavery, misery and death on a grand scale--that the grandiose CEO's of the largest corporations can be considered mere pikers by comparison.

When we talk about the individual versus society; or the individual versus the state; or indeed any discussion of individual rights versus the rights of a group, we are also referring to the psychological tension between the two poles of the Self. Any political or economic system that expects to succeed in the real world will have to accommodate that tension, and find a way to optimally negotiate the needs of BOTH sides of the Self--that is, they will have to take into account human nature.

A perusal of any list of economic systems will demonstrate that ALMOST ALL OF THEM are relatively extreme expressions of the Idealized Parent Image/Omnipotent Object. Almost all emphasize the group, the community, the collective, the nation, the state, or god at the expense of the individual. Examples are numerous. Socialism and Communism; fascism and religious fundamentalism.

The major exception is Capitalism, where the individual and the individual's needs are emphasized over the the group.

In the warm and fuzzy sociopathic selflessness of today's socialist and communist remnants (otherwise know as the political left), the goal is a utopian "dictatorship of the do-gooders". These clowns march around agitating for abstract concepts like "social justice" and an "end poverty" and "peace" and "brotherhood"; yet in the real, i.e. concrete world, how is it that they never seem to notice that their ideology always brings about the exact opposite of those things?

Not only is there a strong link between economic freedom and prosperity (see here for example); there is the undisputed fact that countries which are free and prosperous preferentially engage in trade with their neighbors--not in war. They have no need to project their economic and social failures and disasters on others, demonizing them so as to distract their miserable and dying citizens. Such political tactics are the everyday bread and butter of the collectivist regimes in the Middle East, for example, who must blame the prosperous democracy of Israel for all their own inadequacies.

The reason that systems such as socialism and communism don't work in the real world and are ultimately destructive of the individual self; and of the human soul, is that they remove moral action and judgement from the individual and place it in the collective. The individual is not permitted to make his/her own moral judgements, and must obey the mandates of the collective. This can only work when the individual is stripped of all freedom to act independently and fears reprisals for doing so.

Thus political freedom and economic freedom go hand in hand. capitalism cannot maximize individual wealth for long when it exist within an oppressive political regime. Since it is more compatible with human nature than any other economic system, capitalism will cause any totalitarian regime that permits it to some degree to last longer (China is a good example), but that is only a temporary state of affairs. Without true political freedom, economic freedom cannot last and will either wither away slowly; or, alternatively cause individuals living under the oppression to demand more political freedom.

You can't be a "little bit" free-- because human nature will always demand more and more freedom once it has had a taste of it; until the despot who rules is finally deposed; or until he totally crushes all those who oppose him. In situations where the latter happens, you will always find the worse scenarios of poverty, oppression, misery, death, genocide and/or human degredation.

Likewise, true political freedom cannot last, and in the end is meaningless, where there is no economic freedom.

Think for a minute about what money really represents. Anti-capitalist intellectuals are rather fond of the phrase "money is the root of all evil" (or the love of money); but, in truth, money is the most efficient method of allowing individuals to make moral judgements. The phrase "put your money where your mouth is" is actually a more meaningful insight for understanding the importance of money and its relationship to freedom.

This is, of course not to say that everyone will make good moral choices. Nor do all people necessarily spend or even earn their money wisely. They clearly don't. But that is neither here nor there. That is precisely why political freedom demands a rule of law, and the protection of individual and property rights from other individuals and from the state.

As I have stated before, capitalism is actually good for the soul. It is the only system where the an individual's soul and his self can flourish; where individuals have a right to their own life and liberty, and where they can make choices in the pursuit their own particular happiness.

What we see in the4th of July protest captured by Zombie's camera (and I have only posted three pictures, go see all of them) is the empty, meaningless, and soul-dead ideology of the left in all its naked glory.

They have for some time been dizzy from their own disinformation and drowning in delusion and denial.

Friday, July 06, 2007

SOME CLEAR AND CRISP THINKING....


...on Iran:
Iran is the power that seeks to fill the vacuum that would follow our exit. A false democracy that is in fact a theocratic dictatorship. A terrorism-supporting world power that seeks not only economic and military domination, but spiritual and cultural domination of the region and the world. Quick show of hands. Who would like to see a greater Iranosphere?


Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: And on Iraq from Michael Yon, who reports that Al Qaeda continues to commit suicide in Iraq, as more Iraqis turn against them because of the horrific crimes they are committing against Iraqis.

Real progess is being made in Baqubah since the launch of operation Arrowhead Ripper: the Battle for Baqubah. Click on the link for photos and Yon's dispatch.

THE DREAM OF PERFECT VACUITY

David Warren takes on the multiculti utopians:


“Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try. No hell below us, above us only sky. Imagine all the people, living for today. Imagine there's no countries: it isn't hard to do. Nothing to kill or die for; and no religion, too. Imagine all the people, living life in peace.”

This is the postmodern dream, of perfect vacuity -- of the serenity we imagine will sweep over us like sleep. All we need do is abandon everything of value in our heritage, everything for which so many of our ancestors actually fought and died. In this great zero, everyone will be equal, and no person will be better than another. The heroine and the harlot will be one and the same, great saints and great monsters indistinguishable. “Judgementalism” -- the aversion that one individual has behaved better than another -- is, among the vacuous today, the only crime remaining to be punished. And likewise, under the doctrine of “multiculturalism,” there is nothing to choose between one culture and another. They are all just fine, and so far as any particularity can still be distinguished, “everything is beautiful in its own way.”


Warren's article discusses Canada in particular, butCanada is not the only example of the confluence of all the leftist tripe that is overrunning the world.

The political left who promulgate this drivel are completely unaware of the bizarre contradictions they espouse so earnestly. For example, they claim that "all cultures are equally deserving of respect"; but that Western culture is uniquely destructive and bad. They insist that "all truth is relative"; but that postmodernism conveys absolute truth.

And so on. These are the "contradictory discourses" of postmodern rhetoric which drive reasonable people mad when they attempt to have any discussion with a committed leftist. What you get instead of logical argument is subjectivism and relativism in one breath, and then dogmatic absolutism in the next.

By its very nature, postmodern thinking not only facilitates the commonly observed aversion to "Judgmentalism", that Warren mentions, it also functions as an intellectual medium within which psychological denial, delusion, and paranoia thrive.

This last is important to understand because it represents the psychological link between the "Everything is Beautiful-Love-Peace" mentality, and the deranged, over-the-top rage and virulent hatred that breaks through whenever that mentality is thwarted in its goals.

Richard Hofstadter in his essay "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" states:

What distinguishes the paranoid style is not, then, the absence of verifiable facts (though it is occasionally true that in his extravagaant passion for facts the paranoid occasionally manufactures them), but rather the curious leap in imagination that is always made at some critical point in the recital of events....

The plausability the paranoid style for those who find it plausible lies, in good measure, in this appearance of the more careful, conscientious and seemingly coherent application to detail, the laborious accumulation of what can be taken as convincing evidence for the most fantastic conclusions, the careful preparation for the big lep from the undeniable to the unbelievable.

The singular thing about all this laborious work is that the passion for factual evidence does not, as in most intellectual exchanges have the effect of putting the paranoid spokesman into effective two-way communication with the world outside his group--least of all with those who doubt his views. He has little real hope that his evidence will convince a hostile world. His effort to amass it has rather the quality of a defensive act which shuts off his receptive apparatus and protects him from haavaing to attend to disturbing considerations that do not fortify his ideas. He has all the evidence he needs; he is not a receiver, he is a transmitter.

What is missing from the paranoid style is not facts, but sensible judgment.

The perteninent question is how can any judgments be made--let alone be sensible--when the postmodern constraints on thinking (discussed here and here) demand adherence to a code of moral relativity; and decree that all truth is subjective anyway.

Postmodernism practically celebrates paranoia, projection, denial and distortion as undeniable and fundamental truth.

One of the daunting aspects of the political paranoia that logically flows from the postmodern brain is that it is not entirely out of the realm of the possible; it is just unbelievable in its breathtaking scope to most reasonable people.

In order to believe it, a person would have to accept some pretty far-fetched underlying assumptions - many of them overtly contradictory or even bizarre.

It simply boggles the mind to contemplate all the conspiracy theories constructed about George W. Bush and/or Karl Rove's evil genius. They are blamed even for the sad foolishness of some Democrats' behaviors. Recall, as just one example, the proposed theory that Karl Rove was the originator of the "fake but accurate" Dan Rather/Mary Mapes memo. The idea of this theory was that Rove did it to make Democrats look foolish since it was so obviously a forgery; and that they were "entrapped" into believing it to be real. Except, of course, that the same people who say that piece of nonsense are also unwilling to admit that the forgery is fake and believe there is some "underlying truth" to its contents. Go figure.

Look at all the unbelievable contortions the political left is going through right now to make it seem like George Bush's recent commuting of Scooter Libby's sentence is somehow not an appropriate use of Presidential power, but that Bill Clinton's was.

But as Hofstadter has said, this is the hallmark of the paranoid style--and it is the hallmark of the contradictions inherent in postmodern cognition and rhetoric.

In this "great zero"; this perfect vacuity, there is not a lot that makes any sense. It is, as the Bard has said, a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

And once the dream of perfect vacuity is realized for all, nothing will be all that remains.

Thursday, July 05, 2007

BLOGIVERSARY


I almost forgot, but I started blogging as Dr. Sanity 3 years ago today, on July 5, 2004. There have been very few days in the last 3 years when I have not put up at least one post!

Clearly I have a serious addiction problem.

If only I could find a financial way to do this full time....

UPDATE: Feel free to donate big bucks (or little) via the paypal or Amazon buttons in my sidebar

THE HOLLOW MEN OF THE LEFT

Wretchard in a comment to one of his posts has this to say:
The Jihadi movement is the proper heir of Marxism-Leninism. A very large part of its appeal consists in that it offers the poor a vision of earthly justice against the corrupt and wordly rulers of their nations -- corrupt men, who very often were yesterday's Marxist firebrands. Thus the almost saintly appeal of "learned" and rich men like Zawahiri and Bin Laden who represent denial, commitment and a complete surrender to the faith.

The hold of Bin Laden over the poor, yearning not only for Paradise but worldly justice as falsely but romantically embodied in sharia law, the law of Allah is as strong or stronger than the hold Lenin had on his disciples. Today's strongman-presidents may have gold and thugs, but they don't have romance. And looking at our Western intelligensia, neither do they. Even we are revolted by the sight of them. To the man in the desert or the Northwest Frontier, the multiculti transgendered spokesman of today's liberal society must appear as more ridiculous than Bozo the Clown. And perhaps he is. It might be argued that any honest man forced to choose between today's Left and the al-Qaeda might find himself attracted, despite everything, to the purer killer.

But I am not one to step back and long admire an advancing executioner. Bin Laden, whatever he may be, is determined to kill me, my family and friends. He aims to extinguish my culture; bury my beliefs; enslave my survivors. This he will not do so long as I can help it. And it's this basic, elemental resistance that really stands in the way of the Jihad as it once barred the Commissars. Not armies nor clever diplomats. It is sanity that ultimately defies the seductive whisperings of power. In Tolkien's story it is not the Wise or the Great Captains but the simpleton that collapses the dark tower. He preferred his garden to cold and adamantine stone.


Neither am I one to sit around wringing my hands if there is something I can do. I choose to fight with ideas because the real danger is not the Islamist, who are a bunch of but the ideas that encourage and enable them while simultaneously tying the hands of our military forces. Wretchard reminds of of Tolkien; and I can't help think of the character of the aptly named Grima Wormtongue and how easily his deceptive words allowed Saruman, the representative of the darkness to take control over the King and his country.

We seem to have a plethora of Grima Wormtongues in our own day and age; whose seductive rhetoric also facilitates and encourages the evil of our time, permitting darkness to take hold.

Mark Steyn raises an excellent point that cannot be said often enough:
The Arabization of Islam and the Islamization of Europe provide an ever bigger comfort zone for the bad guys to operate in. Substantial numbers of British Muslims share the same goals as the terrorists: they wish one day to live under Islamic law in the United Kingdom. The Gordon Browns of this world will huff and puff that they'll never give in to the "men of violence", while incrementally making the very same concessions to the men of non-violence.(emphasis mine)


Yes, this is the heart of the problem. On the one hand we are physically confronting and fighting the jihadists in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, and their goal is not only to impose sharia in the places where we fight; but also to violently and radically impose their Islamic law on the West as well.

In our very midst; in the heart of Western civilization; the incremental imposition of sharia is being accomplished by the Grima Wormtongues of the political left; who, wearing their multicultural blindfolds and spouting their politically correct rhetoric, are today's perfect, mindless, and cluelessly self-destructive-but non-violent!-- suicide bombers.

These leftist jihadis are ultimately far more dangerous than their Islamic counterparts. It is true that the latter can intermittantly cause unparalleled death and destruction through their acts of terror; but the former are also engaged in a holy war of ideas and seek to impose their own anti-human, anti-freedom and soul-destroying ideology which, in the long term slowly but surely eats away at everything Western civilization has stood for; while in the short term creates and nurtures the perfect environment where terrorists can wreak their havoc and death with impunity.

The political left has--particularly since 9/11--consistently been able to find new and innovative ways to tie the hands of the West and interfere or prevent them from dealing effectively with those Islamic "men of violence".

Observing the left's bizarre behavior and unparalleled animosity toward America and Israel; their appeasement of tyrants and dictators around the world; and their persistent efforts to stand reality on its head , you might actually be inclined to conclude that they strongly desire the West's defeat at the hands of the Islamic barbarians.

It is definitely hard not to reach that conclusion.

TS Eliot wrote in "The Hollow Men" that the world would end, " not with a bang, but a whimper". Today in our post-9/11 world we face both scenarios.

The Islamic fanatics want nothing more than to bring about the "bang", and are willing to kill themselves as long as they can take the West with them to hell. As Iran races to acquire nuclear weapons and as Al Qaeda seeks other WMD's to kill as many of us as possible; we can have no doubt of their intentions.

But the whimpers of the hallow men of the left; with their slimy, worm-tongued rhetoric; their over-riding allegiance to an ideology that distorts and manipulates reality and truth as a matter of necessity--they are the ones who will make the "bang" that much more likely to occur.

In their little fantasy world they cleverly deceive themselves into the belief that terrorism doesn't even exist; or, if it exists, it is not a serious problem; or, if it is a serious problem, then only they are perfect enough to deal with it--by attacking the moral and ethical foundations of the West. This is the strategy they have adopted in order to preserve their ideology and achieve their own dreams of power.

They certainly won't let the prospect of a nuclear-powered Iran stand in the way of implementing their own little leftist caliphate with its glorious style of social sharia and secular dogma.

In their delusional and empty minds, it is--choose from the following list-- America, Capitalism, Republicans, Bush, Cheney, and all the usual suspects, who are the real enemies that must be fought to the last dying breath. And any enemy of their enemy is surely their friend.

Don't say that terrorists are Muslim, for heaven's sake; those aren't the jihadis you're looking for! Don't call it a "war on terror"; adopt a more consensual tone and you will improve relations with all those (probably Christian or Jewish) religious fanatics who are trying to kill you. Bush is the real terrorist, much worse than Bin Laden. America is the source of all the evil in the world...etc. etc. and so on, ad nauseum.

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.



UPDATE: SC&A have some parallel thoughts, and I've been meaning to link to this excellent post by Bob at One Cosmos.

CARRYING ON THE TRADITION







Wednesday, July 04, 2007

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, AMERICA !


Declaration of Independence


[Adopted in Congress 4 July 1776]




The Unanimous Declaration
of the Thirteen United States of America


When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levey war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.




Happy Birthday, America !


Enjoy the day, Everyone... I will be back blogging tomorrow.

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

FOR THOSE WITH POLITICAL DEMENTIA

...who have forgotten:

See this:
With just hours to go in his presidency, Bill Clinton issued pardons Saturday to more than 100 people, including former CIA Director John Deutch; former HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros; and Susan McDougal, a former Clinton business partner who was jailed in the Whitewater scandal.

Others issued presidential pardons in one of Clinton's last official acts were his half brother, Roger, who pleaded guilty to distributing cocaine in Arkansas, and Patricia Hearst Shaw, the heiress who robbed a San Francisco bank in 1974 after being kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army.

Clinton also pardoned former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington and Peter MacDonald, the former Navajo Nation president.


And don't forget Marc Rich a fugitive on the lam, pardoned by Clinton.

Also, see this:
CNN has learned that former President Clinton is about to put out a statement in which he will acknowledge that his brother-in-law, Hugh Rodham, received a sum of money to represent two clients who were given pardons by the president. They two are Almon Glenn Braswell and Carlos Vignali, both of them controversial.

Short memories... faux outrage...yet more devastating symptoms of Severe Acquired Leftist Anencephalic Dementia (SALAD).

UPDATE: SC&A has more on this: The Stench of Democrat Hypocrisy.

DOCTORS, SADISTS, AND THE BEASTS OF RADICAL ISLAM

Michael Ledeen at The Corner asks,
The FT says that there are even more MDs involved in the British terrorist attacks, once again showing what a great scholar Walter Laqueur is. He was the first, so far as I know, to notice this curious phenomenon. How does one explain the disproportionately high number of medical doctors in terrorist organizations? I'm trying to get Angleton on the ouija board...


Seven doctors are now held in the recent terror plots in the UK, so Ledeen asks a pertinent question.

In those who enter the medical profession there is almost always a curious mix of motivations. The motivation most often talked about (and believe me, I have read hundreds of prospective medical students' essays on why they want to become doctors, and after a while they all merge into one long, treacly sentimental tract) is the desire to do good, to help people, and to ease suffering.

This is good and essential, obviously. But have you ever considered the reality that in order to do good; or to help people in physical pain, that you must sometimes (actually often) cause them even greater pain for a time? That, if you are a surgeon, you must find some enjoyment (or at least be able not to get sick) slicig people open or debriding wounds and mucking around in them? Even those of us who are psychiatrists must often lead the unsuspecting patient to experience (and hopefully to resolve) all the unbearable psychological pain that his psychological defenses have been mobilized to ward off.

This aspect of medicine is not talked about much, but it is very real nonetheless. The physician's own cruel and sadistic impulses are never far below the surface. In the healthy person these impulses are generally sublimated and the instinctual energy derived from them can then be used to benefit society. Nevertheless, this is the dark side of altruism and the motivation to do good, and it is as human as the impulse to do good.

Personally, I find it truly an amazing thing that the worse and most base impulses of the human animal can be transformed into behavior that not only benefits society, but also gives pleasure to the individual who must cope with them if they want to be part of a civilized society. In the case of doctors, it is that side of human nature -- those cruel and often sadistic impulses existing within us all-- that gives them the ability to deal with other people's pain and suffering without diminishing their ability to do what needs to be done to remedy it.

It is a delicate balancing act to keep the two sides in some sort of positive equilibrium at the best of times; and things can get greatly out of balance by a variety of individual, cultural, and environmental factors that influence the the particular doctor.

I remember as a first year resident working the 24-hour shifts in the Surgical Emergency Room. There was a 4th year resident who used to supervise all the CPR and resucitative efforts; capably directing all of us as we tried to save lives. When it became clear that a patient was not going to respond to the CPR and was dead, this resident would move quietly away from the action and open a nearby drawer that contained a baseball umpire's hat; a protective mask and chest guard. He would don this outfit, then calmly wait until CPR was halted and the patient was pronounced dead; At that moment, in the best baseball tradition, he would yell, "He's outta there!", gesticulating just like an umpire making a close call. In an instant, the tension in the room would dissipate as we all broke into whoops of unrestrained laughter.

It sounds pretty awful, doesn't it? A group of doctors laughing uproariously over the body of a recently deceased individual. Not what you would imagine caring and compassionate healers would do, right? Certainly not in the tradition of all that sweetness and light we all wrote about in our medical school entrance essays, that's for sure.

Years later, when I ran into the surgeon who was then in private practice and jokingly reminded him of those days, he winced. "I was crazy then," he told me. "Not enough sleep, too many patients, so much death and mayhem--I just lost it sometimes."

But those are exactly the sort of factors that upset that delicately maintained balance from time to time. Medical humor is well-known for exploiting the latent sadism that is a component of the doctor's life.

Doctors are in a position to do both great good and great harm. Understanding a little of their own darker motivations can be helpful in keeping them from becoming monsters like Dr. Mengele or Dr. Zawahiri or Dr. Shipman (who has the distinction of being the most prolific serial killer of all time) --but that potential certainly lies within every physician--to a degree that is likely significantly greater than most other humans.

When those of our profession who have taken the Hippocratic Oath to "do no harm" are involved in incidents like the recently attempted terror bombings in England and Scotland, the horror experienced by all prospective patients who put their lives in our hands is palpable. When a terror plot is hatched in a hospital; and when some doctors who give into that dark side of themselves and find enjoyment, meaning or even religious awe by causing death instead of preventing it--it seems far more terrifying than any actions by your typical run-of-the-mill barbarian thug. After all, one expects a certain repellant style of behavior from barbarian thugs. It is extremely shocking to discover that the same repellant style can also exist in members of a profession that prides itself in saving human life.

But, in reality, it is not all that much different a dynamic from a supposed "relgion of peace" (a religion, for God's sake!) that has allowed itself to be taken over by elements exhibiting the most bestial aspects of human nature.


UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers! Sorry, but Haloscan comments seem to be down for the moment. They may be up a little later on....

UPDATE II: Well, the comments seem to be up and then down. Good luck if you want to leave a comment.

Monday, July 02, 2007

BEST SUGGESTION REGARDING BUSH'S COMMUTING OF LIBBY'S SENTENCE

The big news is that President Bush has commuted Scooter Libby's jail sentence but left the guilty verdict intact; as well as the 2-year probation and the $250,000 fine.

Commuting the sentence is fine as far as it goes, but I think the best comment/suggestion on the whole affair was made by Ace:
Our long national nightmare silly fantasia is over.

Suggestion: Bush should have reduced the fine to a more reasonable $50,000, which just so happens to be how much Sandy Berger was fined for stealing and destroying classified documents and lying about it to investigators (he wasn't charged for the latter, but subsequent revelations has made it clear he did just that).

Making the fine $50,000 would have been more in line with Libby's transgressions, and it would have made it harder for Democrats to argue against it. The penalty -- no jail time, $50,000, probation -- would have been so similar to Berger's that one could scarcely mention it without also mentioning Berger.


Indeed, I can't help but compare Libby's transgression with the blatant and deliberate treasonous behavior committed by Sandy Berger, who basically got off scott free.

Of the two, Berger was clearly the one who deserved jail time, and who was willing to compromise national security to protect himself and his buddy Clinton. Libby was not even the person who "outed" a supposedly covert Plame--in what has to have been the most over-rated and politically motivated revenge lynching in history; he was only the human sacrifice the left demanded to assure themselves that the Bush Administration was at least as corrupt as the Clinton/Gore era and thus their ideology could remain pure.

But the damage that Sandy Berger did by destroying historical documents which very likely could have provided essential information on how to deal with (or, more likely how NOT to deal with) radical Islam, will likely reverberate for decades. We are just beginning to pay the price for his and Clinton's unparallelled narcissism. And then, to add icing to the treasonous cake, Berger lied about it all. Berger didn't even have a trial with a jury; which would have been extremely enlightening, to say the least.

Meanwhile, Valerie Plame and her loudmouth husband get movie deals, lots of money and enduring fame in the leftolooneysphere. How they have suffered!

The silly fantasia is over, except for the snarls of disappointment and rage we will hear from the left, who will continue to demand a human sacrifice (preferably a neocon) to safeguard and nourish their ongoing denial and delusion about the war on teror.

Just a few short hours ago they were salivating at idea that Libby was imminently going to prison...Curses! Foiled again!

THE LEFT'S COURAGEOUS STRUGGLE AGAINST REALITY

These days all you need to do is spend a few minutes scanning the internet and news headlines and you will soon begin to notice that there is an ongoing struggle being waged against the oppressive chains of reality.

Probably never in history have so many been so oppressed by so much awful reality.

In response to the unpleasantness, people use a variety of coping mechanisms which I have discussed repeatedly on this blog; all of which are a form of psychological denial.

A favorite tactic of those in psychological denial is to say one thing but behave in completely the opposite manner. You can immediately see how useful such a tactic would be. You can SAY you are for free speech (piously, even); but then, in the real world, you support policies that limit the speech of others (and then have the audacity to call it the "Fairness" Doctrine).

Another example is to SAY you "support the troops", but then turn around and sabotage their mission by enabling the enemy they are fighting. You can then close your eyes to the lives that are lost because you "support" those troops.

Along similar lines, take this bizarre example of rhetoric versus reality as reported at LGF:
Daily Kos: Hey idiots: the terror attacks prove OUR point, not yours.

If you don’t want to risk losing hair or IQ points by subjecting your brain to this tripe, here’s the LGF Digest Condensed Edition:

* Get out of Iraq, and the bombings will stop. Give ‘em what they want and they’ll leave us alone.

* Install cameras everywhere and watch everyone 24/7 like they do in the UK. But don’t use wiretapping or other Bushitler methods.

* Work on the socioeconomic conditions, “battle of ideas,” etc. etc.

* “Go after” Osama bin Laden. (I have no idea what that’s supposed to mean.)

* Rely on blind luck. It’s proven effective. (Yes, really.)

* You’re idiots, and we’re not.


One of the wondrous aspects of postmodern rhetoric, where reality and truth are only relative, is that anybody's "reality" is as good as anybody else's. For the dedicated postmodernist, polls and opinion are the final arbiters of truth; and the results of a poll or two, constructed along ideological lines to fit a particular template, is all you need to confirm your reality. Reality is a matter of opinion (simply ignore any polls that don't agree with your reality, of course).

This type of micraculous rhetoric can even determine today, what history will say many tomorrows from now. With enough repetition and passion, "history" can be set in stone in the temporal present! Extremely convenient for anyone who wants to avoid confronting their own contradictions in the present.

The rhetorical passion and word play is mere camouflage for the inherent philosophical and psychological contradictions that the postmodern left exploits in order to achieve and maximize political power. They are perfectly aware that their positions don't make any sense and can be refuted by anyone with basic knowledge of logic and logical fallacies; but their goal is to maintain the psychological denial necessary to believe in the left's ideology. Interpreting this defense and exposing it is essential to countering that ideology.

Stephen Hicks asks this important question (page 184):
The pattern therefore raises the question of which side of the contradiction is deepest for postmodernism. Is it that psotmodernists really are committed to relativism, but occasionally lapse into absolutism? Or are the absolutist commitments deepest and the relativism a rhetorical cover?


The possibility that the relativism is primary can be ruled out with some thought. If the modern leftist truly embraced relativism, then you would not see the uniformity of their politics or their reactions to events in the world. Instead, you would be able to observe an infinite number of postmodern leftist opinions and beliefs from all over the political spectrum. And, have you? Or, have you noticed that their opinions march completely in lockstep with their political ideology?

I must conclude from that observation that the moral relativism they preach so relentlessly as part of their multicultural drivel; and which equates the unceasing and institutional barbarity of terror groups like Al Qaeda (see here) with U.S. troops in Iraq; equates the deliberate targeting of innocents with herculean efforts to spare innocent life; equates Bush with Hitler; Iraq with Vietnam; etc. etc. are simple rhetorical devices that are being used to manipulate and advance their fundamentally socialist / totalitarian agenda.

That is why they can easily ignore any evidence that contradicts their arguments; never acknowledge that their arguments (or more precisely, their beliefs) have been debunked; instead, they simply redefine words or resort to word games (the various meanings of "is" for example); or move the goalposts (those aren't the WMD's we were looking for) when convenient.
The word games and much of the use of anger and rage that are characteristic of much of their style can be a matter--not of using words to state things that they think are true--but rather of using words as weapons against and enemy that they still hope to destroy....

If your opponent accepts that the debate is a matter of opinion or semantics, then your losing the argument does not matter: nobody is right or wrong. But if your opponent does not accept that everything is a matter of opinion, then his attention is diverted away from the subject matter at hand--namely politics--and into epistemology. For now he has to show why everything is not merely semantics, and that will take him awhile.


We see this strategy used repeatedly. No issue is every resolved. When the left realizes it is in a losing position, it simply backs off until it is opportune to revive the argument. And then they start back at the same points which were countered and try again, this time with more passion and outrage.

It's just a matter of opinion or semantics anyway, right? Just think of it as the left's tireless and courageous struggle against the unyielding oppression of reality.

Sunday, July 01, 2007

CARNIVAL OF THE INSANITIES

Image hosted by Photobucket.com Time for the weekly insanity update, where the insane, the bizarre, the ridiculous, and the completely absurd are highlighted for all to see! This has been a week of rare idiocy (as always!). So, if you want to remain sane, the best thing is to poke some fun at the more egregious absurdities.

Send all entries for next week's carnival to Dr. Sanity by 8 pm ET on Saturday for Sunday's Carnival. Only one post entry weekly per blogger, please. And you might read this before submitting an entry.

**NOTE: I am now getting many more submissions than I can possibly include in the weekly Carnival. Please don't be offended if your submission is not used (oh, okay, be as offended as you like) as it only means that for a variety of reasons I wasn't able to fit it into the "flow" as I put together each Carnival.

REMEMBER, THERE ARE SO MANY INSANITIES AND SO LITTLE TIME!!!

1. Tokyo Rose, editor NY Times? Her heirs are all over the media these days. The last refuge of a scoundrel journalist.

2. Sex, lies and videotape in Gaza. The West Bank as fruitcake? Plenty of fruitcakes to go around, though. What a tear-jerker! Always err on the side of severity.

3. Martyrdom at the hands of the evil Israelis, killers of children! He's now in Islamic Rat Heaven. Mickey may be dead, but the little children will always have Rosie. What happens when psychopaths have a disagreement?

4. What happens when the postmodern intellectuals meet pre-civilized Islamists? Oh...they probably mean well, too. Certainly when compared to you know who....

5. Ummmm...except he didn't kill anyone, did he? I think there are some people who are very much like the 9/11 bombers though....

6. But, what fun would it be to be castaway without the video crew???

7. I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today... It even makes Democrats ill ...hard to imagine.

8. Every toddler needs one of these for sure.

9. Not dead yet! But soon, my friend, soon. Maybe abandoned by the mothership?

10. They're just so darn rational! I've noticed that, haven't you? Swayed by emotion....really? Here's a cure for the antiwar crowd's distress that Congress hasn't yet impeached Bush. Is this a rhetorical question? And, speaking of just plain common sense...

11. Freud hangs out. Mohammed burns

12. Life imitates art. But art can be dangerous... call the Nanny State!

13. Are pets worth the cost? Well, you can always martyr them for a good cause (see #3) if you can't afford them. Or, if they paint better than you !

14. Is this the sort of thing they are teaching in college these days? Who put cialis in socialism?? God knows they need it.

15. The terrifying half-Monti ! ....Home penis enlargement ? Are people nuts, or what? Udderly ridiculous.

***************************************
Carnival of the Insanities can also be found at The Truth Laid Bear's ÜberCarnival and at the BlogCarnival.

If you would like to Join the insanity, and add the Carnival of the Insanities button to your sidebar (clicking on it will always take you to the latest update of the Carnival), click on "Word of Blog" below the button to obtain the html code:


Heard the Word of Blog?