THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE PRODUCES WINNERS AND LOSERS

THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE PRODUCES WINNERS AND LOSERS

I met my friend Foley at the Starbucks near Bloomington High School South.  It was a warm day so I ordered a vanilla bean frappachino.  Foley stayed with a mocha latte.

“Did you watch the debate last night?”  I asked.

“All of it.  Both the failed four and the main event,” replied Foley

“Were there any clear winners, Foley?”

“Trump by far.”

“Why so”, I asked.  “He seemed poorly informed on issues.”

“The others ganged up on him so he got to reply more than any of the others. Jindal sounded like a jilted lover.  Fiorina was like a harpie.  Bush was too busy defending his brother.  Walker was too busy busting unions and bragging about it.  Only Trump talked about making America great again.”

“I thought he was thin on specifics for foreign policy.”

“That’s because policy wonks are useless for foreign affairs, Elof”

“So who should make those policies?”

“Deal makers.  Trump has a play book, Art of the Deal. That and the Bible are the only books you need to make America Great Again.”

“Why the Bible?”

  “Simple”, Elof, “to let heathens know that the Book is on our side.”  

“I thought Fiorina was more informed than Trump, didn’t you, Foley?

“I was too busy trying to listen to her between her whistles to know what she was saying”.

“What about Huckabee?”

“Saying the Bible is important, like Trump does, is like saluting the flag, it’s an OK thing.  But quoting from the Bible makes you a minister.  You don’t do that as President, you do that as a pastor in church. “

“What about Cruz?”

“He’s like that Hungarian in My Fair Lady.  He oils himself across the floor.”

PATRIOTISM IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

PATRIOTISM IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

I was walking in the Mall and greeted my friend Foley and we decided to have lunch at Applebee’s. They had about a half dozen TV sets on.  Foley and I watched a military honor guard lead a singer to sing the National Anthem.

“Why do sports events start with the national anthem?” I asked

“It’s patriotic,” said Foley.

“Should that apply to all large gatherings?”

“You better believe it” Foley asserted.

“How about a movie theater before each film is shown?”

“That doesn’t count.”

“How about a beach on a hot day?”

“Nope, wrong occasion.”

“A funeral?”

“No, again”.

“So being patriotic is something to celebrate?”

“You got it.”

“Can you criticize the government and still be patriotic?”

“Not in my book,” said Foley.  

“So if Republicans criticize President Obama, they’re unpatriotic?”

“No, because they’re telling the truth.  It’s Obama who is unpatriotic”.

“Why is that?”

“He doesn’t stand up to our enemies.  He is destroying free enterprise.  He is inviting 10  million illegals to a path to citizenship.”

“ Would it be patriotic if I criticized Republicans for buying elections, depriving citizens of their right to vote, allowing the rich to escape paying taxes, and rushing into wars based on deceptive claims? “

“No, Elof, that’s just sour grapes liberals spew”. 

“So where does that leave the patriotic motto ‘My country right or wrong’?”

“That applies to me, not you.  Get your priorities straight, Elof.”

THE SCARY PARALLELS BETWEEN DONALD TRUMP’S CAMPAIGN AND DICTATORIAL PERSONALITIES

When I taught at UCLA I got to know a psychiatrist, Maurice N. Walsh, MD (1905-1991) who was in the Neuropsychiatric   Institute.  He developed an interest in psychiatry and war when he was a medical resident at the Mayo Clinic and was asked to see a patient.  It was Rafael Trujillo, the Dominican dictator who had syphilis but who also was psychotic.  Soon WWII broke out and Walsh found himself in the Pacific helping pilots to carry out missions to bomb Japan with a high probability of crashing at sea before they could return to their base.  At the war’s end he was asked to examine Rudolph Hess for the Nuremberg trials.  He found Hess to be psychotic and his report was stamped secret and not allowed to be used in the trials.  Walsh wondered why it was that highly narcissistic persons who might be classified as megalomaniacs had such an appeal to the public and why they rose to power as dictators.  He became an advocate for the scientific (rather than political or economic) study of war.  He edited a book (1971) War and the Human Race gathering dozens of articles on medical, psychiatric, anthropological, biological, and other approaches to the study of war.   

              Every time I listen to one of Donald Trump’s interviews or speeches, I think of Maurice Walsh.  He said of Trujillo or Hess, why is it that if we heard this person on a soapbox we walk away and consider this person a nutcase but if he ran for office we would treat him as a serious candidate?  But Walsh also asked another question: Why are so many people charmed or attracted by these narcissistic personalities?  He argued that they appeal to people who are tired of nuance, complexity, inconsistency, compromise, and failure in the political world in which they live.  The narcissistic leader is decisive, admits no wrong, is good at fault-finding in others, and is willing to take the risks to set things right that is part of our own wish fulfillment. 

              I wish some of our political commentators on TV news shows would call attention to the striking similarity of Trump’s rhetoric and those of past bullying dictators like Hitler and Mussolini and Trujillo.  Those with a dictatorial personality like to preach macho values of war or the threat of war instead of diplomacy.  They disregard legalities in favor of executive authority as their first choice for governing. They have overblown confidence in their intelligence or knowledge of how the world works.  The dictatorial personality likes to give orders, likes to be surrounded by “yes men,” looks at criticism as a form of treason or lack of patriotism, and likes to have others fight their wars which are rarely responses to massive attacks or declarations of war.  

              I regret the disappearance of psychological and psychiatric research on war, aggression, and the narcissistic personality.  In mid 20^th century there were books like Erich Fromm’s Escape from Freedom and Carlo Levi’s Fear of Freedom.  In the last half of the 20^th century, I believe, the wrong approach was used, stressing evolutionary models of innate aggression or human nature making war seem inevitable because it is fixed in our genes.  I doubt that.  War is a disease of society. Diseases can be prevented but we need to do research that is not stuck in the traditional economic, political, and human nature arguments for its causes.  Those have not worked in the past and a fresh look is much needed.