Racheting Up The Abuse

I'm grateful to those who watch and report on the Bush junta's press conferences, since I'll admit to a physical revulsion that makes it almost impossible for me to watch or listen to Bush for more than a few seconds. Yesterday's press conference, by all accounts, provided evidence of an even further slide into insanity and incoherence than we've seen before. The WaPo's Eugene Robinson says:

I'm . . . interested in trying to understand his emotional response -- or lack of response -- to the chaos he has spawned.

According to the Iraqi government, 3,438 civilians were killed in July, making it the bloodiest month since the invasion. The president was asked yesterday whether the failure of the U.S.-backed "unity" government to stem the orgy of sectarian carnage disappoints him, and he said that no, it didn't. How, I wonder, is that possible? Does he believe it would be a sign of weakness to admit that the flowering of democracy in Iraq isn't going exactly as planned? Does he believe saying everything's just fine will make it so? Is he in denial? Or do 3,438 deaths really just roll off his back after he's had his workout and a nice bike ride?

Mr. Robinson may have thrown the final option in as rhetoric, but if I were pressed, I'd choose it as the correct option. Sociopaths truly aren't capable of feeling anyone else's pain and Bush is a sociopath. I don't think even millions of deaths would phase him the tiniest bit. I think it's important for us to realize this. It's not that he doesn't know. It's that he doesn't care. We should take that into account when we form our strategies for trying to end this insane, illegal, immoral war.

Mr. Robinson also notes that Bush said:

"What's very interesting about the violence in Lebanon and the violence in Iraq and the violence in Gaza is this: These are all groups of terrorists who are trying to stop the advance of democracy."

Now, whatever you think about George Bush's intellect, he knows full well that the Hamas government in Gaza was democratically elected. He also knows full well that Hezbollah participates in the democratically elected government of Lebanon, or what's left of Lebanon. And so he has to know full well that U.S.-backed Israeli assaults on Gaza and Lebanon -- even if you believe they were justified -- had the impact of crippling, if not crushing, two nascent democracies of the kind the Bush administration wants to cultivate throughout the Middle East. [Here's where I think Mr. Robinson is wrong. Bush does NOT want to cultivate democracy anywhere in the world.]

. . .

So when the president lauds democracy as the magic elixir that will cure the scourge of terrorism, is he really putting faith in his favorite mantra rather than his lying eyes? Is his view of the world so unchangeable that he dismisses actual events the way he dismisses mere "talk''?

Or is he just trying to hold on until January 2009, when all this will become somebody else's problem?

Actually, I think there's a different factor at work, one that Mr. Robinson fails to propose. In a recent post, I blogged about Derrick Jensen's discussion of the similarities between abusive partners and the dominant culture. Mr. Jensen says:

Abusers will use any excuse to ratchet up repression, and if no excuses are forthcoming, excuses will be fabricated. . . . Those in power will repress us no matter what we do or don't do. And if we do anything they will ratchet it up.

. . .

Everyone who has ever in any way been associated with perpetrators of abuse will probably agree with this analysis by psychologist and writer Arno Gruen of why abusers must continue to ratchet up their exploitation: "[C]atharsis does not work for those people whose anger and rage are fueled by self-hatred, for if it is projected onto an external object, self-hatred is only intensified and is aggravated by actions that are unconsciously perceived deep within as further forms of self-betrayal. Thus, with every additional act of destruction, destructive rage raises its stakes."

George Bush hates the principles of democracy with every fiber of his being. The more he talks about bringing "democracy" to the Middle East, the harder he tries to ensure its absence. He does, however, think that it's a good word to use to fool the rubes. And he will rachet up his abuse of democracy every chance that he gets. I don't know about you, but I can just look at the man and see that he is desperate to get his finger on the nuclear button. Saddam's pistol just isn't doing it for him any more. Mr. Robinson, 2009 is way too far away.