Bushism is a sect; Bushites are nuts

Guest post by Ed Stephan

Many of us here have said that the “uniter not a divider” split our families into hostile, hardly-speak-to-each-other pro-Bush and anti-Bush factions. I grew up in a New Deal household; my twin sister and I are still there in spirit, but my younger brother and sister are as rabid a pair of Bushies as you can find. If I email anything more opinionated than “nice weather here” I am guaranteed a deluge of pre-packaged right-wing slams in response. Family reunions have become impossible.

I find this odd because, though widely scattered around the country, we have always been rather close. For the last decade we’ve exchanged daily emails covering all sorts of disagreements, without the vehement tirades of late. I divided from their religion without rancor. We were all raised Roman Catholic and I spent three years in a Franciscan seminary; when I rejected religion altogether they saw that as my choice. We respected each other’s preferences. Religion, career paths, child rearing, differences in material well-being, sports rivalries, wide varieties of cultural tastes — none of this has torn us apart. Only George W. Bush managed that.

By way of contrast, my best friend in the neighborhood happens to be a Republican, practicing Roman Catholic, ex-marine, gun owner, retired small businessman. He and I enjoy lots of activities together, primarily woodworking, and we often engage in extensive discussions of religion and politics, without rancor and usually with a good deal of humor. How is it that he and I can discuss Bush easily while my siblings and I can’t?

Politics, with my neighbor, is more like politics I’ve known all my life. When I lived in San Francisco I supported progressive candidates of both parties. We still had a lot of liberal (Earl Warren) Republicans and, except for the Burton machine which was extremely liberal, many Democrats there/then were actually pretty conservative, especially on race. At one point I was a member of the Republican State Central Committee and the County Democratic Central Committee (technically not legal to be on both, especially since I wasn’t old enough to vote, but no one checked). I have always looked at politics as a kind of game: you win some, you lose some; give-and-take; you-scratch-my-back and I-scratch-yours; competition and compromise, a messy but necessary way of getting things done in the real world.

The other night it hit me: the Bushies in my family aren’t interested in politics at all. The “frame” is completely different. Their behavior is more like a religious cult than a political bloc. Rather than thinking of them as “Bushies” or even Republicans (no one I know is really rich enough or mean enough to be a real Republican), I should be thinking of them as “Bushites” – like the Hutterites, or the Millerites or the Luddites. Sort of like some extreme vegans today. They have a strong sense of division between the Saved and the Damned, the Faithful and the Infidel (or Heretic); they are incapable of seeing warts or making compromises or even laughing.

That’s what’s behind, I think, all the “unreality” we’ve talked about here at TCR, the Bushite “bubble mentality”. It’s not necessarily that they’re ignorant of history or science or logical reasoning. In fact, they can (selectively) quote it chapter and verse. It’s rather that they just don’t care about all that “reality-based” stuff. They love those cocooned, staged performances by their “bubble boy” because it re-enforces the purity with which they view their world. Protesters are excluded because … well, you don’t have protestors in church, do you? Forget that “lost sheep” business: Churches are for those who believe.

In contrast to my own, my wife’s family is entirely unchurched. Whenever a distant relative would “get religion” (of a certain sort anyway) it was thought of as a mild form of mental illness. If this analysis is correct – and it’s the first time I’ve been able to make any sense of all that – then maybe there’s hope after all. Americans are largely pragmatic. They may not have as much sense of “the good life” as Europeans are reputed to have, but they also aren’t as bound by ideology. Hopefully, we’ll “come to our senses” before the current crowd, blinded by its peculiar faith in Bush, can do much more damage to us and our political heritage.

You can’t refute a theology.

Which is why a lot of debate with this group — the 35% who make up Bush’s polling floor — is futile.

You (Plan A.) offer a more attractive competing theology, and/or wait for adherents of the old theology to switch or die out over the course of time.

Or (Plan B) go to war.

In the early 1860’s we tried plan B.

In the depths of the Depression we tried plan A. The fortuitous timing of WWII more than anything may have made it work.

After reading Alistair Horne’s A Savage War of Peace, about the French experience in Algeria in the 1950’s and early 60’s, I am concerned that just as the French Fourth Republic didn’t survive the war in Algeria, our republic as presently constituted may not make it out of the war intact either.

Anybody got a plan C? I’m out of coffee and creativity….

  • Bush has become the great divider in America.
    To my knowledge, this has never happened
    before. He has managed to polarize most Americans
    into two camps that hate each other.

    Never before in my life have I used any litmus
    test to choose friends, but in the last few years
    I’ve found that I simply cannot stand to be
    around the Bushites and all their predictable
    attitudes and prejudices. I know they say the
    same things about us. I see the attacks on
    blogs.

    I don’t know what the solution is. I can’t see
    how a nation can prosper with two diametrically
    opposed worldviews. We don’t seem to
    agree on anything.

    One thing is for sure, though. The neocons
    and their supporters are extremists. That’s
    a fact. They don’t represent the views of
    mainstream Americans. So one lesson to
    be learned is that we must never put
    extremists into any of the three branches of
    government. But now that we’ve got them
    dominating the executive and legislative
    branches, how do we get them out? How
    do we clue middle America in on what it’s
    done to itself?

    I don’t know.

    At times I find the situation truly depressing,
    so much so that I wish I could live in a
    country that shared my values, and not one
    in which half the people hate me for everything
    I stand for.

  • Get on it, get with it, get to work.
    Prophets are springing up in the wilderness: Howard Dean, Paul Hackett, Cindy Sheehan. There is a straight and true path, and they are blazing it. What they have in common is that they seize the terms of debate. They are not counterpunching, they are advancing cogent, common sense arguments in plain language rather than engaging in a dialogue of platitudes and they are backing their arguments up by taking action. Go thou and do likewise.

  • Hark,

    The intense division you mention makes a sort of gruesome sense from one point of view. Remember the original Cheney Corp energy hearings from which everyone but CEOs was excluded? If they regard the American people as their enemy, then our division into rabid Reds and Blues (Crips and Bloods, whatever) fits a very ancient strategery: Divide et impera. — the Roman maxim “Divide and rule” (often “Divide and conquer”).

    I’ve mentioned before (got it from someone on this site actually) there are very few people rich enough and mean enough to be Republicans. If the American people ever got united, around the interests of the vast majority of us, there wouldn’t be enough left over to elect any Republicans.

    I think Jack’s right: the road to that unity is already being blazed by Howard Dean, Paul Hackett, and Cindy Sheehan. We must follow their lead now (and quit worrying about 2008 … in fact, quit worrying altogether).

  • I’ve had the same experiences as you, Hank. I started my blog in April of this year, and my very first post entry on it (as well as on MyDD) expressed how I had to choose to no longer be friends with my best friend. It was featured on the front page of MyDD that day, which I take it, meant that many people felt as I did/do, and many people have had to alter the way they deal with these so called friends.

    I jettisoned my friend, and haven’t looked back. And, to be perfectly honest, I sleep better at night now that I have cut off the dead weight.

    I’m a pragmatist when it comes to our government. I feel a great deal of damage has already been done. The history of this country is the only thing that gives me hope. Thanks to Bush and the gang, the divided half that believe whatever the hell their mantra is, are careening head-first into that reality wall, and their morning after wake up call will be some hell.

    As for the other half of this country, it’s on their backs that this great nation stays afloat in all this bullshit.

    I have no faith in the two party system, and don’t feel at all secure that the Democratic Party has any answer. I can only hope that as the leaders stumble in their own crap, and fall, more reality based politicians will take their place.

    I have faith in the blogosphere, though. It reminds me of the groundswell that started out in the early 60’s protest movement, which is why I started blogging.

    For those that are interested, read An Ode To My Republican Ex-Best Friend.

  • I’ve been harping on the right wing as cult metaphor for a while. It’s a difficult thing to grasp, but facts truly don’t matter to them at all. It’s why they buy books claiming Chelsea is the result of rape – it’s not so important that Chelsea actually “is” the result of rape as it is that Chelsea being the result of rape would make Clinton evil. That’s the important thing.

  • I think it’s a bit more pedestrian– and a lot less intellectual– than “cult”. It’s pure, prehistoric tribalism.

    It’s like rival sports fans, like rival highschools. Or, in a more sinsister note, like rival gangs. Having lived in L.A., it makes me nervous that we have divided the country into “red” and “blue” teams. I’ve seen that colour division before…. and, it’s not pretty.

    Politics in this country has devolved to a blind level of rah-rah that I’ve only seen among football fanatics (we haven’t gotten to gang warfare… yet…). The wingnuts tend to be more shameless and blind in their devotion; most progressives I know would be embarassed to be such uncritical followers. I cringe when I listen to Janaene Garofalo or read Oliver Willis, when they mirror wingnut tactics and rhetoric. But, maybe they’re on to something; perhaps that’s why the wingnuts win and we don’t. I wish it weren’t so.

    MY TEAM!! MY TEAM!!! GOOOOO TEAM!! This is nothing but primate tribe allegiance.

    “Ever notice how people who believe in Creationism look really un-evolved?” — Bill Hicks

  • There WAS a time when things were as polarized as they are now, in some ways moreso. It’s called “the Sixties.” In those days, the left was freedom riding, sitting-in, boycotting, demonstrating, marching, clashing with police, trying to levitate the Pentagon. Entire sets of attitudes were being called into question, often quite starkly, on race, sex, class equality, the role of government, war and peace. Those Americans who wanted things to stay as they always had were left reeling. Nixon got the counterrevolutionary ball rolling with his appeal to “the Silent Majority,” but it was Reagan and his many minions who made it feel good to be a winger. That’s why so many Bush followers remain so angry: they’re still smarting from the Sixties assaults on their cultural virtue, they’re pumped up by their right-wing cheerleaders, and they feel now it’s payback time. “Bring it on!!”

  • Thank you. The Rovian tactics of control are all about preserving the cult. If you know soomething about methods of control, you recognize how they make it clear that respect will only be given to those who submit.

    An important control tactic is to insist on members’ agreement to things which are obviously false, to wean them from independent judgement and mire them in dependent, addictive behavior. Easy to see why Rovians respect and in fact collaborate with Rev. Moon, who demands followers literally worship him. Like Mennonites, Hutterites, Amish, etc., Rovians save their greatest wrath for the fallen away. Changing your mind–growing up, growing wiser–is against the rules. They’re not “appealing to the base” when they go all fundamentalist, they are terrorizing their base! “Be afraid of what we can do to you if you change your mind,” is their message. “See what we did to Richard Clarke, to Joe Wilson, and now to Cindy Sheehan.” And then your pastor will preach that people like you go to hell. Yep, the current Republican Party is, by conscious design, a cult.

  • Yep, the current Republican Party is, by conscious design, a cult.

    You’re dead on, WAction. This is more than simple tribalism, it’s got all the mind control characteristics of classic cult behavior. Like Ed, my siblings and parents have split into barely speaking camps (at least not about politics, religion, or the many culture war issues). The reject huge swaths of science out of hand, and condescendingly denigrate those who believe in such whacky concepts as beta decay and other well-proven facts of physics. And as is so often the case with cults, they’ve abandoned rational and scientific concepts which they once matter-of-factly believed in in exchange for lunacy like coexistence of humans and dinosaurs. It’s almost beyond belief to watch this close up.

    This is why Bush can have a solid floor to his popularity. These people are well-versed in irrationality, in denying facts that stare them in the face. So when Bush and his henchmen lie to their face, it just goes wherever that mental cesspool is where all the rest of their contradictions go to die.

    I find it so ironic that in the sixties and seventies so many of the older wingers were horrified at the cults that were rising up out of the hippie era. Who’d have thought that so many of them would be taken in by the cult of Bush, far more dangerous and malevolent than any of the ones we dabbled in back in the day. And like all cultists, they cannot recognize it from inside.

  • Having lived in San Francisco for four years, I’ve met just as many people who belong in hard-left cults that are just as rigidly ideological as Bushites. And frankly, if you want some perspective, read over your own comments here at the Carpetbagger. Talk about a tribalism mentality that demonizes anything and everything Republican.

    And hey, at least the Bush Cult stands “for” something, as opposed to the knee-jerk cult of dissent that passes for intelligence here. All you guys do is wait for for Bush to do something and cry about it. I’ll take a cult of action over a cult of reaction anyday.

  • Action over reaction? that is interesting, Nate, is like saying that is better to give than to receive, Kill or be killed, etc., etc. Is exactly what Mussolini told the Socialist in Italy, he was pissed with their intellectualism and timid approach to politics, he was a man of action and created Fascism.
    That he ended up hanged by a mob upside down and riddled with bullets doesn’t mean that he didn’t have fun promoting a cult of action. Go on, Nate follow the neocons and sign up for Iraq, they will give you some action.

  • I suppose it’s all a matter of perspective. Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Maybe he should have acted- or would that make him a fascist.

    While Hitler took Poland and Japan took China, killing and imprisoning millions, perhaps the US should have acted sooner? Ah, but that kind of action, attacking country that didn’t attack us, would be fascism apparently. Try telling Winston Churchill that his action would lead to fascism.

    Secondly, you need to give up the chicken-hawk argument. If you support the police, do you need to be a cop? And don’t you find it interesting that the military overwhelmingly supported Bush in the war?

  • Well, the military is a burocracy like any other, when the Cold War ended, the Pentagon and many other agencies that lost their rational for their inflated budget were pretty nervous, it is very convenient for them to now have a open ended war to justify the billions upon billion that we are spending now. Just think about the fact that of the almost trillion dollars spend worldwide in the military, USA spending represent half of it, the next country is China with only 65 billions to America 465 billions. War has been established as a business in America since 1940 and that have gradually distorted and corrupted our political and economic system. Some people are surprised that Bush can articulate a rational for the situation in Iraq, but he really can’t, because the rational is permanent conflict. How long do you think our economy can sustain this formula? That is the real question.

  • The August 15, 2005 issue of “Time” magazine has an article titled “The Evolution Wars.” From p. 32 I quote, “But for those who read Genesis literally and believe that God created the world along with all creatures big and small in just six days, there’s no reconciling faith with Darwinism. And polls indicate that approximately 45% of Americans believe that.”

    Utterly astounding to me.

  • My faith is more important to me than my country, and I value my country very highly. My faith requires me to challenge myself, my beliefs, my thoughts and actions all the time. True faith is not blind, it strives to learn, to struggle, to question, seek truth, and try to make oneself a better person.

    Being a patriot of one’s country requires the same dedication of oneself and to require the same of our country’s leaders. All the time.

    Being a patriot or a person of faith is not blind obedience or worship. As others have said, that describes members of a cult.

    I find that those members of my family who are progressive do a lot of reading, thinking, questioning, etc. “Intellectuals” might be the word to describe them.

    Those in my family who are “Bushites” do not. They do not want to even *know* the “bad stuff” that is being done. They only want to believe that their president is always right. When confronted with the facts, they tend to “shoot the messenger” or simply disbelieve. I might add that these people are not stupid, not at all. Perhaps they are happy living in the same bubble as their president.

    It is very frustrating. I cannot talk to these people without their basically telling me to “shut up”. lalalalala, I can’t hear you. Maybe they will wake up some day. What I do know is that they are now in the minority in this country. It makes me feel a *little* bit better.

  • One of the issues, which our liberal pundit class and those morons at the DLC really ought to think about, is how to break the spell.

    Traditionally, Democrats worry, Clinton-like, about how to come up with catch-phrases, Sister Soljah opportunities, etc., which will allow them to “capture the center”, etc.

    But, really “capturing the center” is irrelevant. What needs to happen is to awaken half the country from an hypnotic trance.

  • Jennifer-

    Judge America’s wars against any other nation is history, and you can’t say we dont’ come out ahead. You think it was wrong stop genocide and mass rape in Bosnia and Kosovo? To try and help starving Somalians from corrupt warlords? To give Iraqi Kurds and Shites freedom from a tyrant who killed thousands of their young men? The gray area of Vietnam aside, look at what American troops have done to liberate Western Europe from the Nazis, protect South Korea, and stand up to the Soviet Union.

    We have a big army, I agree. I can understand people who want to spend money on other things. But when making your argument, you must acknowledge the good that is done by the US military. Look at how many countries in the world don’t have big armies because they don’t need to- we will protect them. A world without a top dog means a million squirmishes for power among the puppies. I would suggest you and your fellow liberals try to influence US military power so it used properly rather than question its efficacy.

  • Program on the emergence of civilization.

    “14 species of large animals capable of domesitcation in the history of mankind.
    None from the sub-Saharan African continent.
    13 from Europe, Asia and northern Africa.”
    Favor.
    And disfavor.

    They point out Africans’ attempts to domesticate the elephant and zebra, the latter being an animal they illustrate that had utmost importance for it’s applicability in transformation from a hunting/gathering to agrarian-based civilization.

    The roots of racism are not of this earth.

    Austrailia, aboriginals:::No domesticable animals.

    The North American continent had none. Now 99% of that population is gone.

    Organizational Heirarchy
    Heirarchical order, from top to bottom:

    1. MUCK – perhaps have experienced multiple universal contractions (have seen multiple big bangs), creator of the artificial intelligence humans ignorantly refer to as “god”
    2. Perhaps some mid-level alien management –
    3. Mafia (evil) aliens – runs day-to-day operations here and perhaps elsewhere (“On planets where they approved evil.”)

    Then we come to terrestrial management:

    4. Chinese/egyptians – this may be separated into the eastern and western worlds
    5. Romans – they answer to the egyptians
    6. Mafia – the real-world interface that constantly turns over generationally so as to reinforce the widely-held notion of mortality
    7. Jews, corporation, women, politician – Evidence exisits to suggest mafia management over all these groups.

    Survival of the favored.

    Movies foreshadowing catastrophy
    1986 James Bond View to a Kill – 1989 San Fransisco Loma Prieta earthquake.

    Journal: 10 composition books + 39 megs of text files

  • Comments are closed.