Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Authoritarian Streak in the Conservative Movement

By John Dean, AlterNet. Posted July 22, 2006.


The despotic personality types we see in the Bush White House have their origins in the amoral politics practiced by the low-lifes of the Nixon administration.
0670037745.01._ss500_sclzzzzzzz_v63542942_
john dean

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by John Dean

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

The following is excerpted from John Dean's new book, Conservatives without Conscience (Viking, 2006):

Frankly, when I started writing this book I had a difficult time accounting for what had become of conservatism or, for that matter, the Republican Party. I went down a number of dead-end streets looking for answers, before finally discovering a true explanation. My finding, simply stated, is the growing presence of conservative authoritarianism. Conservatism has noticeably evolved from its so-called modern phase (1950-94) into what might be called a postmodern period (1994 to the present), and in doing so it has regressed to its earliest authoritarian roots. Authoritarianism is not well understood and seldom discussed in the context of American government and politics, yet it now constitutes the prevailing thinking and behavior among conservatives.

Regrettably, empirical studies reveal, however, that authoritarians are frequently enemies of freedom, antidemocratic, antiequality, highly prejudiced, mean-spirited, power hungry, Machiavellian, and amoral. They are also often conservatives without conscience who are capable of plunging this nation into disasters the likes of which we have never known.

Although I have only recently learned the correct term for describing this type of behavior, and come to understand the implications of such authoritarian thinking, I was familiar with the personality type from my years in the Nixon White House. We had plenty of authoritarians in the Nixon administration, from the president on down. In fact, authoritarian thinking was the principal force behind almost everything that went wrong with Nixon's presidency. I had had little contact with my former colleagues, or with their new authoritarian friends and associates, until the early 1990s, when they decided to attack my wife and me in an effort to rewrite history at our expense. By then I had left public life for a very comfortable and private existence in the world of business, but they forced me back into the public square to defend myself and my wife from their false charges. In returning, I discovered how contemptible and dangerous their brand of "conservatism" had become, and how low they were prepared to stoop for their cause.

About 7:00 a.m. on Monday, May 6, 1991, I received a phone call that was both literally and figuratively a wake-up call, one that would dramatically change the political world as I thought I knew it. My last politics-related activity had been in 1982, when I wrote Lost Honor, a book about the consequences of Watergate during the decade that followed it. Since then I had focused exclusively on my work in merger and acquisition ventures, and I no longer had any interest in partisan politics. In fact, I had done everything I could to lower my public profile and regain my privacy by refusing to give press interviews. I became a true nonpartisan, sometimes voting for Republicans and sometimes for Democrats, always determined to select the best candidates for the job. I paid little attention to Washington affairs other than major events. I did maintain my relationships with old friends in Washington, including some still active at the highest levels of government and several who worked for Reagan and Bush I, but we seldom discussed politics too seriously. I discovered that I enjoyed life more outside of the political arena, and so I had no interest in returning to it.

When the phone rang that Monday morning, I assumed it was my wife, Maureen -- "Mo" to family and friends -- calling from Pennsylvania, where she had gone to care for my mother, who had recently suffered a stroke. I was instead greeted by Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes, and his producer Brian Ellis. Wallace quickly got to the reason for their call. "Have you heard about this new book about Bob Woodward?" he inquired referring to the Washington PostM's star reporter and best-selling author. "I'm talking about a book called Silent Coup: The Removal of a President, by Leonard Colodny and Robert Gettlin." Wallace explained that <60 Minutes was working on a story about Silent Coup, which St. Martin's Press was going to publish in two weeks, and Time magazine was going to run an excerpt from the book. Wallace said the book dealt not only with Woodward but also "with you, sir, John Dean."

"How so?" I asked. I knew about the book because Colodny had called me several years earlier looking for dirt on Woodward, and I had told him I had none. Later he called back to ask me some questions about my testimony before the Senate Watergate committee. But Colodny had said little about how I related to his book. I had assumed his project had died.

"Do you know a woman by the name of Heidi Rikan?" Wallace asked.

"Sure, Heidi was a friend of Mo's. She died a few years ago. What does Heidi have to do with Silent Coup? " Heidi and Mo had been friends before we were married and was a bridesmaid at our wedding. Wallace ignored my question.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Tall Tales
Posted by: famouspipeliner on Jul 22, 2006 12:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's quite a story Mr. Dean but you can tell us a lot more than that. How about a little insightful info into the current crop of the GOP hierarchy.... like Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld or Cheney. You know the boys. Take 'em on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tall Tales Posted by: deo508
» RE: Tall Tales Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Tall Tales Posted by: NeilDeal
John Dean
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jul 22, 2006 3:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all it must be said that John Dean's two books, "Worse Than Watergate" and "Conservatives Without Conscience" are, in my humble opinion, two of the finest books to be written about this sick and sickening administration. I do alot of driving around so after having read them, I puchased the audio book versions. Please trust me on this one kiddies: You won't be dissappointed.

History will record the name of John Dean not so much for his roll in the Watergate affair, as some people assume, but for the articulate and insightful stand he took against the forces of corruption and stupidity that make up so much of the right-wing movement in this troubled country.

He has been mocked and ridiculed by the half-witted right for doing what he's done and I'm glad about that. Let's face it: To make the enemies list of G. Gordon Liddy or Rush Dimbulb or Sean Hannity is, by my way of thinking, sort of a badge of honor. It's like when the great Dick Grergory was asked for a comment when he made Nixon's enemies list:

"Tell him I accept before he changes his mind"

John Dean, as far as I'm concerned, is a hero. He's out there fighting the good fight, holding up a mirror to a twisted and contemptable political culture that obviously doesn't like what's reflected.

We ignore him at our own peril.

Pray for peace

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
The Daily Rant

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: John Dean Posted by: Brandoc-D'Ha
so excellent
Posted by: rsaxto on Jul 22, 2006 4:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This John Dean piece is so excellent. It explains how a Republican White House can deeply and criminally subvert the truth. And now we have a Republican White House that even more criminally than the Nixon White house deeply subverts the truth and engages in war crimes and criminal torture to get their way. We now have more than enough information to impeach and destroy the Bush White House. Don't let neocon Republicans and wimpy Democrats keep us from doing the right impeachment thing. Survival of democracy worldwide depends on all decent people to help do the right thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: so excellent Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: so excellent Posted by: Somedaysoon
» Somedaysoon tries to make a point! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: so excellent Johnson Posted by: rsaxto
» RE: so excellent Johnson Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: so excellent Posted by: madmac10
» madmac10 is afraid of opposing ideas? Posted by: Conservasaurus
Hal Weiner
Posted by: druidlaw on Jul 22, 2006 4:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Dean, although I am in awe and admiration
of your courage in taking on the Nixon White House
and the pond scum you formerly worked with
and for, I am puzzled, as a lawyer, by your statement
above that

" When I saw Colson promote " Silent Coup " on " Crossfire "
I was unaware of his earlier pre-publication discussions with
Colodny... ( Colodny had illegally tape recorded all of his
conversations)...

As far as I know, the law then in effect, and it may have
changed, I did not research it to date, could not have
forbidden the tape recording of a conversation by one
of the parties to it. The only restriction on that was in
the tariff regulations of the telephone company service
providers, which we both know can be put, for legal
enforcement purposes where the sun don't shine.

Kindly explain what you mean and how it is possible,
since credibility here is the main issue of you vs. them.
e mail: druidlaw@interport.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hal Weiner Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Hal Weiner Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» It is what it is Posted by: Joe Ox
» RE: It is what it is Posted by: druidlaw
» RE: Hal Weiner Posted by: druidlaw
» RE: Hal Weiner Posted by: arthur
» RE: Hal Weiner Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Hal Weiner Posted by: jenvon
» Are you people nuts? Posted by: Paul D
Dean, keep exposing, talking, show and telling ........ never quit!!!!
Posted by: Pepper on Jul 22, 2006 7:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Word of advice for neocon sociopaths....... if you want to succeed you better quit trying to attack those who are NOT AFRAID OF YOU and will come back into the arena to prove it.

Now Dean is your worse nightmare and a rare American hero.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CONSTANT FEAR, SOCIOPATY and SOPHISTRY - PT. I
Posted by: LMNOP on Jul 22, 2006 7:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I have said before, the neocon’s ideology, like most, is only a verbal rendering of a common psychological state. What characterizes their minds is an absence of conscience (sociopathy, or chronic anti-social behavior) combined with a sense of being vulnerable. As Dean said above, ”authoritarians are frequently enemies of freedom, antidemocratic, antiequality, highly prejudiced, mean-spirited, power hungry, Machiavellian, and amoral”.
Unlike the sheep who are merely fearful, but also decent and simple, their leadership combines sociopathy and sophistry with fear.

FEAR. We all have had times in our lives when we feel relatively threatened, and we temporarily become more conservative in response. We tend to hunker down, become more withdrawn and defensive, and we begin accumulating what we think we need to stay safe and comfortable. The needs of others become more their problems because we feel that we have insufficient time or resources to address them.

The perception of the fear of impending harm, whether from physical damage (gangs, terrorists), privation (poverty, hunger, homelessness) or social harm (blackmail, public humiliation, arrest), need not be valid for it to dominate the psychology. If we are normally secure, just and generous by disposition, but are presently feeling threatened by say, impending bankruptcy or a new breast lump, we temporarily become more conservative and withdrawn, less trusting or open, less willing to share, more reactive and less contemplative, etc.

The liberal psychology is also the source of liberal ideology. Here, however, one feels less threatened and more connected. Connectivity manifests as empathy, tolerance and community. In combination with a well-developed moral sense, this is the source of the sense of justice. A sense of sufficiency - of having enough - and a sense of security are the basis for the open, nurturing, communal character of liberalism. I believe that it is just that simple. We trust and love, they fear and hoard. We are open and honest, they are secretive and duplicitous. We can become this way temporarily during the intervals when threats do actually arise. They are there permanently fearful despite no evident danger to them.

They can’t have enough door locks, surveillance, handguns, a big enough military, high enough border barrier or severe enough punishments to make them feel safe. Every other race, religion and ethnicity is a threat. They cannot have enough power (political or economic) to feel safe, so they always grasping at more. Sound familiar?

SOCIOPATHY. The neocon leadership does not feel a sense of right and wrong - just what it wants and don’t want, fears or regards as harmless, deems friend or foe, safe or unsafe, or useful or useless, etc. There is nothing that they won’t do because it is wrong. We perceive them as evil, but they perceive themselves as just being fair and sensible, not malefic.

Sociopaths don’t know that they have a deficiency the way a color blind person does. They assume that when other people are talking about conscience that they are just pretending. So sociopaths learn how to fake these values too, but don’t see themselves as fakes unless everybody is considered a fake.

CONT.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» TOM TOMORROW Posted by: LMNOP
Who's yer daddy?
Posted by: willymack on Jul 22, 2006 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Didya ever notice how the ones who crave positions of power the most are the ones least able to properly wield it? (kinda like the fools behind the wheel of 40' motor homes). Instead of leadership ability they have a certain manipulative cunning that they employ every time they screw up, and use it to twist facts and obfuscate issues. Don't forget the mile-long list of canned excuses. (it's all Clinton's fault). These maladroits will NEVER grow into their jobs, never. Their personal growth ended somewhere in pre- adolescense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

verifi...
Posted by: FFA on Jul 22, 2006 8:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The explanation for (Mr. Dean's amazement at) how today's conservatives are so cruel, prone to violence, authortarian, and despise any and all opposition, can be found in Michael Lind's book, "Made in Texas- George W. Bush and the Southern Takeover of American Politics." (search google or
amazon

This book is almost MIRACULOUS in how it can reveal the answers to so many of today's complex political realities in such a short book. It has been described by reviewers as "dry", but I found it a page-turner.

At risk of greatly oversimplifying Mr. Lind's book, it is about how the CLAN of Anglo-Scots-Americans (with a wee tad o' Irish/Celtic thrown in) (aka "WASPs") are first and foremost a clan or tribe, bent on wiping out all opposition. Like the Sioux, Japanese, Mongols, Huns, Spartans, ISRAELITES, or other such expansionist, conquering tribal empires, most of whom massacred opponents in great numbers, while allowing some minorities to exist as a subservient or serf class. In cases where minorities pose a threat (much less, heaven forbid, outnumber their oveseers), an EXTREMELY MILITARIZED and VIOLENT society results, as with the Spartans and their HELOT slaves. (which google) Not only militant and violent, but necessarily CRUEL. Without constant terror and intimidation and humiliation, the Greek-born Helots would march off those Spartan farms and flee to freedom in their homeland in an instant. In the case of Japan, society was ferociously cruel and hierarchical (eg the violent, often suicidal code of the Samurai), even though it was almost racially homogenous.

Long before I stumbled on Mr. Lind's book, I was doing reading in a similar subject area, regarding the fighting of the American Revolution. For a time, the Revolution was STALEMATED in the North and mid-Atlantic states. Gov. Jefferson's leadership of Virginia during this period was just one step above abysmal - the Tories (Loyalists/Monarchists) were so strong in Virginia that Jefferson empowered Virgian Major Thomas Lynch to run drum-head trials and hang those Loyalists suspected of aiding British forces - from which we get the term "Lynch mob." It is a testament to the power of PROPAGANDA that EVERY American knows what the term "Lynch Mob" means, but that 99% of us don't know where it came from - from orders of "when in defense of human liberties" Thomas Jefferson, himself, at that!
(Here is a brief mention of Major Lynch's drumhead trials, in this fiercely pro-British/Loyalist site, 2/3rds down
http://www.redcoat.me.uk/ )
This site, too, is an excellent demonstration of PROPAGANDA: the story of how Major Ferguson's Loyalist militia (actually wearing Green-coats instead of the Red-coats of the regular King's infantry) were "heavily outnumbered" sort of neglects to mention that at the Battle of King's Mountain, the Patriot Mountain Men were DESPERATELY trying to cut off Ferguson's men before they tied up with the VASTLY SUPERIOR Royal forces under General Cornwallis.
(Battle of Kings Mountain)
Like Major Lynch's drumhead trials, the Battle of King's Mountain was, until recently, an almost forgotten part of the American Revolutionary War. But it is now credited as a vital turning point, and led directly to the Patriot victories of Cowpens, Guilford Courthouse, and Yorktown. Guilford Courthouse is nominally considered to be a "Patriot defeat" because the Patriot militia and regulars (Continentals) were driven from the field. But to win the battle the British commander was forced to turn his canons on an area that was so thick with fighting, that he blasted his own troops, giving the British control of the field.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: verifi... Posted by: redcoat
American violence, drumhead trials, past to present (continued)
Posted by: FFA on Jul 22, 2006 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Immediately upon "winning" the battle, the British marched out of N orth Carolina (to Yorktown, where they were defeated by mostly French troops and the French fleet), never to return. WHICH IS TYPICAL of a guerilla or insurgent war: the insurgents can usually NOT match the massed forces of the imperial occupation, so they engage in constant hit-and-run battles and try to trade casualties (war of attrition). IF you can trade casualties on the scale of a big battle, that is almost always an insurgent victory.



While researching the often neglected battles of Kings Mountain, Guilford Couthouse, and Cowpens, I stumbled on the book, "Trail of the White Savages," which puts much of the information that Michael Lind would later write about in his book in one central location.



Lind was more interested in the religious divides of Texas than he was with the American Revolution and frontier fighters. But since the "White Savages" were such a common denominator in; the American Revolution, the settlement of the frontier, the expansion of slavery, and the rise of the plantation Confederate autocracy and entire Southern social system, well, Lind started to research this very powerful influence on Texas' powerful fundamentalist religious sects and cults. And, it turns out, fundamentalist, anti-intellectual, xenophobic, clannish cults are sort of an omnipresent feature of the Texas political landscape, and the gunfire and fires at David Koresh's Branch Davidian cult were far from the first such instances of fire and holocaust in that east Texas region - a region which statistically dominated in 20th century lynch-mob figures, and a region (East Texas) which not only dominates the whole state, but now dominates the nation, following a political ideology of violence, conformity, subjegation, and racial caste that is now attempting, via the US government, to rule the world. Hence Lind's subtitle, "The Southern Takeover of American Politics."



Sorry if I butchered the review of Lind's book, but if you don't understand the history of "the White Savages" going back to the use, by ruthless British post-medieval autocrats, of Scottish Protestants to "ethnically cleanse" Catholic Irish from English-dominated regions of that troubled country (Ireland), then you are grossly ignorant of one of the driving forces behind America's history to present.



And you will certainly be missing out on the fascinating history of our violent, savage, clannish dominant culture, and the fundamentalist, milinarian, apocalyptic cults (and even major religions) that spin off from that dominant clan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

re-
Posted by: FFA on Jul 22, 2006 8:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry for the doubly-long comments, above!

But if you want an explanation to how American politics is today dominated by an AUTHORTARIAN streak, well there it is... stretching clear back to the British conquests of Scotland and Ireland, if not back to the conquest of the "Promised Land."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mr. Dean, I have a simple question
Posted by: chabuka on Jul 22, 2006 9:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is it possible for "the people" the rightful government of this country...to impeach Congress..? Congress has failed to execute their sworn duty, is it impossible to demand impeachment of the entire body of these political "Kingmakers"? Do we have to vote them out? With the gerymandering that has been done is it even possible? Do the people have no recourse..?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The anatomy of a media smear campaign
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jul 22, 2006 9:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This has gotten to be a ritual - the smearing of an opponent of the imperial regime in the public press - and it always plays out the same way - major media firm decides to cover a story, and sends out its 'camera crew' to get as much dirt as possible on the intended target. This is then played up on all the talk shows, farmed out to newspapers - which is why, if you see the media trying desperately to smear someone, it's in your best interest to read everything the 'target' wrote. What's funny about all this is that these deliberate media smear campaigns often result in more people listening to what the 'target' has to say then otherwise would have.

Sometimes the media tries to simply ignore people, won't mention their names or discuss their work. That's generally because they are saying something that directly attacks US media coverage of events, pointing it out as biased, dishonest and serving ulterior motives - which is the truth that the media can't handle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Im scared
Posted by: Joe Ox on Jul 22, 2006 9:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The mean leaders are gonna make me go in timeout. He started it!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Im scared Posted by: sirossisofliver
» Actually Posted by: falternet
Reservations
Posted by: fifthworld on Jul 22, 2006 9:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"By then I had left public life for a very comfortable and private existence in the world of business" - what kind of business? I'd have to say, unless he were working for himself, it was likely a "pursuit without conscience" in itself. I have no problem with making money, but we all know the scene out there for former politicos....

Still, of course, I applaud the stand Dean has been taking these many years...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What reservations? Posted by: sirossisofliver
» Advanced reservations Posted by: fifthworld
John Dean : Dean Of The Nixon/Ford Rehabilitated
Posted by: mrtshw on Jul 22, 2006 9:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John,
I'm amazed you pretend to be so ignorant regarding the cretinous authoritarians, including yourself, who have in one fashion or another; completely dominated the GOP since the reign of the visionary and under-rated Dwight Eisenhower.
Surely you were exposed to the work of Adorna,et.al in the academic circles of the 60's following the worldwide interest in the 'authoritarian personality' phenomena generated by the hideous Nazi nightmare.
Though I proudly admit I'm just a " broken down old country boy from Pine Bluff, AR ", my reading of Paulinian B.S. e.g. and daresay even your personal experiences with toilet-scum like Charles Colson; convinces me to be highly suspicious of converts.
My suspicions suggest you and your nixonian cohorts got paranoid when you realized your fearless leader along with fellow Nazis Kissinger, Haldemann, and Erlichman had gone dangerously ' BONKERS ' and you then became enablers of the now obviously ego-maniacal opportunist Woodward to bring Nixon down. Don't get me wrong....God Knows I'm grateful for such small favors!
Imagine your disappointment.however, when the most scurrilous of the lot; Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ledeen, Wolfowitz,etc. were rewarded for their totally amoral viciousness and emerged as the powers behind the first of the designated morons ( Ford )who have represented the reptilian GOP during the last three decades.
Now. of course, the marginally ethical John Dean is alarmed ...again; because H.L. Mencken's prophecy regarding morons inhabiting the White House has been multiplied times four ( i.e. Ford, Reagan, Bush1 and capped off by the Grand Master of Imbecility, Bush2 ) and sadly,tragically in the example of Bush2, puerile stupidity is combined with Nixon's amoral,lethal psychosis.
Verily, praise God, my fellow Americans; a hero has arrived !
For merely the publisher's suggested retail price, comes John Dean to the rescue...on cue.....again. Could be worse, could be another nixonian paragon of virtue: Pat Buchannan or Pat in drag when he calls himself Bay Buchannan or Pat in a sexier drag persona when he becomes Monica Crowley.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This whole prostitution thing is amazing....
Posted by: albiegf13 on Jul 22, 2006 10:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This whole neo-con thing seems to be formed around some sort of synthesis of sexual inadequacy. There is anecdotal evidence that all the neo-conservatives are in fact SDM, driven by envy towards the happy go lucky and well endowed progressives. Does anyone else see something like this...? Or am I just nutty...?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More ways they violate the Constitution
Posted by: Reader11722 on Jul 22, 2006 11:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The US gov't violates the 1st Amendment by detaining peaceful demonstrators and pressuring Amazon (and Wikipedia) to drop the book "America Deceived" by E.A. Blayre III. The US gov't violates the 4th Amendment by illegal wire-taps on ALL PHONES. The US gov't violates the 8th Amendment by torturing people. The US gov't violates the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on a false-flag attack known as 9/11.
Final link (before Google Books is silenced):
America Deceived - Book

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bully-boy Bush, American Dictator
Posted by: HughEScott on Jul 22, 2006 12:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you believe as I do that George W. is the most dangerous president in U.S. history, then for God's sake visit the website -- www.FreedomCentralUSA.com -- and tell your friends while we still have freedom of speech.

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam veteran, ex-USAF pilot, lifelong registered Republican, Goldwater conservative, Ronald Reagan fan and RABID necon-hater with a family history of honorable military service going back to 1776.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bully-boy Bush, American Dictator sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
kineticutan
Posted by: kineticutan on Jul 22, 2006 12:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just finished reading John Dean's new book, and I'd definitely recommend it. (I might even buy it and read it again!)

The best thing about the book is its explanation of what has happened to conservatism in the past two or three decades, an explanation that helped me answer recurrent questions like, "How could Bush (or Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, or Krauthammer) possibly say something so patently false, and how could anyone listening possibly buy it?" Like many others, I've been befuddled by Bush's ability to hoodwink the American public--at least through November of 2004--despite all his administration's blunders, lies, and misdeeds.

Dean depicts most of Bush's die-hard supporters as "authoritarian" thinkers who cling desperately to a "strong leader" who claims to share their views; he says that authoritarians are very reluctant to abandon such a leader, no matter how abysmal the leader's record. I had suspected that a dynamic something like this was operating, but Dean's book does a good job of articulating that dynamic and then providing examples of real-life authoritarian personalities.

One objection I'd raise involves Dean's credibility as a "life-long" conservative. He assures us he's been a Goldwater conservative since the 1960s, but his descriptions of the various conservative mindsets often seem heavily judgmental and negative, as if conservatives run the gamut only from "Not totally awful" (Pat Buchanan, Phyllis Schlafly) to "Genuinely Despicable" (Tom DeLay, Dick Cheney, Gordon Liddy). In other words, besides Barry Goldwater himself, there doesn't seem to be a list of admired Republicans that self-professed conservative John Dean can summon up.

That and smaller quibbles aside, though, I think the book is well worth consulting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: kineticutan Posted by: druidlaw
» RE: kineticutan Posted by: kineticutan
Freud told us about "cathecting to power" a long time ago.
Posted by: Sojourner on Jul 22, 2006 2:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's a pattern in children that is nearly universal. The dependence of the child gets expressed as it quickly learns who it needs to manipulate for survival--whoever has the power.

There's nothing wrong or abnormal about that. Normal babies run the family from before their births. I have not seen a follow-up, but cameras that trace the vision of a child's caretakers showed that all eyes are always on the baby. Babies yank our chains.

What's abnormal is when the child continues to run the family without ever growing up to take responsibility for itself. The most familiar feature of perpetual childhood is blaming others for our problems; that is, seeing ourselves as victims when we actually have the opportunity to build our own lives. If there is a behavior pattern that predominates among our culture's many inadequacies, that is it.

Is retarded development a kind of sickness? I detest pop psychoanalysis, as it is usually offered without the necessary accompaniment of a program of treatment. Hence it's worse than epithets.

I rather think of it as a self-inflicted disability. (Of course, for some a lack of childhood care results in genuine victimhood.)

Paul Simon expressed it in the pop lyrics, "Slip out the back, Jack. Make a new plan, Stan, etc. Get yourself free."

Authoritarians live in a jungle filled with enemies and danger, instead of people like themselves, struggling as best they can, and frequently lending a hand to strangers. Our world is not half as dangerous as it is portrayed by politicians, Hollywood, novelists. "We have met the enemy, and he is us," Pogo told us. Period. That's all she wrote.

But do we love the drama of imagining ourselves the unfortunate victim? Does a bear relieve himself in the woods? Is the Pope Catholic? Etc?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CRUEL ,VIOLENT,AUTHORITARIAN NEO CONS...
Posted by: picket on Jul 22, 2006 2:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Man's inhumanity to man is an age old dilemma but trying to understand it in today's reality must bring us back to past history.
A previous post re Anglo-Scot-American Clans , bent on wiping out all opposition, was interesting because last week I happened on part 3 of BBC movie"Gunpowder, Treason and Plot". Considering our current bent on torture the cruelty I witnessed in the 1600's Mary Queen of Scots and her son James I of England, story should not have been a surprise.

We live in a society now where the masses are subservient to the "King", as in those days of old, it results in an extremely militarized, violent and cruel society. Many of our citizens have had no direct experience with this cruelty but they are quickly becoming the minority. King James I allowed some religious freedom, but apparently when more money was needed, fines, stealing property,and terrorizing the people began again.

An example, citizens who use a banned herb, in this country, often for severe pain, face SWAT teams, breaking into their homes while they sleep. People in wheelchairs, manacled to their beds, while the Government employees rumage through the box of oatmeal.

This week I read that 17 million people have been arrested in the USA, for this crime since 1965. It is big business and very CRUEL.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Over-thinking it
Posted by: quadgemini on Jul 22, 2006 3:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Very well said, Mr. Dean, but there's already a perfectly serviceable word to describe big-government conservative authoritarianism: FASCISM. 'Nuff said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Over-thinking it Posted by: fifthworld
» RE: Over-thinking it Posted by: saywhat?
An American Hero
Posted by: JAXC on Jul 22, 2006 4:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the days of Nixon and Watergate John Dean spoke truth when it mattered most. I give him my heart felt thanks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

insightful...
Posted by: zombi on Jul 22, 2006 5:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
yes you did, no I didn't, yes you did, no I didn't, yes you did, no I didn't, yes you did-i have proof, no I didn't-show it, yes you did-we don't have to, no I didn't-I have proof, yes you did-show it, no I didn't-I don't have to.....& in the end don't all these guys have a track record as liars? i mean really, are there still so many of us out there who actually buy that any of them have OUR best interests in mind? c'mon now...in the immortal words of Samuel L. Jackson..."Motherf&@#%r Please!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is All About Cycles Folks!
Posted by: davidt on Jul 22, 2006 5:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is pointless to discuss where this authortarian trend in the Republican Party came from. Every CLAN is capable of being seduced into this trap. The real question is HOW it happened, and this presents a colorful list of ingredients that have culminated in a revolting little stew.

OLD Nixon/Reaganophiles who hunger for the good ol' days of "we are America and we are ordained by God to kick ass anytime we feel justified to do so" HATED Kennedy, Carter, Bush I & Clinton as castrators of our tradition of incinerating recalcitrant nations who have dared to challenge us. Bush IS God.

RELIGIOIUS folks who are tired of the sleaze that passes for entertainment in the USA see a return to "old-fashioned values of God & country" as the only way to restore our unrivaled status as the leader of the free & Christian world. The Founding Fathers were adamant about establishing a nation who's building blocks were based on the SEPARATION of Church & State. In fact it was their greatest FEAR that organized religion would assume an undeserved influence in public policy. The terms "under God" were INSERTED into the Constitution sometime in the 19th (?) century--our country officially got started in 1776!!!!!

WHITE males who are moved to fits of blood-boiling when they hear about the Pill, Women's Lib, Gay Rights, Abortion Rights, Affirmative Action, Welfare, Gun Laws, Working Women, Immigration, Big Government, Inter-racial Marriage--Specifically White WOMEN + Black MEN--and Tax & Spend LIBERALS are seduced into voting for ANY GOP nutzoid who even hints about shutting down any of the above. However, the GOP controls the Supreme Court, the Media, the Senate, the House, the PRESIDENCY and STILL not ONE of their causes has been CORRECTED. They still insist that liberals are in control. preventing our War President from carrying out THEIR agenda. They will continue to cut their own throats and vote for Bush CLONES and so will their WIVES, who are on a short leash of home & babymaking.

FANS of war, the Korean, WWII, Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Bosnia who see the only solution to any problem is kicking ASS have gotten behind a documented coward who went AWOL from the TANG, was a political embarassment to his Dad in DC so he was whisked out to Alabama to work on a GOP campaign, instead of supporting two candidates who SERVED in Vietnam. Bush checked OFF on the possiblility of his being ordered into the conflict. This is NOT Bush-bashing this is reporting a fact. Clinton was an admitted draft-dodger, even so our media never missed an opportunity to smack him for it when he, as C-I-C addressed the troops. When have they done the same to our Warrior President even when he shows up with a wooden turkey for the troops?

POLITICAL hacks from the Nixon/Reagan years who have never worn a uniform but have now wasted over 3,000 American lives and untold Iraqi innocents in the pursuit of their unbridled obsession--a world dominated, legislated, parasitized by Grand Old Republicrats under the guise of the American Flag. They enjoy, thrive, expect, revel in a perpetual state of WAR. It is good for their political donor class and it fulfills their need for vicarious triumphalism. Kind of like the Romans watching the gladiators being torn to shreds and congratulating THEMSELVES on their own SEXUAL performance.

A lapdog media who has totally abandoned their role as political watchdogs for a fatter bottom line--besides, 3 out of 4 of the Big Media Whores make weapon systems so they are making a KILLING on the KILLING. War forever makes them toe the ONLY corporate responsibility--fatter dividends for their shareholders.

Pity any of us Pee-ONS who dare to ask where our money is being spent or why our Empire must be maintained, even if our Country shrivels down to an unrecognizable remnant of it's true self.

David T. Gray
Claremont, NH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It is All About cycles? Posted by: freedem
Can Bush spell Poetaitow?
Posted by: deo508 on Jul 23, 2006 6:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We should give the next candidates (all two of them) an MCAS test like the ones graduating seniors have to take. My guess is thjat Bush would have failed his and Kerry would STILL be writing his multi-faceted-obfuscational essay.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Can Bush spell Poetaitow? Posted by: Conservasaurus
Video
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Jul 23, 2006 7:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I received this from a firend.. has no political message, just a heart warming tribute to vets, regardless of their political views.. no need to comment to me, please..just enjoy it...
The web line it too long for Alternet to post it so i broke it up into two pieces..

You must combine the two links in your web browser

First part:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-

Second part:
2487638612433437293&q=Veterans

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Video Posted by: Paul D
» RE: Video Posted by: Conservasaurus
Shut up and eat your ketchup
Posted by: shangrilalad on Jul 23, 2006 9:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Despite the Main Stream Media’s propaganda campaign to justify Israel’s aggressive overkill, most American’s aren’t buying it.

It’s about time the citizens of this country took notice that the media is a big part of our problems, not the solution. The ESTABLISHMENT, which includes the brainwashing media for disinformation, isn’t concerned about average Americans. They are exclusively concerned with only their own ELITE self-interest.

What a shock!

Devotion to democratic ideals was never our plutocratic government’s strong suit.

Life is good for them, so shut up and eat your ketchup . . . Uh . . . vegetable that is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not Athoritarian-Totalitarian
Posted by: freedem on Jul 23, 2006 11:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In what must have been her last moment of lucidity, Phillis Shaftly (still a Democrat then) was hyping the NeoCon line that while Reagan was supporting outrageous thugs, Our thugs were better than "Their" (the Communists) thugs.

Her reasoning was thus

Our thugs were Athoritarians, they grabbed power and stole lots of money, but otherwise pretty much ignored the population. So as long as you did not oppose the looting of your country you were pretty much safe.

"Their" thugs on the other hand were not satisfied to just loot the country, they insisted on interfering with every aspect of every person's life, that not just the body and money but that every thought follow the perscribed path.

(All this happened before the internet, so I have no transcript, but is a rough gist of her points)

Even as she said it, I realized (perhaps conciously for the first time) that the positions she was arguing for, were deeply, at their heart, Totalitarian and not the Athoritarianism that was hallmark of the Banana Republican streak that was the "Military/Industrial Complex" Eisenhower warned about.

The stem cell ban is not Athoritarian but an insistance that everyone hold specific extream religious beliefs, the proliferation of Dr Phil/Judge Judy TV shows (with lectures on every aspect of behavior mostly set up to frame a right wing talking point). The threats to murder everyone from the NY Times, to Ob-Gyn's, to couples wishing to marry, all over narrow religious particulars, is not Athoritarian.

That "Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice committes" have yet to show up at your door, does not mean that such things are not part of the agenda, only that they have not yet implemented all of it.

It is easy to point at the worst state of Nazi, or even the Itialian Fascists and proudly proclaim that we are not as bad (yet) even while we use such bad acting by ALQueda to justify the next step along that path.

With the election fraud/court slap of Y2K the US stepped over the line from Democracy to Athoritarian. The Athoritarians are now the new Centrists with the Totalitarians like Mike Savage/Ann Coulter/Rev Moon to the right and small "d" democrats like John Dean / Barry Goldwater types on the left.

Folk who believe in Justice for All, much less Freedom, or even (gasp) a safe clean Enviornment are just wild Moonbats.

I guess Extremism in persuit of Reality, and general welfare is no Vice, and Moderation in the face of Totalitarianism , no virtue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

goes to show ya.
Posted by: douglashoyt on Jul 23, 2006 4:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dean was the brains behind Nixon and his wife ran a call girl ring for the DNC.

Makes perfect sense to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Excuse me--conservasaurus is the idiot
Posted by: Somedaysoon on Jul 23, 2006 6:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservasaurus is the idiot not the first writer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Somedaysoon may never come Posted by: Conservasaurus
Machiavello, Nietsche, Trotsky, and the neocons.
Posted by: maxloen on Jul 23, 2006 8:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Strauss and the American Right" Shadia Drury's book originally was a cool and brilliant analysis of the Strauss dogmas, restrained in its criticism. This new edition is preceded by an even more brilliant 57-page preface which emphatically exposes the radicalism Strauss transmitted to his students. They now surround President Bush. His catastrophic policies show that Strauss' near-fascist teachings have infected their advice to him. Absolutely a must read for everyone who wants to know the political doctrines behind our present disaster in Iraq. Sartre88

... Professor Shadia Drury of University of Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada is among the world's foremost scholars on the history, philosophy and politics of neo-conservatism. She is the author of the acclaimed books Leo Strauss and the American Right (1998) and The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (1988). Her recent article “Saving America: Leo Strauss and the neoconservatives” is very useful to understand the subject. There, Drury also offers an insight into the minds of the disciples of Strauss: “The trouble with the Straussians is that they are compulsive liars. But it is not altogether their fault. Strauss was very pre-occupied with secrecy because he was convinced that the truth is too harsh for any society to bear; and that the truth-bearers are likely to be persecuted by society - specially a liberal society - because liberal democracy is about as far as one can get from the truth as Strauss understood it.” Is it any difficult to understand why the neocons lied about WMDs to justify the invasion of Iraq?

Drury says, “Strauss's disciples … are afraid to speak the truth openly, lest they are persecuted by the vulgar many who do not wish to be ruled by them. This explains why they are eager to misrepresent the nature of Strauss's thought. They are afraid to reveal that Strauss was a critic of liberalism and democracy, lest he be regarded as an enemy of America. So, they wrap him in the American flag and pretend that he is a champion of liberal democracy for political reasons - their own quest for power. The result is that they run roughshod over truth as well as democracy.” Strauss, According to Drury, was “the enemy of liberty in general. It was for love of America that he wished to save her from her disastrous love affair with liberty."