Of Incompetence, Delusions Of Grandeur And Monomania

(Updated below)

Monomania (mon-o-ma-ni-a):
n.
1. Pathological obsession with one idea or subject.
2. Intent concentration on or exaggerated enthusiasm for a single subject or idea.

"The marketing of personality is changing from a cottage to a growth industry (...) The trend coincides with a current journalistic emphasis, even in the respectables, on what is interesting, against what is important. (The important may make a comeback in news interest but at the moment lacks either the urgency of danger or the stimulus of hope.) Recognizing this shift, politicians constantly conduct polls about their image and resist too much identity with substance (...) Everywhere the cult of personality prevails (...) There is less of journalistic prying now, even though gossip and gossip columning are still around. Gossip flourishes particularly in Washington, where political hypocrisy still lends savor to misbehavior (...) Celebrityhood lives by publicity and must be ready to be "interesting" on cue (...) But an interest in people won't go away: it is as old as Plutarch, and apt to survive as long as humans do."

The preceding constitutes a collage of choice statements from an August 1978 Time Magazine piece, "America's own cult of personality" (with emphasis mine).

Thirty-minus-one years later, things have only gotten worse in this respect - in both the U.S.A. and Canada.

Indeed, we need only to scan through the offerings of the MSM on any given day to arrive at this conclusion. The same applies with the current offerings in entertainment (Reality TV shows, anyone?). The prevailing under currents of praises, needs and cries for a Unitary Leader, of a strong and powerful leader who must be above the quaint laws of the country, as well as the MSM's fixations with all things manly, confident, comforting and securing in candidates (some examples highlighted and discussed here, here, here, here and here), are likewise glaring symptoms of the terrible disease that is ailing our democratic societies.

However, allow me to dwell specifically upon the subject of the cult of political personalities, especially with regards as to what it can do to incompetent, would-be authoritarian Leaders.

The cult of political personalities has ever constituted a given fact of life in totalitarian regimes - Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, et al., the list goes on and on. Truth be told, these (and those currently in power still) are nothing more than modernized transpositions of the worship, reverence and unwavering following of all those Pharaohs, Kings, Tyrants, Emperors and Monarchs found throughout Humanity's history. Absolute authoritarianism requires that the Leader be loved, admired and cherished without question - because He is powerful, He is wise, His word is law, His vision is pure, and His rule is all that is good, just and true.

And, of course, because He has a mandate from the Gods/the Heavens/God ... or is a God Himself.

(A mandate from God ... where have I heard this before? Ah, yes - now I remember well - but I digress)

It goes without saying that Cult Leaders are typically afflicted by delusions of grandeur, seeing themselves as all wise and all visionary, brooking no questions of their self-righteousness, let alone suffering any dissenting opinions (something that they just can't understand). They can do no wrong and are always right. They do not make mistakes - rather, it is always the fault of others if the Leader's plans and directives go astray. The apparels of government must conform to the Leader's will, vision and purity of ideology - facts of reality notwithstanding. Laws be damned or be brushed aside, if they stand in the way of the Leader's obsessive march into history. All that matters to the Leader is his (perceived) infallibility and the total loyalty of others to himself and his vision - as well as his ego's need to be praised and flattered. In short, the Leader views himself as the only one worthy and capable of governing all by himself.

And of course, there are enemies everywhere - at least in the Leader's paranoid mind - and hence wars must be waged while secrecy is de rigueur. Total awareness and control are a must as well. Above all, the Leader must use the politics of fear and ignorance in order to keep the flock subdued and adoringly supportive of His decisive grandeur - of the idea that He is the Law.

But as history has often shown, political personality cults can collapse very quickly upon the disgrace, ousting or death of the Cult Leader. History has also shown us how a besieged Cult Leader can behave like when his hold onto power becomes tenuous:

1) He enters into an acute paranoid-driven "bunker mentality";
2) He becomes monomaniacal and resolute in his deluded belief that he is right;
3) He holds court only with his most fervent and loyal supporters;
and 4) His demands for support and loyalty become increasingly petty and specious.

All of these numerous characteristics and behaviors mentioned above constitute glaring examples of all Eight Principles of Incompetence in action.

Unfortunately, history has also shown us that a "besieged" Cult Leader will often resort to the Sixth Principle whenever he feels cornered enough.

And the problem is that all the tools required to do so are already on hand, namely the Catastrophic Emergency Presidential Directive (“National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”), the Blocking of Property and Assets Presidential Directive, the Patriot Act, the Military Commission's Act (as well as the gutting of the Posse Comitatus Act), and the invocation of Martial Law - taking into account the policies of habeas corpus suspension, torture, indefinite detention and illegal eavesdropping already currently still being enacted.

Could there be indeed something in the works to trigger an authoritarian state? Will he, spurred on by his Regent, finally cross the Rubicon?

In 2000, an obvious incompetent was elected as President by the People (or lack thereof) - regardless of how he may have been "helped". Nevertheless, he was re-elected in 2004 - thanks again to the People.

Because of his incompetence, the seeming cult of personality that he has enjoyed (after 9-11) only fuled his deluded ego, therefter rendering him susceptible to increased delusions of grandeur - and once the majority of the People realized that he was indeed an emperor without clothes, the shock at being denied unfettered loyalty and adoration by a flock of unquestioning, submitted sheeps caused him to retreat further and further into monomania ... to the point whereby he now constitutes a frightening potential danger to the Republic.

Respect for authority and institutions is a requisite in democratic societies governed by the rule of Law. However, venerating said authority and institutions is anathema to the very basic principles of democracy.

What is holding the People back from ousting the Bush administration with impeachment? Is it misplaced blind respect for the office of the Presidency, or some lingerings from the Bush cult of personality? Or is it plain procrastination or, even worse, democratic cowardice? Or all of the above?

Only time, and history, will tell, I suppose ...

Update: 07/24/2007 - TheBHC at Anything They Say also blogged on the same subject, albeit coming at it from a different angle and yet arriving at essentially the same conclusion: "The country has grown weary of their yapping, and they know it, which spells only one possible recourse: an actual terrorist attack, not the phony, trumped-up dummy plots we have seen to date. If something like that does happen, it is going to have the smell of Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio all over it. Outrageous? Of course. But how could we be surprised that any of these war criminals, whose lies have already led to several thousand American dead and untold numbers of Iraqis, would resist what must surely appear to be their only solution to failing political climate". 'Nuff said ...

(Cross-posted from APOV)
__________________________