On Cindy Sheehan, Durkheim's "Disorganized Dust of Individuals," and

[H2O Man]

George Bush's Secondary Narcissism.......

Cindy Sheehan, Emile Durkheim's "Disorganized Dust of Individuals," and George Bush's Secondary Narcissism (Part One)


The arrest of Cindy Sheehan at the 2006 "State of the Union" address in Washington, DC has sparked a renewed interest in the tactics and activities of the nation's best known anti-war activist. The debate over Ms. Sheehan was found not only on the corporate media sources, including Fox, CNN, and MSNBC, but also on the internet.

Perhaps the most surprising responses were found on the Democratic Underground, a discussion forum that tends to appeal to progressive democrats and the far left. A small but very vocal minority attempted to discredit Ms. Sheehan's recent efforts, from this week's arrest to her recent meeting with a South American head of state. I read with amusement the "Cindy does NOT speak for me" threads -- as if Ms. Sheehan has ever claimed to speak for anyone but herself -- and with great interest a thread by Will Pitt, which expressed a sense of "awe" that the DU "community" would not be more supportive of Cindy's efforts.

There is really no need to respond to the asinine "anti-Cindy" comments, which may be proof that progressive democrats span the intelligence spectrum and include some disturbed individuals ...... but it might be worth looking closer at Cindy Sheehan in terms of a couple points raised by Mr. Pitt.

Most of the media coverage refers to Sheehan as an "anti-war activist." This is a result of her son Casey being killed in Iraq. Over the summer months, Cindy began a lonely and painful quest to meet with President Bush, to question him on the reasons the US invaded Iraq. Her journey quickly caught the media's attention, and the growing anti-war movement embraced Cindy Sheehan. More, she became the central point in the national discussion, causing those who were undecided and pro-war to question if the war was "just," and if it was worth the cost in human terms.

Since the summer months, the quick "shelf life" of news stories -- which is dramatically different today, with 24-hour-a-day news channels, than in the days of Vietnam -- resulted in Cindy's camping out near the President's Texas ranch to fade from public's consciousness. Thus, Sheehan began to move further into the camp of the progressive left, something that we need not place a value judgement upon, as the Sean Hannitys and DLCers tend to do. What Cindy Sheehan does is entirely her own business, and as an individual, I would agree with Mr. Pitt that democrats should support her ..... even if we do not embrace her every move.

Yet, because she is a symbol of the anti-war movement, and because she does have the potential to do more good for the entire nation, it might be worth our while to examine how she -- or other parents in a similar circumstance -- can approach the issue of the Bush/Cheney aggression in Iraq. I would suggest that we do so in the context of the "community" that Mr. Pitt mentioned, although I would advocate taking an expanded definition of that word.

In political/social campaigns, there is a simple rule that holds true, no matter if one is discussing an election or a policy debate. In each, there are three groups: {1} those who always support you/your idea; {2} those who always oppose you/your idea; and {3} the undecided. In a campaign, one does not invest much time or energy in appealing to group #1; none in appealing to group #2; and instead focus on appealing to group #3, because they are the ones who will determine the outcome of the contest.

Cindy Sheehan's greatest strength last summer was in appealing to group #3 in America: those who were beginning to question why the administration had brought us to war in Iraq .... because the WMD lies were being exposed, and the numbers of dead and injured soldiers was growing at a rate that could not be ignored.

Cindy's strengths in conveying her anti-war message was simply an direct. A mother's pain caused the nation to respond with compassion, which the administration seemed cold and detached from the suffering of a woman who everyone could view as their sister, daughter, niece, or neighbor.

She is not, as Mr. Pitt reminds us, a professional. She did not go to college to study the art of being a mother of a soldier killed in an immoral war. No sane person could think she enjoys her position. Thus, I do not intend for this to be taken as critical of her as an individual. I do think that it would be good for those around her, especially those who are more media-savvy, to discuss her options for advocating the anti-war message. Her choices are to attempt to appeal to group #1 to step up their anti-war activities (thus subjecting herself to the harsh critics on the right and even some on the left), or to re-focus her attention to doing what she did, intentionally or not, last summer -- force the people who are undecided about the war to decide what direction the country will move in.

In his classic book "The Sane Society," Erich Fromm starts with an assumption that individuals in any society can experience sanity or insanity. He expands this basic assumption about individual mental health for societies: if one believes that a group of sane individuals creates a "sane community," then it follows a group of insane individuals creates an insane community. Thus, a group of sane communities creates a sane society, and a group of insane communities creates an insane society.

In the 50 years since Fromm's book was published, the psychiatric community has made great advances in understanding mental health and mental illness. For the sake of this discussion, I am not concerned about the affective and schizophrenic disorders; instead, let's focus on personality and adjustment disorders.

Those familiar with Fromm know that he diagnosed much of the pathology of modern, western society as being the result of "being governed by the fear of the anonymous authority of conformity .... We have ... no convictions of our own, almost no individuality, almost no sense of self." (The Sane Society; page 96)

Fromm also relied heavily upon the works of pioneer sociologist Emile Durkheim, including his description of anomie, a state where societies' standards of conduct and belief are either weak or lacking, and where individuals are isolated, anxious, and disoriented. Fromm notes that Durkheim, while "neither a political nor a religious radical," makes "one of the most penetrating diagnoses of the capitalist culture .... that in modern industrial society the individual and the group have ceased to function satisfactorily ..." As the social structure breaks down, the individuals follow "a restless movement, a planless self-development, an aim of being which has no criterion of value .... (until that society becomes, in Durkheims's classic description) 'a disorganized dust of individuals'." (The Sane Society; page 191)

Fromm also considers the works of Lewis Munford ("The Conduct of Life") and A.R. Heron ("Why Men Work") on this subject. He looks beyond the mere killing of the body as the definition of suicide. There is a death of the spirit in those "who resign themselves to a life devoid of thinking, ambition, pride, and personal achievement ..... to the death of attributes which are distinctive elements of human life." Finally, this "emptiness is perhaps what made 'Death of a Salesman' so poignant to the metropolitan American audience that witnesses it." (The Sane Society; page 196)

Cindy Sheehan's strength was her refusal to allow her son's death to be meaningless. The emptiness in her life, caused by Casey's death in a meaningless war, became the foundation for her search for meaning .... and that is without question what made her journey so poignant to the American audience that witnessed it.

Cindy became a living, breathing, feeling example of what Fromm defined as the passions of life. Going beyond the obvious and indisputable biological needs that humans share with other animals -- thirst, hunger, and sleep -- and the central need of the Freudian interpretation -- sex -- Fromm focused on two "passions": the need for love, and the need to "attempt to answer the problem of human existence." (The Sane Society; page 35)

An individual's need for love begins at very least by birth, and continues throughout life. Initially, the infant is nurtured by the mother's love, then the family, the extended family/clan (Mr. Pitt's community), and potentially by a sane society.

Fromm agreed with Harry Stack Sullivan (the pioneer American psychiatrist, largely removed from his deserved position in our society because he was gay), that children tend to gain the ability to love others in a mature capacity at about the age of 8 or 9. Until then, children tend to love others in terms of their own needs, rather than as distinct individuals with needs of their own. This is "primary narcissism," which Fromm and Sullivan recognized as a necessary part of healthy human development.

An unhealthy phenomenon occures when this narcissism is carried on to later life. It happens when a child fails to learn that other people's feelings, needs, and indeed lives are just as important to them, as the child's to him/herself. Fromm refers to this as "secondary narcissism," and believes it is at the root of most individual and societal pathology. (The Sane Society; page 40) I would suggest that we are beginning to see the stark contrasts in human potential that the Cindy Sheehan -- George Bush equation brought into focus for America.

Indeed, Fromm noted that the need to comprehend the meaning of life was at the root of the arts and religions of various societies. Again, he recognizes both healthy and unhealthy potentials: individuals and societies can be either creative or destructive in their arts and religions. In essence a person with a healthy ability to love (Cindy) will tend to be creative and productive; while the person who lacks the capacity for healthy love (Bush's secondary narcissism) will tend to be destructive. From notes that destructiveness "is only an alternative to creativeness ... (and that) both answer to the same need for transcendence...." (The Sane Society; pages 40 & 42)

I would suggest that we could apply the "Cindy versus George" equation to one of the more significant factors in Fromm's view on a societies' potential for sanity, which is in his comparison of matriarchal and patriarchal cultures. It is important to keep in mind that each have positive and negative potentials; we should not ask people to believe that these are simple issues. They are indeed complex, but important for us to answer as individuals and as societies.

Fromm compares the aspects of matriarchal and patriarchal societies by examining parents' relationships with their children. Mothers tend to love all of their children equally. Although one child may have a particular talent, and another may suffer from a disabling weakness, the mother tends to love them both "with the same right to love and care." Fromm notes that this aspect of matriarchal society results in individuals with "a sense of affirmation for life, and (a) freedom and equality that pervades the matriarchal society." The negative aspects are "being bound to nature, to blood and soil, ... (and thus) blocked from developing...individuality and ... reason." (The Sane Society; page 48)

Fathers tend to be different. Fromm notes that fathers tend to favor the son that best lives up to his expectations. This results in a competition among siblings for the father's love. Fromm believed the positive aspects of patriarchal society were "reason, discipline, conscience, and individualism," while the negative potentials were "hierachy, oppression, inequality, (and) submission." (The Sane Society; page 50)

Cindy Sheehan has the potential to bring these issues to the national discussion on the Iraqi war, as well as to the other questions that we as a society must discuss and debate in 2006. While the responsibility clearly does not belong to her, alone --- and it is foolish for her critics to believe that it somehow does -- it is true that she is in a unique position to force the debate. I would hope the people around her, especially those with more experience in the arts of public debate, would help her bring her natural strengths foreward

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. wow-great read

Thanks for the analysis. I was especially taken with the thought that Cindy really represents life in that she refuses to allow the death of her son Casey to be meaningless. These are, indeed, a time of death and disintegration, but we can live our lives with meaning, and with life-if we so choose.

[H2O Man]

2. Thank you.

I think Cindy is a wonderful example of someone trying to find the meaning of life. It is important to try to do things that are positive and living, not because of the negative and painful, but in spite of them.

[bloom]

3. The Sane society

that sounds like a good book to read.

"Those familiar with Fromm know that he diagnosed much of the pathology of modern, western society..." We have ... no convictions of our own, almost no individuality, almost no sense of self."

It seems that nowadays - those of us internet political types - have plenty of convictions. I'm not sure if it adds much to "individuality" or "sense of self". People can find and reinforce their ideas by finding a group that more or less shares those ideas. Though probably the vast majority are more like what Fromm referred to - content to find groups that don't have "convictions" to speak of - other than what sports team will win or what shoes are the most stylish.


I think this is interesting:

"Indeed, Fromm noted that the need to comprehend the meaning of life was at the root of the arts and religions of various societies. Again, he recognizes both healthy and unhealthy potentials: individuals and societies can be either creative or destructive in their arts and religions."

It reminds me of my brother-in-law who said that the soldiers were sacrificing themselves so that artists could create art. I guess he had to think of the war as being creative some how. Needed some way to spin it so that it seemed positive. I think people could make art just fine without their war/invasion.


Lots of interesting points there...

As far as male/female brains (from which concepts of matriarchy/patriarchy can be inferred) - you may be interested in:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,12983,937443,00.html

[H2O Man]

6. Interesting site .....

thanks for providing the link.

Warfare as art is an interesting concept. I would think the Lakota idea of counting coup would rank as the most inspirational, in that sense.

[Me.]

4. Wonnerful H.

Truly. You bring up several interesting points. Over the last several years the most asked question (surely) has been, why can't they see? Why has not the nation risen up, enraged at B***co governance. Well your insanity point is, I believe, the answer. Do the inmates know they are insane and would they protest their condition? The insanity of the term collateral damage is just the beginning point of the national asylum.

Your bit about matriarchal societies also caught my eye. I read a piece by Mark Morford yesterday that said Wicca is the fastest growing religion in this country while the Christian based ones are losing believers at a rate of 1% a year. This says to me that we may heading in a matriarchal direction, a return to the earth so to speak.

As for the "you do not speak for me" people, I think there 2 camps there. There are those concerned about the message and wanting it pristine. The media and pugs have done a damned good job in the last several years in dismissing progressives as (to quote Mathews) "left wing whack jobs". I believe their concern is real and that what they may be thinking of is the need to persuade group #3. The other camp may be working from an agenda that is not progressively generated.

[bloom]

17. The DLC (on their site) also refers to the "loony left"

"Contrary to the conspiracy theories of Michael Moore and the loony left, Bush did not invent our enemies."

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252914&kaid=127&subid=173

5. there are many ideas in your essay

a lot to chew on. It is sad to think of the "dust of individuals". Also what comes to mind with comparing Sheehan and Bush is that she is the true warrior, a peace warrior, and he is a sham.

I read a poem by Rumi recently on masculinity, it is different from your descriptions but also similar.


The Core of Masculinity
by Rumi

The core of masculinity does not derive from being male,
nor friendliness from those who console.
Your old grandmother says, "Maybe you shouldn't go to school.
You look a little pale."

Run when you hear that.
A father’s stern slaps are better.

Your bodily soul wants comforting.
The severe father wants spiritual clarity.

He scolds but eventually leads you into the open.

Pray for a tough instructor to hear and act and stay within you.

We have been busy accumulating solace.
Make us afraid of how we were.

[Hissyspit]

7. K&R, Water Man. Very interesting. n/t

[nashville_brook]

8. in cindy's message -- how she wept at the police station...

"That's when the enormity of my loss hit me. I have lost my son. I have lost my First Amendment rights. I have lost the country that I love. Where did America go? I started crying in pain."

it's like a greek tragedy where a mother's pain portends the downfall of the empire.

[Pithy Cherub]

9. What an intelligent, insightful and wonderfully researched mirror

on the individual and the continuous search for meaning. Cindy is finding meaning in her life by flinging herself into the political intersection between a mother's unending sorrow, American hegemony, partisan interpretations and hope. Hope is Cindy's biggest offering because it affirms that one lonely person in their quest for meaning can change the world for the better and make it responsive to our communal needs.

Just wonderful H20 man, just wonderful!

[H2O Man]

11. One of my favorite quotes

comes from when Robert kennedy was on his journey, after the murder of his brother. During the 1968 primary, while on a late March bus ride, Robert scribbled the following to his friend Allard K. Lowenstein:

"For Al, who knew the lesson of Emerson and taught it to the rest of us: ...'that if a single man plant himself on his convictions and there abide, the huge world will come round to him'."

Or her.

[Me.]

10. A Lot To Think About Here

"who resign themselves to a life devoid of thinking, ambition, pride, and personal achievement ..... to the death of attributes which are distinctive elements of human life." Finally, this "emptiness is perhaps what made 'Death of a Salesman' so poignant to the metropolitan American audience that witnesses it."

What is the antidote?

[nashville_brook]

12. the antidote is -- live meaningfully, affirmatively

willy loman is tragic b/c he turned away life-affirmation (his family) in favor of illusary social-affirmation.

connection vs anomie

[hfojvt]

21. the odd thing about that

is that the average Republican has quite a bit of pride, ambition, and desire for personal achievement (in a power and money game)

I contemplate a few years ago that I was better off giving up, as I seemed to find even relatively basic goals like getting a job and getting married, or even getting a date to be frustratingly impossible. It is better to accept the things you cannot change, and at 42 I am more aware of what those things are. I seem to still have more than a fair share of pride, and the thinking is subject to debate.

[H2O Man]

27. One of the things

that I have said numerous times on DU is that it is important for people to "wake up." I suppose that can be taken to mean many things. I'll try to give one example, reaching back more than 40 years ago, from our good friend Malcolm X. And he was our good friend.

There was an article in the February 25, 1965 edition of the Village Voice, where Marlene Nadle interviewed Brother Malcolm shortly before his death. She asked him about his plans for organizing people. Now remember, Malcolm was a prophet to people in America who, according to the power structure, did not deserve a prophet. So I think we should listen closely to his message:

MX:"The only person who can organize the man in the street is the one who is unacceptable to the white community. They don't trust the other kind. ..... The greatest mistake of the movement has been trying to organize a sleeping people around specific goals. You have to wake people up first, then you'll get action."

MN: "Wake them up to their exploitation?"

MX: "No,to their humanity, to their own worth, to their heritage."

[H2O Man]

47. Another thing

that is important was expressed by Onondaga Faith Keeper Oren Lyons at the end of an interview he did with Bill Moyers years ago. It played on PBS a few times, around the time that Moyers wonderful series with Joseph Campbell were popular.

At the end of the interview, Oren explains "that we shouldn't take ourselves so seriously."

"Even a chief?," Moyers asks.

"Especially a chief, I guess," Oren answered. "You're just a human being, really. And you happen to take on a responsibility that anybody else could have taken on if he wanted to do it and took the commitment to do it. And you begin to see the serious side of things quite a bit but, nevertheless, there's a life to be lived. I told you the instruction was to give thanks. There was a second instruction that I didn't mention. That was to enjoy life. We're instructed to enjoy life."

[Me.]

50. Gratitude Is Another

Appreciating and thankful what we all have rather than always lusting after more. Greed has a tendency to consume this country to the point that it has become an illness that has sickened many of us into inhumanity.

[H2O Man]

51. Yes.

In fact, Oren says just that (even in that brief quote) .... The first instruction is to give thanks, the second is to enjoy life.

[Me.]

49. Humanity Is One Of The Answers

Ours, yours, theirs. MX was and is right. I think that is why Katrina was so powerful, it faced people with the humanity of those who were helpless and they didn't like what they didn't see. Help coming for them.

It also begs the question, if all the people in this country were faced with the humanity of those in Iraq, as pictured in the film linked here:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x315905, would they change their minds? Would the super-imposed visuals of Saddam Hussein and OBL dissapear to be replaced by remorse for what we allowed to be done in the name of this nation?

[H2O Man]

52. If the American public

were fully aware of what the US is doing in Iraq, and the suffering being caused to innocent human beings, the war would be stopped today. At the trial of the St. Patrick's Four in Binghamton, NY, and then again at their recent sentencing, there was a film shown (not in court, of course, but by supporters near-by) that showed the truth about Iraq.

[Me.]

53. Aside From The Pain & Loss Of Life

The pictures of a bombed out Bagdad is disgraceful. The karmic implications for this country are terrifying.

[Fovea]

13. Durkheim and Fromm

Two greats, Durkheim sits on my shelf next to William Whyte's 'The Organization Man'...

Have you read any Fred Riggs?
He has a lot to say about 'developing'
nations that seems to apply to us now.

http://webdata.soc.hawaii.edu/fredr/welcome.htm

[H2O Man]

14. Fred Riggs ....

No, I have not read any Fred Riggs. Thank you for the link. I'm curious what parts in particular you would recommend?

[Fovea]

33. Start here with my old professor's commentary

on Fred.

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~fredr/gamtxt.htm

Much of Rigg's work is in paper format, which is how Bob Gamer fed it to me...

But this is a nice start at an overview.

In particular, consider the new American Paradigm in light of this idea...
<snip>
Riggs understood that organisms transform into machines only in literature and films. For a model that could better explain transition he turned to the diffraction of fused light in a prism 15.

In fused societies formal power over markets often lies in the same hands as formal political power, in ruling groups closely tied to society. In diffracted societies, markets have great independence from political control. Inside the prism, however, markets have begun to achieve independence but are still held back by political elites that cannot entirely control them. Business people must buy protection from those with power.

The result is negative development. A large share of the total gross national product is used for reciprocal gifts among a narrow elite. More money can flow, but it will not spread widely because it is being used for tribute rather than investment.

</snip>

Bush/Cheney/Lay/et al have driven us back from a diffracted society/economy to a prismatic one, and are seeking a fused theo/military/autocratic economic system, IMO.

On edit: Much of what I studied was collected into this book...
Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society (1964) Fred W. Riggs.

[Gronk Groks]

15. Fromm is both correct and incorrect...

(snip)
"Fromm diagnosed much of the pathology of modern, western society as being the result of "being governed by the fear of the anonymous authority of conformity .... We have ... no convictions of our own, almost no individuality, almost no sense of self." (The Sane Society; page 96)"

While Fromm is probably right about "society"; I must disagree with his interpretation of the "Individual". Individuals make their own decisions for themselves, while society is simply the mean aggregate of their decisions.

The internet has empowered the individuals to make their own decisions; this was not the case in Fromm's time period. When sufficient individuals band together they can create a new society. This can be radically different from the prevailing parent society; e.g. "Democratic Underground".

Thinking individuals that can now band together in sufficient quantities to change the parent society. While it is true that societies cannot be changed by a lone individual (even shrub has to have supporters) it is wrong to believe the individual cannot affect society. A Fine example here at DU would be someone like Plaid Adder. Even though she no longer post a regular column, her opinion is highly valued on any thread.

Of course the basic problem is that many American citizens fit Fromm's observations...
...but not all; not yet...
...because of that, there is still hope.

[Me.]

16. "Of course the basic problem is that many Americans

fit Fromm's observations"

One of the hopes is that more people begin thinking for themselves.

[Gronk Groks]

23. Kool-Aid drinkers = 36%.

They have their blinders on and will not (Can not???) see that shrub is turning this country into a fascist police state. The vast majority see but do not act.

Halliburton is building "detention centers" inside the U.S. The (un)Patriot Act is going to authorize a uniformed Secret Service division (anyone say SS?) and criminalize "un-American" dissent.

If the American public doesn't start thinking soon, the Gulags will intimidate them into fear of any thoughts at all.

[Fovea]

34. "while society is simply the mean aggregate of their decisions"

No, that is not right, IMO.

That is like taking the red-blue dichotomy and saying that the American political philosophy is purple.

This view of society is far too simple and mechanistic for my taste. It does not take into effect the disproportionately strong influence of elites and the influence of diffraction in modern developed(gods i hate that term) systems.

[ninkasi]

18. That was great...

thanks for posting. Cindy is a woman of enormous courage, and her actions show how deeply she loved her son. That's why I don't understand why anybody would think that she's against the troops...she's trying her best to bring them home. She doesn't want any other mother to feel her pain.

Bush is incapable of empathy, and because of his overwhelming ego, and his megalomania, is the very last person who should be trusted with as much power as he has. He is intent in grabbing even more, too, and this scares me much more than thoughts of any terrorist could.

[savemefromdumbya]

19. because of Cindy some people began to question bush's handling of Iraq

I know many who hadn't thought about the consequences of having their son or daughter sent to war.

[H2O Man]

20. Very true .....

I think her greatest strength was in getting people who were sitting on the fence, so to speak, to give more thought to the realities of the Bush-Cheney war in Iraq. That includes many of the journalists who covered the war. She has a power -- a great power -- that can continue to be a positive force in confronting the lies and evil-doing of the administration.

[savemefromdumbya]

22. It was the image of a woman crying for her son.....

He has a lot of power and bush didn't know how to react - he was cornered. It was most effective when she camped outside his ranch!

[H2O Man]

25. I think her face

is more powerful than any t-shirt. It would have been wonderful to have had the cameras focus on her beautiful face, with the pain, the dignity, and the compassion, during the State of the Union.

[zippy890]

40. I do to

Cindy's face speaks volumes, 'the pain, the dignity and the compassion' she posseses is extraordinary.

Thank you for a wonderful essay. It would be great if Cindy could read this.

[Fovea]

35. Cindy also allowed people to use a different frame

than the Clect approved newspeak.

I suspect that a lot of people could not find the handle for their discomfort in the international law and multilateral frames, but saw the raw emotion of Cindy Sheehan as a more authentic reason for their discontent.

[Me.]

24. This Tole Cartoon Makes Your Point

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x307048

[toddaa]

26. H20Man strikes again

Consistently the best posts on DU.

[leftchick]

28. This has to be one of your best essays H2O Man...

At least one of the best I have read and I am sure I have not read them all. I think we all should let Cindy be Cindy and appreciate what she has done for the left/anti-war movement. She has pushed it years ahead of where it was in just a few weeks.

We also all need to keep in mind as well that it is very apparent the BFEE is scared to death of her. All of their actions toward her reflect it and that speaks volumes about the affect she has.

[H2O Man]

29. It might be nice

if more people shouldered more of the weight of the anti-war movement. I think that we need to consider a variety of options, from public education to nonviolent demonstrations.

I have given and mailed copies of Symbolman's wonderful documentary "Rove's War" to high school and college students from NYS to the west coast. I wish that he would do a shorter documentary on Cindy's Texas demonstration that could be distributed to that same age group. That might sound like a small thing, but it will be through the "small" actions of thousands (perhaps millions) of everyday American citizens, at the grass-roots level, that real change will be accomplished.

[ruggerson]

30. Hey H2O Man

Very interesting, thoughtful post which on first read requires more time to digest.

Since you chose to address my words in particular, I will simply repost what I wrote to another thread, as it has some bearing on your words, which to my mind, in part, overly simplified and distorted SOME of the legitimate reaction to Ms. Sheehan:

I read with amusement the "Cindy does NOT speak for me" threads -- as if Ms. Sheehan has ever claimed to speak for anyone but herself --

-----------------------------------------

Cindy Sheehan herself has chosen to continue her courageous leap into the public eye. Therefore what she does and says is magnified, distorted, and sometimes accurately represented in the media. Our side (progressives) does not benefit from knee jerk, hostile defense of the various and sundry positions on extraneous issues that she randomly offers the press, any more than it benefits from disparaging her mission or her humanity.

I would proffer the usual disclaimer that I think she performed an invaluable service as a symbolic embodiment of, and hopeful antidote to, what George W Bush has done to this country, but having to repeat that in every post to avoid offending her more aggressive acolytes becomes trite and tiring.

No, she does not speak for me, and it is self evident to anyone with a brainstem (or anyone not toting personal baggage) that by saying that, I do not mean that she ever claimed to speak for anyone but herself. What it means is that I disagree with her on a whole host of remarks she has made about a wide range of issues, most of which have nothing to do with Iraq or the loss of her son. I disagree with some of the tactical decisions she has made in her ongoing journey in front of the relentless, non blinking public eye. And, yes, it is necessary for us to speak up, when and if we disagree with her AND when we agree with her, as the press has turned her into one of the symbols for the anti war movement, a conduit, a vessel for millions, and as we know, the press likes to build up, canonize and then swiftly caricature, simplify, mock and finally destroy the icons they create. And, most importantly, in so doing, they attempt to destroy the movements the symbols represent.

When all is said and done, she is just a mother who lost her child in a useless war. A mother who spoke truth to power to an unjust, ignorant, vicious leader. That is the mission she chose for herself and it is a powerful and utterly human one.


I agree with you, H2O Man, that Cindy's power lies in her humanity and her painful search for meaning from her son's tragic death. But nothing in this world occurs in a vacuum and her words and actions, magnified through the lens of the public eye, affect, perhaps unintentionally at times, perhaps both positively and negatively, the efforts of those who are trying to unseat the bloody regime that has held us captive for six years.

The media in this country is perverse and unpredictable and the course it takes, often a random series of events compounding upon one another is, unfortunately, often just as powerful a force for the bad as one individual attempting to find meaning in the world is for the good.

Perhaps Cindy has the potential to highlight and symbolize the rational alternative to the unhealthy narcissistic, disconnected society that Bush propogates. One hopes if she can't be a symbol of that antidote, she can at least be a conduit for partial American self- discovery, knowing or not, witless or self aware.

Thanks for your very thought provoking post.

[H2O Man]

43. If DU is,

as Mr. Pitt has suggested, a "community," then I would suggest that: {1} there is relatively little to gain by focusing on if she "speaks for" anyone but herself; {2} there are potential advantages accrued from recognizing that she "speaks as" a representative of the publicly identified anti-war movement (thus allowing serious discussion of the concerns you mention, which I do appreciate); and {3} from the stance of an anti-war community, we should be focused on who we -- including she -- "speaks to" .... because that is the avenue that leads to progress.

It is impossible to view a picture while standing inside the frame. I suspect that is true in this case: Cindy surely believed that her t-shirt would send an important message. From outside the frame, it is clear that her face in the audience would have sent the clearer message.

A few of the less insightful on another discussion forum have scolded me for suggesting that anyone should advise her on choices of tactics. This is foolish. Not to compare the loss in two cases, I will mention how, in 1998, a racist hate gang attacked my nephew because they didn't like brown people. My nephew was getting regional media attention for his basketball and leadership skills, including holding a kid from NYC who was featured in a 14-page Sports Illustrated article to 2 points. A gang of 15 men savagely attacked my nephew, and left him for dead in a field being used for a parking lot.

My brother-in-law and sister wanted to let the public know about the dangers posed by this type of hatred. This included their concerns about the gang leader getting a $50 fine for having an open beer at the start of the assault,but no penalty for his punching and kicking my unconscious nephew more than a dozen times, leaving him deaf in one ear, and with serious physical injuries (he was not able to take advantage of the scholarships he worked so hard for). Again, I appreciate the difference between Casey dying, and my nephew surviving. But my point is that even my nephew's parents, both educated and intelligent, well-spoken people, recognized the benefits of having people with experience dealing with the media advising them. One of my close friends, a retired NYC police officer who was the head of a local NAACP chapter, and I filled that role. Our goal wasn't to speak for others, but rather to speak as members of the community, and to speak to the larger society.

[Clara T]

31. Fromm concluded that modern Western society was indeed insane

The danger of the future is that men may become robots. True enough, robots do not rebel. But given man’s nature, robots cannot live and remain sane, they become “Golems,” they will destroy their world and themselves because they cannot stand any longer the boredom of a meaningless life.

ERICH FROMM, The Sane Society

MECHANISMS OF ESCAPE FROM FREEDOM
1 Authoritarianism. Submission or domination. In masochistic form, we allow others to dominate us. In sadistic form, we try to dominate and control the behavior of others. A common feature of authoritarianism is the belief that one's life is determined by forces outside oneself, one's interests, or one's wishes, and the only way to be happy is to submit to those forces. The authoritarian submits to those who are higher up and steps on those who are below.
2 Destructiveness. "The destruction of the world is the last, almost desperate attempts to save myself from being crushed by it." Destructiveness is often rationalized as love, duty, conscience, or patriotism.
3 Automaton Conformity. . People cease to be themselves and adopt the type of personality proffered by their culture. Fromm notes a similarity between his mechanisms of escape and Horney's neurotic trends, but her emphasis was on anxiety and his was on isolation.

http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/frommnotes.html

We are facing destruction of our world and humanity. For the first time in history, humanity's survival depends on a radical change of th3e human heart. This is possible only insofar as "drastic economic and social changes occur that give the human heart the chance for change and tghe vision to achieve it."Why this passivity?
• The selfishness our present system generates "makes leaders value personal success more highly than social responsibility." We are no longer shocked when political leaders and business executives make decisions that benefit them "but at the same time are harmful and dangerous to the community. Indeed, if selfishness is one of the pillars of contemporary practical ethics, why should they act otherwise?"
• "At the same time, the general public is also so selfishly concerned with their private affairs that they pay little attention to all that transcends the personal realm."
• The changes that will be require for our survival are drastic, and it is uncomfortable to contemplate such a major change.
• "Little effort has been made to study the feasibility of entirely new social models and experiment with them."

http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/frommnotes.html

What can one say of the prospect of the future in a world where increasing injury to the planet is a symptom of human psychopathology? Is not the situation far worse than one of rational choices in an economic system or the equilibration of competing vested interests?

What can be of interest in this particular example- Cindy Sheehan- is to consider not only those who claim to be against the war but disparage or disagree with her tactics, they are to my mind experiencing great cognitive dissonance and their position is abhorrent, but also consider those, like myself, who are in total agreement with her tactics yet do not risk nearly what she does in light of the obvious catastrophes/injustices/criminal acts that surround us each day. I would suggest that it is we who are not doing as much, and in fact should be going beyond what Cindy has done/is doing, who are pathologically insane.

It is of course a lesson we know all too well from Milgrams 37. And still we watch complacently, and sending letters-petitions etc. is ultimately pretty complacent, as the world goes down the toilet.

[hfojvt]

36. is the world going down the toilet

just because of the war, or is western society insane for deeper reasons? Were we just as insane in October of 2000? Would we be just as insane if Gore had been sworn in on Jan 20,2001?

What makes the people around me robots? Because they watch alot of TV or drink alot of beer? What would make life less meaningless and/or boring?

You wrote: "What can be of interest in this particular example- Cindy Sheehan- is to consider not only those who claim to be against the war but disparage or disagree with her tactics, they are to my mind experiencing great cognitive dissonance and their position is abhorrent"

I see neither cognitive dissonance nor abhorrence. It is an evaluation of tactics. Being in the anti-war crowd does not mean that everything anybody else in the anti-war crowd does is going to be seen as helping the cause. Leaving Cindy out of it, I said the same type of thing as the beginning. In Feb. 2003 I went to an anti-war march in Lawrence, Kansas. Many of the signs said things like "War begins with a Dubya" and "a village in Texas is missing its idiot". Which to me, hurt the cause. It turned into a rally that said "we hate Bush" instead of a rally that would say "we hate war". The 2nd message is more to the point and more inclusive, especially in a red state.

[H2O Man]

39. Fromm borrows Adlai Stevenson's

quote that "we are not in danger of becoming slaves anymore, but of becoming robots." More, he saw capitalism and communism, both based upon an industrial foundation, as being limited to where the "goal is ever-increasing economic efficiency and ... everybody is a cog in the machine." Thus, he concluded that "our only alternative to the danger of robotism is humanistic communitarianism."

You raise interesting points.

[SmileMaker]

32. The cons have demonized passion

This is a brilliant piece. Thanks! I look forward to reading some of the discussion in this thread when I have more time, but I wanted to comment and recommend first.

I realized a long time ago that the cons demonized passion. Passion has become synonymous with being crazy or perverted. It SHOULD be morally impossible to demonize Cindy for anything she's done.

I met her a few months back at a lecture by Chris Hedges. He read excerpts from "War is a Force that gives us Meaning" - listening was an awesome exprience because he's such a good writer. Cindy wept as she listened to his vivid descriptions of war in Bosnia. Just like war in Iraq and everywhere.

Cindy is striking - not only for her authenticity, but because of her height. I even thought she'd make a good President! She's a powerful presence for many reasons and love is the most important one. Through her love for Casey, she carries his spirit with her. She really feels like a part of him is with her, cheering her on.

[EFerrari]

37. Interesting. A question and a comment.

Why "secondary" narcissism?

And, in response to Fromm in this passage:

"Again, he recognizes both healthy and unhealthy potentials: individuals and societies can be either creative or destructive in their arts and religions. In essence a person with a healthy ability to love (Cindy) will tend to be creative and productive; while the person who lacks the capacity for healthy love (Bush's secondary narcissism) will tend to be destructive. From notes that destructiveness "is only an alternative to creativeness ... (and that) both answer to the same need for transcendence...." (The Sane Society; pages 40 & 42)"

I tend to agree with all those British Object Relations people -- Klein, Winnicott in particular -- in thinking that destructiveness has a much more complicated relationship to creativeness; that it isn't only an alternative to creativeness but a developmental precursor to relationship that can be creative -- whether that relationship is with an idea or an object, a person or a movement.

This idea is central to the Cindy Situation, because in fact one cannot create something new without feeling comfortable with a measure of destructiveness, with messiness or disorder. And the "messiness" of Cindy Sheehan, as she sets about her work makes some people deeply uncomfortable with her and her project because we as a culture are not accustomed to playfulness or creativeness. We distrust the disorder, the process itself. We want our heroes to be available at drive through windows.

We would probably tell Michelangelo to stop messing up the ceiling.

:rofl:

Sorry. And, it would be important that, if we did tell Michelangelo to get off the ladder before someone sees him, that he be willing to incur our displeasure, be willing to temporarily disorder his relationship with us -- and with the ceiling -- long enough to advance his work. . .

[H2O Man]

41. "primary" versus "secondary"

In the essay/OP, I mention that Fromm (like A. S. Neill) was in agreement with Harry Stack Sullivan about childhood development. That is to say, children up to around the age of 7 see the world in terms of themselves; thus from birth to 7, the child experiences "primary narcissism." If that child does not progress, by around 7 to 8, to begin to appreciate the needs of others as distinct from his/her own, and are limited to seeing the world in terms of only their needs, it is called "secondary narcissism." It is an unattractive quality.

In his book, Ambassador Joseph Wilson notes that CIA psychiatrists refer to Saddam as an egomaniacal sociopath who suffers from "malignant narcissism." That's a wonderful term. It describes George to a W.

[EFerrari]

42. Yes, it does. I read "People of the Lie" and thereafter

can more or less immediately identify those personalities.

This government is stuffed with them.

Thank you for clearing that up; I wasn't understanding.

[Little Star]

46. People of the lie was a real eye opener

I encouraged every one I know to read all of M. Scott Peck's Books. He died this past year I believe. A very knowing man that Mr. Peck.

[Binka]

38. It Is Midnight In The Moral Order

Midnight is the hour when men desperately seek to obey the eleventh commandment, "Thou shalt not get caught." According to the ethic of midnight, the cardinal sin is to be caught and the cardinal virtue is to get by. It is all right to lie, but one must lie with real finesse. It is all right to steal, if one is so dignified that, if caught, the charge becomes embezzlement, not robbery. It is permissible even to hate, if one so dresses his hating in the garments of love that hating appears to be loving. The Darwinian concept of the survival of the fittest has been substituted by a philosophy of the survival of the slickest. This mentality has brought a tragic breakdown of moral standards, and the midnight of moral degeneration deepens. MLK 1963

Could truer words ever be spoken?

Cindy has the power of redemptive suffering and sorrow in her hands. She can shed the light her light on the moral degeneration spewing forth from the Bush/Cheney crime family.

[H2O Man]

44. More and more,

I find myself reading from the wonderful collection of King's work, "A Testament of Hope: the essential writings of Martin Luther King, Jr." I have no doubt that Martin would be very proud of Cindy Sheehan.

[EFerrari]

45. kicking for a wonderful read

[Me.]

48. !

[im10ashus]

54. Thanks for posting.

I thought you may enjoy this article by Charles Sullivan about Revolutionary Movements and Leadership. In it he says this:

"As we proceed along this diverse but united front toward a goal of social justice and world peace, we must recognize that what we are trying to accomplish is nothing less than a global revolution of Democratic Socialism. The name is not important; the substance of the dream is."

It is that last sentence that I feel best encapsulates the tone of the article and the possibilities we would have if we followed a more peaceful path.


http://informationclearinghouse.info/article11781.htm

[H2O Man]

55. Thanks!

That looks very interesting .... thanks for providing the link.