In time of victory, why is the left so angry?

Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 02:54 pm
In time of victory, why is the left so angry?
By: Byron York

These should be happy times for liberals and the Democratic party as a whole. They control the White House and both houses of Congress, while opposition Republicans are leaderless and lost. So why do some Democrats, particularly those farther to the left, appear so angry?

If you doubt it, just watch a few minutes of MSNBC, where the recent nationwide series of "tea parties" to protest federal spending and taxes set off an angry, almost manic response. The most telling came on Keith Olbermann's program, during which the actress Janeane Garofalo, who plays an FBI computer geek on “24,” denounced the tea parties as "racism straight up."

"Let's be very honest about what this is about," Garofalo said. "It's not about bashing Democrats. It's not about taxes…This is about hating a black man in the White House."

Garofalo linked the tea parties to what she described as a peculiar feature of the conservative brain. "The limbic brain inside a right-winger, or Republican, or conservative, or your average white power activist -- the limbic brain is much larger in their head space than in a reasonable person," she explained. "And it is pushing against the frontal lobe. So their synapses are misfiring." (The limbic brain is the deep portion of the brain that mediates, controls and expresses emotion.)

Now, it's possible Garofalo was joking; she used to do comedy. But she didn't seem to be joking, and her comments were consistent with a long and dishonorable history of attributing political conservatism to mental abnormality. And as she spoke about the alleged anger on the right, Garofalo herself seemed visibly angry. Why were she, and Olbermann, and many others on the left, so apparently troubled by a virtually powerless opposition?

I asked William Anderson, a friend who is a political conservative, a medical doctor, and a lecturer in psychiatry at Harvard. "They are angry, but I think they are also scared, and I think it's because they have a sense that their triumph is a precarious one," Anderson told me. Democrats won in 2008 in some part because of the cycles of American politics; Republicans were exhausted and it was the other party's turn. Now, having won, they are unsure of how long victory will last.

"They see that they have a very small window of opportunity to do all the things they want," Anderson continued. "They see the window of opportunity as small because they know in their deepest hearts that the vast majority of the American people wouldn't go for all of the things they want to do." So they are frantic to do as much as possible before the opposition coalesces. And the tea parties might be the beginning of that coalescence.

Then there is the question of self-image. Watching Garofalo and Olbermann discuss the tea parties, it was impossible to avoid the sense that they saw themselves as two good people talking about many bad people. "One of the things about narcissism is that it looks like people who are just proud of themselves and smug, but in fact narcissism is a very brittle and unstable state," Anderson told me. "People who are deeply invested in narcissism spend an awful lot of energy trying to maintain the illusion they have of themselves as being powerful and good, and they are exquisitely sensitive to anything that might prick that balloon."

Again, the tea parties could represent a threat. What if the protesters weren't racists, weren't violent, weren't mentally defective? What if their point was legitimate, or even partly legitimate? Those are questions better batted down than answered.

Finally, there is the sense of anxiety and fragility that stems from the liberals' newly-won power. They control everything in government, and some fear what the responsibility of governing is doing to them.

Their president of hope and change has chosen not to prosecute the authors of the Bush-era "torture memos." He is escalating the war in Afghanistan. He seems determined to bail out the nation's richest bankers. For some on the left, it can be difficult to abide those actions and still maintain the image of one's self atop the moral high ground. So they lash out at the easy target presented by the tea parties.

And that is how political triumph can produce anger and unhappiness. Don't be surprised if there is much more of both in the days to come.
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 02:58 pm
All liberals agree with Janeane Garofalo.

And all conservatives agree with Rush Limbaugh and David Duke. Right?
0 Replies
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 03:11 pm

"Girls! Those hateful, wicked ol' liberal meanies hate us because of our fabulous tea parties! I say we bust a cap in they asses!"
0 Replies
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 04:12 pm
In time of victory, why is the left so angry?

Voters remorse. This remorse has set in and the dumbmasses are afraid to admit it.
The frustration with what PrezBO has turned out to be is giving everyone an ulcer.
The left is projecting this pent up anger on anyone that does not feel their pain.
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 04:44 pm
I think Id rather be a bit angry (if that is indeed even true) than a simple nutcase like Waterboy. Course thats just me.
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 06:51 pm

Farmgirl is a bit confused
0 Replies
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 07:01 pm

These should be happy times for liberals and the Democratic party as a whole. They control the White House and both houses of Congress, while opposition Republicans are leaderless and lost. So why do some Democrats, particularly those farther to the left, appear so angry?


0 Replies
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 08:28 pm
I thought that psychologically anger is depression turned outwards. Some on the left might have been depressed in the past, and now can just turn it outwards, rather than truly being happy/content?

The anger reminds me of a woman that realizes, on some level of consciousness, that they are in a bad relationship. Rather than end the relationship, she may just be angry. Perhaps, the Democratic Party is just a bad relationship for the left, when all is said and done, since we only have two parties, and the Democratic Party needs to be all things to all of its constituents. The left in countries that have a multitude of parties might not be angry, per se? They can focus on their agenda, in context of a coalition government.
0 Replies
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 08:29 pm
I'm something of a lefty and I'm mostly pissed at the automated voice of Qwest.
0 Replies

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
  1. Forums
  2. » In time of victory, why is the left so angry?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/21/2024 at 01:54:17