Because most political dialogue amongst the citizenry these days instantly spirals downward into irrational, knee-jerk, and poorly-reasoned rants about terror, immigrants, socialism and taxes, we often fail to step back and look at the psychological underpinnings of politics in general. Looked at through such a framework, the basic forces at work are quite simple. It all goes back to Psych 101, where one learns that the leaders of any group of people – elected or not – are essentially replacements for our parents. When we’re children, the parental role is first replaced by our teachers and school officials, and later, as we gain more autonomy, by our bosses and other figures of authority, which for some may include some kind of spiritual guidance or deity. As you enter adulthood, if you aren’t the leader of some other type of group, like a business, social, or religious organization, you probably lack the audacity or strength of character to be a political leader. You will forever remain – at least metaphorically – in the role of a child. On the other hand, if you have a sense of self that makes you feel entitled to make decisions on behalf of others, regardless of whether or not you know anything about them, and if you have the communication and organizational skills necessary, your narcissistic tendencies will have the opportunity to flourish, and you stand a good chance of being a politician or some other kind of leader. All of which explains a lot about the dynamics of American politics today. Speaking metaphorically, our parents – who are supposed to provide us with a secure home, feed us, educate us, and guide us into self-sufficient responsible adulthood – have flown the coop. They’ve absconded with our allowance, blowing it on big parties, scandalous relationships, brawls with the neighbors , and half-baked schemes for rebuilding the shattered financial security resulting from their irresponsible behavior. And then, in their guilt and dysfunction, they’ve gone on and tried to point the finger at us , as if their inability to run the household is our fault. As kids, we don’t know how to react to all of this, so instead of calling them out for their shenanigans, we fight amongst each other like dysfunctional siblings. For their part, our “parents” know in their hearts that they’ve created the social and economic mess we’re all in, but are reacting like any parent would when they lose control of the kids. They’re shouting and relying completely on hyperbole to try and scare everyone back into line. Which only riles everyone up more, causing some of the kids to run away from home, others to mope around demanding that someone take care of them, and yet others to scream and shout that they have the solution, even though they’re the ones that most recently trashed the house. So is there a solution? Personally, I think some other families in the neighborhood are going to see a more prominent role in the community before we get our domestic squabbles worked out. Especially when our parents’ guilt and frustration is leading them to create nearly psychotic delusions of, for instance, imaginary terrorist babies. I’ve included a couple of clips below that demonstrate some of the metaphors I’m joking about here. Both clips are with the generally mild-mannered (and probably bleeding heart liberal) Anderson Cooper.

First of all, I want to be clear that I have NO IDEA whether or not the assertions of either side of this little debate are correct; both sides’ only evidence for what they’re saying is the words (or alleged words) of former FBI employees. I only selected the “terror baby” issue because I really think it sums up – and in an amusing fashion – the misdirected mental energy of today’s America.

Debbie Riddle Talks About “Terror Babies”

In this first clip, Texas lawmaker Debbie Riddle insists that terror babies are invading the US, and when asked what evidence she’s basing these ideas upon, says “at this point, I’m not going to reveal that”. And continues to talk about how the government (as if she isn’t part of it?) is ignoring this and other threats. I don’t know if her strange facial mannerisms are the result of a stroke, being a robot, bunged cosmetic surgery, or a botox overdose, but if it’s any of those four things, we should question her judgment in the first place. What I really want to point out though, is the bizarre nature of her concern about “terror babies” and how even a rudimentary assessment of its underpinnings points at a delusional mental state driven by the anxiety of losing control, which manifests as a projected fear of “monster babies that want to kill us”. She comes across like a cranky grandmother who can’t believe that none of her offspring are sharing her deluded thinking:

Anderson Cooper, Louie Gohmert Debate “Terror Babies”

Louie Gohmert is another perfect example of the frustrated paternal figure I’m describing. As he rants rabidly with utter disregard for the concept of “dialog”, Gohmert himself shouts “I’m a former judge!” If you know anything about what this means from a psychological standpoint, you know that a judge is typically a person who is accustomed to issuing edicts, decisions, and opinions that for all practical purposes are beyond reproach or that in any case may only be challenged via an elaborate legal process. He presents himself as the screaming angry dad that just walked in on your delinquent behavior and thinks that if just SHOUTS LONG ENOUGH, you’ll eventually be scared into listening to whatever kind of anger-driven jabbering he remains capable of after working up such a froth. And his jabbering is, as in Riddle’s case, all about “terror babies from the future”:

So what do you think? Is this psychology metaphor too much of a stretch? Feel free to share your thoughts. I’m gonna go visit ManBabies.com now.