|
Bush "true beleivers" with their unshakeable faith in Bush are irrational, but not insane.
People of all shapes and sizes fall into the "cult of personality" way of thinking. I personally beleive that the beleif in heros and villains is almost always irrational, no matter who and what and where. Hitler was not uniquely evil, (thats what the expression the "banality of evil" is all about, the lesson of the holocaust is not that the germans were uniquely, superhumanly evil, but that they were rather all too human). Likewise, the elevation of almost anyone to heroic status is likewise irrational. Probably leftover instinctive behavior from our primate past when we lived in troops with a "leader" and a strict hierarchy.
So, Deaniacs and Naderites are as irrational as Bushies, Deaniacs for example refusing to beleive the demonstrable fact that Dean is no progressive, Naderites believing in the face of all evidence that Nader is sane.
The only rational people are the democrats who hold their nose and say "Hey, not my first choice, but beats the alternative," and the equal or greater number of republicans who will hold their nose and say "hey, he sure has flaws, but he's better than the democrats." These people are at least basing their decision on rational weighing of the facts as they perceive them to be.
But, as I say, irrational and insane are very very far from being synonyms. Most of what makes life worth living is irrational.
On the other hand, demonizing and dehumanizing those you disagree with (as by saying they are "insane") does noone any good. Jon Stewart actually showed me something the other day. Crossfire is indeed a sham, but so is most of the so-called debate that goes on here. Childish name-calling, party-line, lockstep thinking (I love when DU-ers actually literally ask for their marching orders, those threads that start with "what should we think of ...?").
|