Darrell, in your excerpted post of Toward a Unified Theory of Clinton, is a link to the original by C.P. Barr: freerepublic.com
There is a wealth of information. What I consider core, and useful is this:
Clinton is generally considered to suffer some severity of some diagnosis on the DSM Axis-2. Unlike the Psychotic Axis-1 and the Organic Breakdown Axis-3, most of these people are not institutionalized. Colloquially, they are neurotics. Technically, they have Personality Disorders. This Axis is distinguished by various normal human reactions, carried to an extreme. Using Damasio, found in Barr's page, another commonality exists: there is a lack of the brain mass containing emotions, or an equivalent physical explanation. They have an emotional deficit.
Because Clinton, in spite of his disorder, or by using his disorder, has been successful in life, the precise primary diagnosis, of an Axis of overlapping diagnoses, is of minor import. Using the tools scientific psychiatry provides, we can expect to better sort out where Clinton's actions had integrity, where they were of sickness or bad character, where we misunderstood them, where they can be more useful than normal, and where they need unusual reinforcement.
One issue that bothers many is his lack of self. He seems to take in vast amounts of emotion, fact, and opinion, and yet seems unaffected. The infamous stare is a related issue. One obvious consequence of an emotional deficit is the need for emotional nourishment. Strangers who offer their emotions are a safe way to feed, although a differentiated residual is doubtful. An unusual consequence of the emotional deficit is the disconnect from reason and decisions. One can reason abstractly as well as, or better than, your full IQ, but without emotional guidance, personal decisions are difficult. The full range of information is stored and processed objectively, but while some presidents only need aides to carry out decisions, Clinton needs aid in bringing the decisions out. The default aide is the polls. The lack of consistent policy is part the objectiveness, part no emotional loyalty to override the decision, and part an inability to enunciate the thoughts locked in him. I do not address his caliber of objectiveness.
Another issue is the insincerity he projects. If we each have an 'inner child' at our most private, a personality disorder only has that emotional place. We have developed an adult emotion and a mature emotion to cover and protect our child. Defensiveness comes easy to a child's emotion. Moreover, small emotion work their effect, while more becomes confusing. To maintain appearances, especially as a politician, Clinton will amplify what has already happened for our benefit. Clearly this will often result in no ones satisfaction. The worst part for his Presidency is the inability of the public to confirm his sincerity and actual position. This leads to both cynical and genuine attacks, even of the most outrageous charges. I see no easy resolution unless he were to explain what is really going on to his public. That has pitfalls too.
Of concern also is the grey and black actions he has taken in the past. The sex and derivatively, the court testimony, are primary, some of it having been documented. It seems likely that these actions were the direct result of his disordered personality. More compelling than the view of a sick, loose cannon, though, is the explanation of stretch. Anyone who operates out of their comfort zone of behaviors is stretched. Longer periods and more severe stretches make a worse stretch. Most folk cocoon when they rebound: sleep, hobby, vacation. A personality disorder rebounds to his sickness. The compulsion to revel in sickness is more overwhelming than cocooning. The alleged sexual assaults do cluster in frequency and severity with his times of high stress: campaigns, new offices. Although a show of repetence that must be unrelated to his feelings holds no appeal, I would still prefer assurances that this behaviour is being dealt with, but realistically, we are not talking a slideshow of DisneyLand. I would expect the national uproar to keep him and his handlers aware of a short leash. We'll end up waiting for the post-office book.
Great leaders and mental illness are not exclusive. Churchill would have been a different man without his manic-depression. As would have Lincoln without his depression. [Both Axis-1 disorders.] The similarities in the country at the times of and in Nixon and Clinton suggest the country has some genuine need for Axis-2 presidents. The visceral repulsion [Barr's thesis] to such disorders in power may show health and wisdom, or may be experience which yet can be shown to have purpose and leave success.
Thanks awfully for the read. |
