According to the DSM-IV-TR, the handbook used by most psychologists when diagnosing mental disorders and/or aberrant behavior, in order to be diagnosed with Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD, sometimes referred to as sociopathy) an individual must display at least three characteristics out of a seven item list. Using these widely accepted guidelines, it can be suggested that George W. Bush is a sociopath (and that many other elected officials are as well), at least insofar as clinical psychology is concerned.
A few caveats before I begin my argument in earnest. First, my formal education was in physics and mathematics rather than in psychology, so my training is limited only to introductory psych courses and independent readings on the subject. I am emphatically NOT a clinical psychologist. Second, mainly due to its wide scope and easy accessibility, I will be referencing from Wikipedia articles concerning sociopathy and conduct disorder, whose contents may need to be taken with a grain of salt. Third, in my search of the DKos archive, I found
this poll by
mstein. With nearly two years gone by, I would be curious to see how people would respond to his question as well as to my own.
With that out of the way, we can begin. We will take Mr. Bush as our case study for the politician-as-sociopath. Listed below (taken from this page) are the seven criteria in the DSM-IV-TR (all emphasis mine):
1. Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest.
2. Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure.
3. Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead.
4. Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults.
5. Reckless disregard for safety of self or others.
6. Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain steady work or honor financial obligations.
7. Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.
If an individual has consistently displayed at least three of the above characteristics since the age of fifteen, they may be diagnosed with APD if the following criteria are also met:
A. The individual is at least age 18 years.
B. There is evidence of conduct disorder with onset before age 15 years.
C. The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia or a Manic Episode.
We will address these latter three criteria before moving on to the initial seven. Clearly, Mr. Bush is over the age of 18, and to my knowledge he is neither Schizophrenic nor Bipolar. While I am less clear on the issue of conduct disorder (a full overview is available
here), I believe that the anecdotal evidence suggests that in his youth Mr. Bush was well-known as a bully and a liar. Obviously, if it indeed existed such behavior never made it into the official biographies of the President, but even if Mr. Bush did not display conduct disorder at its most extreme I believe his age and the length of time over which he has displayed his current antisocial tendencies renders the subject of his youth more or less moot.
Let us now examine the first seven criteria in detail (bearing in mind that the minimum requirement for a diagnosis is three matches).
1. As documented by many bloggers and, occasionally, the mass media, George W. Bush and his administration have repeatedly and knowingly violated American law and have on multiple occasions cited the belief that Presidential power in fact supersedes the law. To give but one example, since 2001 the Bush Administration, under direct orders from Mr. Bush, has eavesdropped on telephone calls made by or to American citizens without first obtaining a warrant. This is a violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (as updated by the USA PATRIOT Act).
2. Mr. Bush has, since the beginning of his campaign for the Presidency at least, displayed a continuing penchant for dishonesty. In some cases Mr. Bush has told very specific lies (e.g., stating for several years that all wiretaps were being performed in accordance with the law), and in many other cases has lied by omission (e.g., refusing to comment on past drug use).
3. Perhaps the most consistent criticism of Mr. Bush's handling of the invasion of Iraq has been the complaint that the President and his administration in no way shape or form planned for any contingency following the successful removal of Saddam Hussein from power. A failure to plan on the part of the Bush administration is at this point more or less an accepted fact.
4. Beyond the obvious aggression manifested in the invasion of other countries, it has been widely reported that Mr. Bush has an extremely volatile temper. Such reports, however, are generally anecdotal in nature so we will set them aside for now. Instead, consider the vicious smear campaign that Mr. Bush has spearheaded against all who would oppose or criticize him. The vitriol that both Mr. Bush and his followers have spewed at John Kerry and John McCain are hardly the work of a serene, rational, empathetic mind.
5. The secretive nature of Mr. Bush's recent trip to Iraq indicates that he still has a sense of self-preservation. As for the safety of others, on the other hand, it seems clear that the President has no particular problem with the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people in order to achieve what to him amounts to personal glory. Mr. Bush's willingness to let our troops fight in harsh conditions without proper protective equipment - and his general indifference to hurricane victims on the Gulf Coast - suggests that the well-being of American citizens does not particularly matter to him.
6. Mr. Bush inherited a government that was running a massive surplus. By increasing spending while significantly lowering tax receipts, Mr. Bush has ensured that the US government will for the foreseeable future operate with a massive budget deficit.
7. With the recent notable exception of his phone call to a legally blind LA Times reporter, I am unaware of an instance in which Mr. Bush has apologized to anyone for anything during his presidency. Even blatant errors in judgement ("Bring 'em on") have not elicited a simple "I'm sorry", rather, they have resulted in roundabout attempts to either justify the mistakes made or in the use of disingenuous weasel words.
Of course, the above is as much a diagnosis of the entire Bush administration as it is of the man himself, so in closing let us consider Mr. Bush on a more individual level. It seems clear that George W. Bush is an enormously engaging individual, capable of charming his way into the good graces of most everyone spends any significant amount of time with him. One might go so far as to say that Mr. Bush enjoys manipulating the attitudes of those around him. Charisma and a desire to manipulate others certainly is in keeping with a typical case of APD. And certainly Mr. Bush has for a long, long time put his own personal ambition above all else, including the safety of others. Mr. Bush has been willing to lie to get his way, and (note - more bits of anecdote) has reportedly attempted even while playing games of tennis and golf attempted to change the rules to guarantee personal victory.
Indeed, a number of the above characteristics are demonstrated by many successful politicians. The Wikipedia article cited above notes that "[i]t is hypothesized that many high achievers exhibit antisocial personality disorder characteristics." So, given our media's and our culture's propensity to support the political campaigns involving cheating, lying, and naked ambition, we must ask ourselves if we are in fact rewarding antisocial behavior. If we are, we then must examine whether or not this is negatively affecting our nation. And so, rather than asking whether Mr. Bush is or is not sociopathic, I ask you: does it matter? If you've slogged your way all the way through to this point, I would be curious to hear your answer.