Over the years I've mentioned this topic in a few comments to others’ diaries -- but given the last couple days’ FISA votes it has seemed especially appropriate to develop it a bit further and throw it out again as a diary unto itself.
It has often been said on this site that the Democratic party has "battered-spouse syndrome." As a domestic violence counselor who has worked with both abusers and victims for years, it has become increasingly clear to me over the last decade that there is more truth in this than people might realize. I can say very seriously -- and not at all lightly -- that based on the behavior of the Democratic party, the “battered spouse” analogy is a completely valid description. Let me explain why ...
QUICK UPDATE (8-7-07): I just wanted to say THANKS to twilight falling for rescuing this and allowing a few more people to see it.
Disfunctional people tend to sift out into two groups of extremes. (By the way, I use the word “disfunctional” in a very literal sense: “dis”= ”doesn’t” and “function” = “work”; that is, people whose life patterns don’t work for them.) Those two groups can be roughly labeled "abusers" and "victims." They are both miserable and wounded, but abusers are molded by two specific conditions:
1) They are miserable and wounded; but
2) They are psychologically unable to take even the slightest bit of personal responsibility for their misery.
Thus, they are miserable -- AND IT'S EVERYONE ELSE'S FAULT! (their spouses', society's, brown people’s, the System's ...) Anger and fear are their primary emotions, because they are outward-focused cop-out emotions. Anger allows an abuser to say -- and actually believe -- "I'm miserable ... but I’m not responsible for my misery! You are!"
Regarding personal responsibility, people with healthy self-esteem can afford to say, "I'm sorry," or "I made a mistake," or "I'm not perfect" or “I will make amends” -- for, while those humbling words and actions lower them a little inside, their self-worth levels are still at a pretty high level overall.
Arrogance and conceit are the qualities of abusers, whose self-esteem is a half-millimeter above rock bottom. If they admit even the tiniest mistake, or admit to even the tiniest fault, or take even the tiniest bit of responsibility, it will lower them to rock bottom (which basically feels like the grandmother of all panic attacks). Abusers’ #1 priority is, thus, to be able to shove someone under them to act as a cushion against hitting rock bottom. They desperately need someone whom they can hold responsible for their own misery.
That's also where their authoritarianism comes from, for ...
"I'm miserable -- AND IT'S YOUR FAULT!"
... naturally leads to ...
"You need to change! You need to be fixed! You need someone perfect (i.e. ME!) to control you and tell you the RIGHT thing to do!"
Abusers want all of the power, but none of the responsibility.
Now, who does this sound like? Modern Republicans! And more specifically, their current abusive father-in-chief, the Bush Administration, whose motto seems to be “Trust us. We know what’s best, even though we’re not responsible when anything bad happens as the result.”
Abuse victims, on the other hand, compensate for the extreme imbalance displayed by Abusers by going to the opposite extreme: They take on too much responsibility for other people's misery:
ABUSER: "I'm miserable -- and it's your fault!"
VICTIM: "I'm sorry. I'll try to work even harder with you in an equal, mutually respectful way to achieve a harmonious relationship for the good of all."
In reality, of course, the LAST thing an abuser wants is an equal, harmonious relationship. What he really wants is an enabling, willing sucker of a SCAPEGOAT. Joe Lieberman and DC Democrats, anyone?
I compare the dynamics in an abusive relationship to a ballet company trying to collaborate with a football team. The ballet company goes in wanting to work with the other side to create something beautiful and harmonious. The football team goes in wanting to WIN. Naturally, the ballet company gets trampled into the astroturf. After picking themselves up, they say, “Jeez! What happened there?! Hmm. Maybe if we TRY HARDER we can create something beautiful and harmonious with them.” So they try even harder -- and get trampled into the astroturf again. And again. And again.
The two sides are coming from completely different worldviews and sets of assumptions. The ballet company has no stomach for conflict and, by the sheer fact of being who they are -- a ballet company -- can’t even grasp the concept of competition. If they were people who liked competition and had a need to win, they wouldn't be in a ballet company in the first place. They'd be on the football team.
The football team, on the other hand, has no concept of working with others toward a win-win resolution. It is an incomprehsible, meaningless message from outer space to them. To them, there is no such thing mutual or equal: If you’re working equally with someone, then by definition, you’re not winning. And if you’re not winning, then by definition, you are losing.
The dynamics between Republicans and Democrats these days are exactly the same as in an abusive relationship: The first side trying to be nice and fair and rational, to WORK WITH the other side; the second side trying to WIN OVER the first side.
The first side trying to make the other side “get it” and understand that its actions are harmful and wrong; the second side not caring if its actions are harmful and wrong and blaming the other side for “making them” do it (all the while having complete contempt for the first side and not giving a rip what it thinks anyway).
The first side believing the other side must also be operating from some sense of rationality; the second side actually coming from a place of pure, irrational, infantile anxiety, fear, and anger. Abusers are oblivious to the fact that they are blatantly irrational. They will flip-flop all over the place, hypocritically changing their positions from one moment to the next without the slightest sense of shame. That is because, moment to moment, they must take whatever position allows them to win in that moment -- and thus stave off a panic attack -- no matter if it completely contradicts what they said five minutes ago. And as they do this, they must actually believe their contradictions from moment to moment. This is what drives anyone who has to try to work with them crazy.
And to take the analogy even farther, abusers are almost uniformly convinced that they are the real victims in the relationship; that THEY are the powerless ones. Thus, in their minds, they can’t possibly be abusive because they are only fighting to defend themselves from the “real” abusers -- all those evil external forces who are “making them” feel so miserable.
And when their victims finally get fed up with being trampled into the ground over and over again, and finally start showing even the tiniest flashes of justified anger at being abused -- and further, when the victims actually start holding the abusers accountable for their behavior ...
Well, then the abusers immediately start howling and whining about how the victim is so “mean” and “unfair” and “controlling” and “abusive,” and how their partners are the ones who REALLY need “anger management” counseling. (Bill O’Reilly, anyone? Sean Hannity? Ann Coulter? Michelle Malkin?) And, of course, the victims -- being NICE people who don’t want to be “angry” or “mean” -- immediately back down and apologize, only to be sneered at and trampled into the ground yet again.
Where is the mainstream media in this analogy?
At their worst, they are abusers themselves. In the middle, they are like the abuser’s best friend who knows exactly what is going on, but doesn’t really want to admit to himself that he sees it, and who has some stake in not saying anything. At their best -- which isn't very good -- they are like well-intentioned, “fair and balanced” couples counselors who just don’t understand the realities of domestic violence; who want to believe the best of everyone, and who consequently get played like a pipe organ by the manipulative abuser.
Couples counseling simply does not work in domestic violence cases, for the simple reason that couples counseling demands two people acting out of mutual respect and taking equal responsibility. When forced to the point of having to go to counseling at all, abusers invariable want couples counseling because it allows them to say “it takes two to tango” and then pass part (i.e most, i.e all) of the responsibility for their behavior onto the victim. It also allows them to subtly collude with the naive counselor, who is tricked into believing the abuser’s distortions -- and thus, validating them.
That is the current state of “he said, she said, all sides are equal” journalism.
In reality, the abuser needs to be strongly and repeatedly confronted: “No, it’s not her fault, she has no responsibility for your behavior, and stop acting like a jerk.” When a counselor who actually understands the dynamics of domestic violence says that, the abuser throws a hissy fit, plays the victim even more, storms out, (cuts the counselor's microphone), and refuses to go back. And then beats up his wife for “humiliating" him.
In this analogy, the netroots is that realistic, plain-talking counselor who “gets it.” That is why Bill O’Reilly hates us.
It is also why the battered-spouse Democratic Establishment hates us, for they are like abuse victims in denial. When working with abuse victims, the hardest, most frustrating thing is often to get them to see the reality of the situation: that, no, the other person really does not respect you; that, no, there is no hope of things ever “working out”; and that, yes, you are being consciously played for a willing sucker. Deep-down they know it, but they don’t want to believe it. So they turn against you.
Some victims start to get it -- but the next banging-head-against-a-wall frustration is to try to get them to understand (once they've left the relationship) that they are now being forced into a position where they HAVE to compete. They are being forced to FIGHT -- and they have to fight HARD. Declarations of disapproval with no actions to back them up are viewed by abusers as a joke. Half-steps are viewed as a sign of weakness. Compromise is viewed as a sign of weakness. Niceness and "fair play" is viewed as a sign of weakness.
Victims need to be taught, and really need to internalize, that, coming from certain people, being called “mean” and “unfair” and “abusive” and “controlling” is a COMPLIMENT. When certain people accuse you of those things, it means YOU ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING. It means they’re mad at you because you’re not being a doormat they can walk over.
The actions of this administration are exactly like those of an abuser -- daring anyone to actually DO SOMETHING to hold them accountable; to not just say it, but DO it. They are daring Democrats to really FIGHT them. They are daring the whole country to fight them.
As often than not, in reality, the "nice" victims end up getting trashed while the abusers walk away with everything, all the more emboldened. And unfortunately, in this case, the whole country is in danger of going down with them.
So ... We'll keep working. When you keep plugging away, sometimes you can help abuse victims to "get it." And sometime after they "get it" you can help support them in the necessary fight. And sometimes things turn out really well. Sometimes the good guys win. I'm sure that if they learned how to play by the different sets of rules at different times, a ballet company could still create beautiful things with other ballet companies -- but also beat the crap out of a football team, if push came to shove.
I realize that in a sense I’m wasting my time in writing this -- that I’m really preaching to those truth-talking "counselors" who already “get it.” But if this diary helps clarify anything for anyone else, it will have served its purpose.
(And if anyone out there has any “ins” in the Democratic establishment, and wants me to give a workshop explaining domestic violence dynamics to Democratic leaders -- I’ll do it for free!!!!)