EgbertoWillies.com

Political involvement should be a requirement for citizenship

  • Home
    • Homepage
    • Login
    • About Us
    • Bio
    • Research
      • BallotPedia
      • Bureau of Labor Statistics
      • CallMyCongress
      • LegiScan
      • OpenSecrets.org
      • Texas Legislature Online
      • US Dept; Of Health & Human Services
      • US Dept. of Labor
      • VoteSmart
    • Contact Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
  • Shows
    • Live TV
    • Move to Amend Reports
    • Politics Done Right
  • Books
  • Articles
    • AlterNet
    • CNN iReports
    • CommonDreams
    • DailyKos
    • Medium
    • OpEdNews
    • Substack
  • Activism
    • Battleground Texas
    • Coffee Party
    • Move To Amend
    • OccupyMovement
  • Social
    • BlueSky
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • Pinterest
    • Tumblr
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
  • Sections
    • Environment
    • Food And Cooking
    • Health
    • Local News
    • Odd News
    • People Making A Difference
    • Political
    • Reviews
      • Book Reviews
      • Books I Recommend
      • Product Reviews
    • Sports
    • Substack Notes
  • Donate
  • Store

What should we do when a ruler is mentally unstable?

November 14, 2019 By History News Network

Sorry, there was a YouTube error.

F. Scott Fitzgerald is said to have commented to Ernest Hemingway that “The rich are different from you and me,” to which Hemingway replied “Yes, they have more money.” Many people similarly assume that national leaders are different from you and me not just because they generally have (a lot) more money, but also because their mental health is supposed to be more stable. 

And yet, history is full of political leaders whose mental stability was questionable at best, and others who were undoubtedly nut-cases. Roman emperor Caligula is infamous for sexual excess, for having people killed for his personal amusement, and other pathologies. Charles VI of medieval France became convinced he was made of glass and was terrified that at any moment he might break. Mad King Ludwig II of Bavaria suffered from what now appears to be Pick’s disease (related to early Alzheimer’s), along with frontotemporal dementia and schizotypal personality disorder. King George III of England evidently suffered from logorrhea, an incontrollable need to speak and write to a degree that often became incomprehensible, as well as apparent bipolar disease. And that is only a very limited sample. We can safely conclude that occupying a position of great political responsibility is no guarantee against mental illness.

“Only part of us is sane,” wrote Rebecca West. “Only part of us loves pleasure and the longer day of happiness, wants to live to our nineties and die in peace …” It requires no arcane wisdom to realize that chronic mental illness is not the only source of “crazy” behavior: people often act out of misperceptions, anger, despair, insanity, stubbornness, revenge, pride, and/or dogmatic conviction – particularly when under threat. Moreover, in certain situations—as when either side is convinced that war is inevitable or under pressure to avoid losing face — an irrational act, including a lethal one, may appear appropriate, even unavoidable. When he ordered the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Japanese Defense Minister observed that “Sometimes it is necessary to close one’s eyes and jump off the Kiyomizu Temple” (a renowned suicide spot). During World War I, Kaiser Wilhelm wrote in the margin of a government document that “Even if we are destroyed, England at least will lose India.” While in his bunker, during the final days of World War II, Adolf Hitler ordered what he hoped would be the total destruction of Germany, because he felt that its people had “failed” him.

Both Woodrow Wilson and Dwight Eisenhower suffered serious strokes while president of the United States. Boris Yeltsin, president of the Russian Federation from 1991 to 1999, was a known alcoholic who became incoherent and disoriented when on a binge. Nothing is known about what contingency plans, if any, were established within the Kremlin to handle potential war crises had they arisen during the Yeltsin period. Richard Nixon also drank heavily, especially during his stressful stint as US president during the Watergate crisis, which ultimately led to his resignation. During that time, Defense Secretary James Schlesinger took the extraordinary step of insisting that he be notified of any orders from the president that concerned nuclear weapons before they were passed down the command chain. 

Presumably, Schlesinger – and by some accounts, Henry Kissinger, who was then serving as National Security Adviser – would have inserted themselves, unconstitutionally, to prevent war, especially nuclear war, if Nixon had ordered it. As civilians, neither Yeltsin nor Nixon, when incapacitated by alcohol, would have been permitted to drive a car; yet they had full governmental authority to start a nuclear war by themselves. 

During his time in office, Donald Trump has been the first US president considered, simply by virtue of his own personal traits, to be a national security threat. Thus, he is renowned for repetitively lying, possibly to a pathological extent, and concerns have constantly been raised about his mental stability, impulsiveness, narcissism, sociopathy, and many other ailments that in the opinion of many mental health professionals would clearly disqualify him for numerous military and government posts … but not the presidency. The fact that the current impeachment inquiry has driven him to acts and utterances that are increasingly bizarre and unhinged, and that by law he has sole sufficient authority to order the use of nuclear weapons should be of the greatest concern to everyone, regardless of your politics.


David P. Barash is an evolutionary biologist and professor of psychology emeritus at the University of Washington; his most recent book is Through a Glass Brightly: Using science to see our species as we really are (Oxford University Press), 2018.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Click to share on Nextdoor (Opens in new window) Nextdoor
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Viewers are encouraged to subscribe and join the conversation for more insightful commentary and to support progressive messages. Together, we can populate the internet with progressive messages that represent the true aspirations of most Americans.

Support Our Politics Done Right Store

Filed Under: Columnists Tagged With: Donald Trump, mental instability

About History News Network

History News Network's mission is to help put current events into historical perspective. Given how public opinion is shaped today, whipsawed emotionally on talk shows this way and that in response to the egos of the guests, the desire for ratings by the hosts and the search for profits by media companies and sponsors, historians are especially needed now. They can help remind us of the superficiality of what-happens-today-is-all-that-counts journalism.

Comments

  1. Janice M Kelly says

    November 14, 2019 at 2:32 AM

    Very interesting history of leaders who gained such power. Scary. That is why Trump must be impeached now. The Republicans in the House and most importantly the Republican Senate, have to GET REAL regarding this President. Otherwise their and his soul are sullied for eternity because of their total lack of caring for their fellow citizens.Their legacy will be one of shame and their families will carry their burden of inaction.

    Loading...
  2. Gram Brinson says

    November 14, 2019 at 10:08 AM

    “According to his biographer, Senator Ervin had discussed just such a possibility with Majority Leader Mansfield before they decided on the Watergate probe. It had been, even then, ‘that thing which was the main fear and therefore the prime issue. Which wasn’t whether or not Nixon was a crook. Millions had been talking on both sides of that issue for more than a quarter century now. Everyone knew what the prime issue was. A certain thumb moving awkwardly towards a certain red button, a certain question of sanity…. Query: if the man who holds the thumb over the button is mad….'”
    -Anthony Summers, The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon

    Loading...
    • Gram Brinson says

      November 14, 2019 at 10:14 AM

      The Yeltsin comment also brings up another issue. In January 1995, when radar technicians saw what appeared to be nuclear missiles heading for the Russian Federation (it turned out to be a Norwegian rocket studying the aurora borealis), Yeltsin was given ten minutes to respond. He chose not to fire back, because he did not believe Bill Clinton would start a nuclear war without obvious provocation. Would Chernenko have given the same benefit of the doubt to Ronald “We begin bombing in five minutes” Reagan, or Brezhnev to Nixon?

      Loading...

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • X
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Pinterest
  • Tumblr
  • LinkedIn

Support Independent Media

Support Politics Done Right on PayPal

Politic Done Right

RevContent


Support Independent Media



RSS Feed

  • RSS - Posts
Mastodon
%d