In 1943, Harvard psychologist Henry Murray did a psychological profile of Adolf Hitler for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). The OSS was the precursor of the CIA. Murray made the following observations about Hitler’s personality:
After coming to power, Hitler enjoyed a stunning string of political and military successes. But in 1943 the tide would turn irreversibly against him. Therefore, Murray was tasked to predict how Hitler would react to increasing German defeats. He correctly forecast suicide as Hitler’s most likely reaction to setbacks:
This is the most plausible outcome…
…Whatever else happens, we my be reasonably sure that as Germany suffers successive defeats Hitler will become more and more neurotic. Each defeat will shake his confidence still further and limit his opportunities for proving his own greatness to himself. In consequence he will feel himself more and more vulnerable to attack from his associates and his rages will increase in frequency. He will probably try to compensate for his vulnerability on this side by continually stressing his brutality and ruthlessness.
His public appearances will become less and less for, as we have seen, he is unable to face a critical audience. He will probably seek solace in his Eagle’s Nest on the Kehlstein near Berchtsegaden. There among the ice-capped peaks he will [Page 249] wait for his “inner voice” to guide him. Meanwhile, his nightmares will probably increase in frequency and intensity and drive him closer to a nervous collapse. It is not wholly improbable that in the end he might lock himself into this symbolic womb and defy the world to get him.
In any case, his mental condition will continue to deteriorate. He will fight as long as he can with any weapon or technique that can be conjured up to meet the emergency. The course he will follow will almost certainly be the one which seems to him to be the surest road to immortality and at the same time drag the world down in flames.
It goes without saying that George Bush never stresses his “brutality and ruthlessness” and that he has never even considered pursuing policies that are comparable to Hitler’s. Yet, it is impossible read the following excerpt from Dan Froomkin without seeing the parallels in Bush and Hitler’s personality type. And it is frightening:
In this sort of environment, Bush apparently didn’t fathom the extent of the catastrophe in the Gulf Coast for more than three days after the levees of New Orleans were breached.
“The reality, say several aides who did not wish to be quoted because it might displease the president, did not really sink in until Thursday night. Some White House staffers were watching the evening news and thought the president needed to see the horrific reports coming out of New Orleans. Counselor Bartlett made up a DVD of the newscasts so Bush could see them in their entirety as he flew down to the Gulf Coast the next morning on Air Force One.
“How this could be — how the president of the United States could have even less ‘situational awareness,’ as they say in the military, than the average American about the worst natural disaster in a century — is one of the more perplexing and troubling chapters in a story that, despite moments of heroism and acts of great generosity, ranks as a national disgrace.”
Among Thomas’s disclosures: “Bush can be petulant about dissent; he equates disagreement with disloyalty. After five years in office, he is surrounded largely by people who agree with him. . . .
“Late last week, Bush was, by some accounts, down and angry. But another Bush aide described the atmosphere inside the White House as ‘strangely surreal and almost detached.’ At one meeting described by this insider, officials were oddly self-congratulatory, perhaps in an effort to buck each other up. Life inside a bunker can be strange, especially in defeat.”
Consider this description of Hitler in the last years of the war:
Hitler would then have a long lunch followed by an afternoon nap. When Hitler was asleep no one was allowed to disturb him. Even when important events were taking place, such as the allied landing in Normandy, Hitler was left to carry on sleeping. link
Bush rises early, but do you remember this from last month?
And this from last week?
Early Wednesday morning, (Governor) Blanco tried to call Bush. She was transferred around the White House for a while until she ended up on the phone with Fran Townsend, the president’s Homeland Security adviser, who tried to reassure her but did not have many specifics. Hours later, Blanco called back and insisted on speaking to the president. When he came on the line, the governor recalled, “I just asked him for help, ‘whatever you have’.” She asked for 40,000 troops. “I just pulled a number out of the sky,” she later told NEWSWEEK.
There are a disturbing number of parallels emerging in the personality traits of George W. Bush and Adolf Hitler. I’m well aware that making such comparisons invites hysterical reactions. So, once again, I’ll stipulate that whatever commonalities of personality Bush might share with Hitler, Bush is not a Nazi and he has never even approached the moral depravity of Hitler. What concerns me are increasing signs that Bush is becoming dangerously isolated, is in denial of reality, refuses to hear bad news, and clings to some misguided belief in himself, his destiny, and his divine calling to lead the nation.
Let’s make a few more comparisons:
“I carry out the commands that Providence has laid upon me.” -Adolf Hitler
“I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can’t explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen . . . I know it won’t be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.”- George W. Bush
“No power on earth can shake the German Reich now, Divine Providence has willed it that I carry through the fulfillment of the Germanic task.” – Adolf Hitler.
“God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did. And now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East.” – George W. Bush.
One doesn’t need to engage in psycho-babble to know that there are other similarities. Bush launched a preemptive war in Iraq based on a pack of lies. Hitler did the same against France, Poland, and Russia. Bush ignored the advice and warnings of his military and intelligence advisers and diverted his resources from Afghanistan. Hitler ignored his advisers and diverted the offensive on Moscow into the Caucuses. When things began to go wrong, Hitler resolutely refused to adjust course; Bush has done the same. And when reality became unpleasant and realistic options began to run out, both adopted a bunker mentality, became reclusive, lashed out at their staff, and refused to hear bad news.
I don’t want to take these comparisons too far. There are profound differences between both the men and the threat facing their respective nations. And whatever the moral shortcomings of George W. Bush, they cannot be compared to Hitler’s. Yet, we should be mindful of the warning signs. The failure of the federal government to respond to Hurricane Katrina is symptomatic of a government in disarray, with a leader whose mental state is unhealthy and incapable of making good decisions.
Back in June, the unreliable Capitol Hill Blue reported:
In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats and others that he classifies as “enemies of the state.”
Worried White House aides paint a portrait of a man on the edge, increasingly wary of those who disagree with him and paranoid of a public that no longer trusts his policies in Iraq or at home.
Now we have more reports along the same lines. The Bush administration entered a bunker the day Matt Cooper outed Karl Rove as one of his sources. It moved to the Western Bunker in August, as Cindy Sheehan threatened their perimeter. Now, they are hiding from their catastrophic failure to prevent or alleviate the destruction of New Orleans. Unfortunately, there is little reason to believe that the news from Iraq or Fitzpatrick’s office will get any better. On September 24th legions will descend on D.C. to vent their displeasure with the administration. And our President seems to totally unprepared to respond to these challenges.
And now, of course, we have the courts granting dictatorial powers to Bush to “disapper” anyone he deems to be an “enemy of the state” and the Pentagon laying plans for preemptive nuclear strikes against any country Bush imagines to be developing WMD. Are you sure Bush is not as dangerous as Hitler? Hitler didn’t have the bomb.
Bush’s personality is the strongest, best argument against Patriot Act-type powers, since that kind of unchecked power is only manageable by someone with a stable, truly moral personality. Too bad the brain-dead press and public are only now seeing what 50% of us have been screaming about all along.
And not only do we have courts granting dictatorial powers to Bush, we have a man known only to surround himself with those who parrot his views back to him selecting lifetime appointees for the Supreme Court.
of a book I read a long way back. “Groupthink.” Analyzed several very bad American policy screw-ups (ignoring China’s warnings in Korea, Vietnam escalation, Bay of Pigs, etc.). All of them were characterized by a President who was surrounded by “yes” men. It is like the best laboratory for breeding awful policy decisions.
Yes this is the most disturbing part:
Among Thomas’s disclosures: “Bush can be petulant about dissent; he equates disagreement with disloyalty. After five years in office, he is surrounded largely by people who agree with him. . . .
So Bush must “know” that he is always right, even when he isn’t. Would admitting the he is at least sometimes wrong so devestate him? For most of us this is a daily occurrence. How fragile is he? But most importantly, how did this creature get into office twice?
Someone with a narcissistic personality disorder, when he or she learns things are going wrong must always blame someone else. Their ego-defenses will not let them examine even the possibility that they are wrong themselves. Obviously such a person is not a candidate for any form of real therapy. Can’t self-analyze. It is too threatening.
For such a person admitting they are wrong is that devastating.
Not only do they always have to be right, they have an exaggerated sense of their own greatness. One result of this is that even small accomplishments must be evaluated by others as world-shaking, the greatest to date ever.
Oh, and people with NPD totally lack empathy with others. Since they feel superior to everyone else, how can they empathize with inferiors? Also, if you know you have no flaws, how can you empathize with people who do have flaws?
See Does Bush suffer from a Narcissistic Personality Disorder?
…Seems to me that the Dems would have wanted to “count all the votes” a little better last November…
…Too Bad “Reporting for Duty”…didn’t.
Parallels to the embattled Nixon could also be made. Who, then, will play the role of Alexander Haig in Bush’s WH? Who will take action to protect America from the paranoid delusions of a president in crisis?
John Dean, Predicting Presidential Performance: Is George W. Bush An Active/Negative President Like Nixon, LBJ, Hoover and Wilson?, May 21, 2004:
The whole thing’s worth reading. Even more so, I’d imagine, if you know Barber’s work.
Although this information about Bush is frankly quite frightening, I am glad that such major news sources as Time and Newsweek are reporting this. Amazing job on this, Booman!
George is so out of touch with the real world that he is not only a danger to himself but an enormous danger to this country. With President Dick at the helm anything can hapen and then he cancome in to “save the country” from George and still have the reich in place. Am I paranoid? Ummmmm..I don’t think so. Our country is being dismantled a little chunk at a time while we idly stand by and wait for “our leaders” to rescue us. Oh well, maybe we can elect some more dem dinos in “06 huh?
and formative years. Very different. Hitler always felt persecuted and an outsider, and was bitter about the armistice after WWI.
Bush has always had nothing but privilege. Spoiled brats don’t commit suicide, in my opinion. He’ll try to take anyone down around him, but never himself.
Wry Twinger, BS, PhD (and we all know what those initials stand for!)
As I wrote this I thought about the differences in upbringing. Ultimately I decided not to engage in armchair psychology.
But I think both men do suffer from an inferiority complex. In Bush’s case I don’t blame him. His father was President. His brother was always considered the smart and talented one. I would also have an inferiority complex under the circumstances.
In fact, as the youngest son, whose brothers have been very successful, I am not immune from feelings of inferiority.
But, I don’t think Bush has a good self-knowledge of what drives him. He is not introspective.
He’s also vindictive and resents the bright Ivy Leaguers he was intellectually embarrassed by in school. He instinctually rebels against his father and the ‘reality-based’ community. He also rejects Clintonian policies as an ideological choice. The result is a mish-mash of reactionary policies driven by revenge, rejection, and the old Bush family mainstay- looting.
engage in armchair psychology, huh!?
;^)
main section, but in the comments I don’t mind.
Change the names and this seems an apt diagnosis of Bush.
An interesting evaluation. It does come from the OSS, does it not?
I don’t think they were aware of Hitler’s doctor giving him shots of Dexidrine and Benzadrine, and they may not have been aware of the side effects of speed even if they did. I have long suspected that Hitler’s rages were the result of his speed addiction.
Have you seen the movie “Downfall?” It’s about the last 10 days of Hitler in the bunker in Berlin. Best movie I have seen this year. The acting and writing are amazingly good. It is in German with subtitles, which normally I find a pain, but “Downfall” is so good you don’t notice.
George W. Bush’s eary experiences: he had an absent father, a cold, insensitive mother, and his sister simply “disappeared” one day when he was very young. His younger brother was apparently the favored child and George was considered the dumb one. He’s been bailed out all of his life, but that’s not the same as love.
George W. learned from his family and his peers that people who aren’t rich are worthless, lazy, and undeserving. He doesn’t have enough native intelligence, curiosity, or creativity to look at the world for himself and see anything different.
Personally, I have no doubt that he’s a sociopath.
I hate that you have to couch this article in constant acknowledgments about how there is a moral chasm between the actions of Hitler and Bush.
You have laid out the facts about both men’s governing styles in times of crisis, and pointed out reasonable similarities.
If anything scares me about America in this age, it is that good people have been too slow to draw these very basic historic parallels between the actions of our present government, and those other governments of recent history that our textbooks villanize, and the inevitable attacks from apologists that reasonable comment invokes.
I think you said it well. More people should be writing this on the front pages of America’s media.
“He would lie there, completely apathetic, thinking only of . . . chocolate and cake. His craving for cake had become pathological. Before, he used to eat three pieces of cake at most, but now he had them fill his plate to overflowing three times.”
(first post here… finally got around to it.)
I can see a lot of parallels between Bush and Hitler. Personality type is not one of them, for a number of significant and fundamental reasons.
First of all, Hitler was driven. Bush is a flake. This is the longest job he has ever held in his life. As Bill Maher said the other night, when it gets tough, it’s time for him to find another fantasy job, like astronaut or fireman. He may have overcome that for now; after all, it is a cushy job, no matter how “hard it is being president.”
Next, Hitler was a control-freak. Despite the colorations of the latest Time and Newsweek articles, Bush, really, is (as he said in Biloxi) “I’m a delegator!” Of course, it helps if you delegate to competent people.
Next, Hitler was able to axe incompetent employees. He valued his own loyalty, but he was capable of making the ruthless decision when the chips were down, such as when Hitler had to choose between his loyalty to Rohmer or the support of the German military brass.
What we see in Bush, with his anger with subordinates, I think, is impatience, irritability, and an exaggerated, almost royal self-image. Bad news pisses him off. Unlike Hitler, it’s not because Bush has a dream of a thousand year reich, but because he doesn’t like anybody killing his buzz. When subordinates tell him bad news, he feels free to lash out at them because, they are, after all, to him, just court peons.
Actually, Hitler had grave difficulties firing subordinates. This seems not to be the case, because he was very capable of widescale purges. But, he couldn’t face firing anyone.
Moreover, as the OSS profile makes clear, Hitler was a split-personality:
As one surveys Hitler’s behavior patterns, as his close associates observe them, one gets the distinct impression that this is not one person but two which inhabit the same body and alternate back and forth. The one is a very soft, sentimental and indecisive individual who has little drive and wants nothing quite so much as to be amused, liked and looked after. The other is just the opposite – hard, cruel and decisive with an abundant reservoir of energy at his command – who knows what he wants and is ready to go after it and get [Page 130] it regardless of costs. It is the first Hitler who weeps profusely at the death of his canary, and the second Hitler who cries in open court: “Heads will roll”. It is the first Hitler who cannot bring himself to discharge an assistant and it is the second Hitler who can order the murder of hundreds including his best friends and can say with great conviction: “There will be no peace in the land until a body hangs from every lamp-post”. It is the first Hitler who spends his evenings watching movies or going cabarets and it is the second Hitler who works for days on end with little or no sleep, making plans which will affect the destiny of nations.
Until we understand the magnitude and implications of this duality in his nature we can never understand his actions.
And more from Mike Allen’s column in the WP:
Again, he is a procrastinator who is known for bursts of activity when he feels a sense of urgency.
As for another lack of resemblance between Hitler and Bush, Hitler was very successful as a soldier in WW I. His job as messenger had a high casualty rate, and he lasted a long time, earning high respect from his superiors for his ability to get the message through when it was important. He really was an excellent combat soldier.
However, for all his reputation as a control-freak, Hitler’s management style was much like that of Bush. Both tend to give a job to someone, then never follow up. Both tend to give overlapping responsibilities to subordinates, also. For all its vaunted efficiency, the top management of the Nazis was extremely chaotic. If Bush’s is less so, it is probably because he has the tradition of White House roles and structures to go by.
Hitler also had no close confident like Bush has in Rove.
The ability to fire or liquidate people at will versus the absolute loyalty to subordinates are learned behaviors, not characteristic of the inner person. The intensity with which each is practiced, however, is more characteristic and is probably a resemblance between the two.
This is an interesting site about “Narcissistic Personality Disorder”, link here.
Here, and here, and here, are quite useful analyses and characterizations of various aspects of this problem.
Bush is an extremely disturbed, (clinically disturbed), dangerously dysfunctional individual. His pathology is pretty clearly illuminated in this website’s information.
I totally agree that Bush shows clinical signs of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He is mentally ill. I also think that Poppy Bush shows signs of Narcissism and Momma Bush is probably a cruel sociopath. Bush’s mental illness has become so intense that his entire administration is showing clinical symptoms.
Good post.
Which brings us to Judge Roberts. This is the man Bush is so excited about, his perfect candidate that he has now elevated to his nominee for Chief Justice. This man will carry out all of the things Bush holds dear which should tell us right away that he must be rejected for 30+ years of Roberts means the awful Bush legacy actively continues for the bulk of our lifetimes. Bush must be forced to pick a moderate to please (or equally displease) both sides.
I don’t think Hitler and Bush were or are alike.
Hitler worked to get to where he stood. Bush did very little.
The difference is…though both can be said to be paranoid that outsiders or auslanders are out to get them…..Bush is essientially lazy, univolved. Hitler was interested in his job, I think. Hitler worked hard, Bush does not.
There are similairities. I know that Bush is delusional. He believes God talks to him. Well, God speaks to Pat Roberts and Pat Roberts alone.
The essence of George Bush as far as his presidency is concerned is that he is competing with his father. If you use that as a guide you can see where he has been and where he would like to go.
He hates his father. His father has always indicated to him that he is a screw up. Since childhood. A potential time bomb…in terms of embarassing his family with his drug and alcohol abuse and the things that result from that.
So George hates his father and when you hate your father (and secretly love and want his approval-that’s what makes him so mad=he percieves it to be unattainable-) you want revenge.
He gets his revenge by being the biggest fuck up anyone could ever imagine. He secretly feels satisfaction at his debacle in Iraq and Katrnia and offending the world through his actions at the UN. Then of course the world starts to disaaprove of him and he feels hurt and angry which leads to a cycle of more revenge.
He is at all times disturbed. His problems are not unusual. It’s just that his dad was president and now he’s president and the effects on the world are so immense. He is playing out a little psychological drama and the world is indulging him.
THis is the time when he can be said to be very dangerous. When he’s down. When he wants to strike out. He may not do it right away. He may do it when and if his popularity rebounds slightly. THat will really trigger him. He’s will feel the possibility of vindication…that he was riight all along and strike back at that point.
He has no gut. Only rage.He cannot refer to his gut because it is undeveloped. He is not intuitive.
THe engine that runs him is an engine that gets gratification from destroying things.
All the things his father built and valued as a president have been and are being destroyed. That is observable.
but how do you not? To me the comparison was evident from the outset. Bush also compares to Saddam, Stalin, Mussolini, and every other twisted despot. It’s not about their actions. It’s about character and personality. I’ll leave it to psychologists to decide whether it’s socio-psychopathy or malignant narcissism, but it’s a common theme among all these despots. This enshrining of Hitler as the evil that none can possibly emulate leaves us open to repeat history, endlessly. The difference between Hitler and Bush is one of cultural context, not character. Hitler did what he could get away with in a culture of anti-Semitism and rampant xenophobia. Bush and his crew do what they can get away with in a society that believes it is pluralistic and democratic. It’s time we stopped lying to ourselves about Bush being directed by moral clarity or compassion. The man is not capable of empathy. Neither is anyone close to him, including his mother. (That’s an interesting side note, btw. One of the common themes among despots like Bush, Hitler and Saddam is a remote or absent father, and a closeness to the mother.)
One of my favorite pieces of writing follows. It was written by a prescient fellow named Kent Southard, who writes for BushWatch.
The Bush regime’s main players are so infatuated with themselves and their crackpot ideology that they’ve become incapable of accurately assessing reality. This is why every single action they take is destructive and every policy they propose is irrational.
the Washington Post entitled “End of the Bush Era” writes:
I really was stunned to read this column today, and I’ve enjoyed Dionne’s columns for years. I was going to post a diary about it, but I don’t have the time so I will take the opportunity to share some quotes here. I encourage all to read the whole column.
As the parallels to Hitler’s end are brought into the discussion, how’s this sound?
All things mentioned by Boo and others here, but this is the Washington Post, in a column entitled End of the Bush Era!!
I’ve never heard Bush like I’ve heard him today. I do not recall him admitting fault by himself or anyone in his administration. The freepers will stick to the exact phrasing of all federal responsibility, and praise the courage — but has anyone with an objective view EVER seen Bush even accept the smallest of responsibility?
Dionne offers a final opportunity:
At last — the definitive refutation of Godwin’s law!