Tags
authoritarianism, Blase Ford testimony, feudal absolute power, Kavanaugh confirmation, malignant narcissism, medieval v modern, political identification, political loyalty
The article touted in “conservative” circles: http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/04/left-will-never-apologize-brutalizing-brett-kavanaugh-family/ In Federalist writer Nathaniel Blake’s own words:
This ugly truth about us explains what has happened to Brett Kavanaugh. Initially he was hated for being a Republican nominee for the Supreme Court, but it is still not universally acceptable to abominate someone only for being an originalist judge.
“Originalist judge” may not well explain what the nation saw transpire last week.
Here is this blog’s editor’s take on that.
BackChannels believed Ford, and that he (Kavanaugh) lied because he had the power to deny everything negative about himself. As much may be part of an “ambitious” or malign narcissism, and as much fits with the personality and associates of the man who nominated him.
With Red or Blue Right / Left Flag navigation, political identity may force arguments rather than reason, and that emotion drives the demonizing of the other camp as well as the concept familiar to conflicts worldwide: “accusation in a mirror”. “Witch hunt!
The Left has no need to apologize for defending Blase Ford.
The Right has no need to wonder why professional advisement — all those lawyers! — against the confirmation were ignored and the process will be remembers as forced by the Republicans or blocked by the Democrats: for an answer, the power of identity and loyalty will do.
Related on BackChannels
https://conflict-backchannels.com/coins-and-other-terms/anthropolitical-psychology/
Related on the Web
https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/rwanda/Geno1-3-10.htm (cited here for “Accusation in a Mirror”, a political science concept well known to scholars — and here in association with genocide — but also fit with what may be observed in relation to “malignant narcissism”: the malignant narcissist is never wrong. BackChannels offers this post from 2013 as an example of the type: https://conflict-backchannels.com/2013/06/11/remember-its-never-the-narcissist-erdogan-blames-woes-on-vandals-and-terrorist-elements/).
–33–
BackChannels 
Regarding Dr. Christine Blasey Ford – the narrative may be true. But minus proof beyond solitary self witness there is no case.
Whilst possibly distasteful, the protection for the one is the protection which should be afforded to all. We are not under a Napoleonic penal code where the accused is presumed guilty and must prove their own innocence.
Our history attests to the many black American men who have spent years incarcerated due to the powerful testimony of a woman, to later find that DNA evidence proves innocence against a rape charge.
Ms. Ford was assaulted. But our social order also demands humane and lawful protections for the accused. The burden of proof is required.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Preponderance of evidence has also legal standing, and there is now a popular perception of an appointment nominated by an American president today associated with convicted felons starting with Paul Manafort who as at one time his chief campaign manager. “Optics” matter too in the broad court of public opinion.
In any case, Judge Kavanaugh’s examination by the senate was in no way a criminal trial but an evaluation of the candidate for appointment to the Supreme Court. For that purpose, the Administration withheld requested documents, controlled out FBI, its report, and its distribution. In the end, 48 of 100 senators denied the appointment, two did not vote, and the Vice President sat ready to produce the tie-breaker had that taken place. The appointment proved marginal and not broadly popular except in the most rigid and of definitions. About half the country, perhaps more — we shall see — will be most doubtful about highest decisions in law in which Judge Kavanaugh’s opinion proves decisive.
LikeLike