70 online
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 12 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Review: Confessions of a Former Dittohead

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   No comments
Message Lynne Glasner
Confessions of a Former Dittohead
By Jim Derych

As might be expected from the title, Confessions of a Former Dittohead sheds light on the Rush Limbaugh phenomena for those who already think he's an idiot. But the pleasant surprise is that it also presents some incisive arguments that could be used in a sincere attempt to convert those who think he's a hero. Should Rush fans actually read this friendly little book, its light and informal style might just make them think again. Derych is neither preachy nor condescending; mostly he's rather modest about his transformation. This isn't so much a tell-all confessional self-expose' as much as an honest mea culpa.

By his own account, Derych used to subscribe to the Rush theory of government and politics. Somewhere in early 2004, however, he had reached the tipping point and officially counted himself among the Democrats. As with most self-realizations, Derych's conversion was borne of a thousand cuts. Derych openly documents many of his cuts and in the process exposes the straw man, carefully constructing the case for those who might try to suss out Rush fans. He even throws in some caveats in the how-to department.

Derych's first public confession about his official change of heart was posted to the Daily Kos website in February 2005. Greeted by hundreds of comments from other readers, eventually he turned his confessions into a book. This book is his story, written in the breezy, personal style of a blog, but organized to elicit understanding of his evolution of thought. Derych doesn't vent so much as unveil his own past thinking in order to enlighten; he clearly lays out the thought patterns of a Rush fan by offering up his own experience, including the illogic that he once hung his hat on. This isn't a heart-wrenching, painful self-analysis - if he suffered in the process it's not part of this narrative; it's amazingly nonjudgmental and matter-of-fact for all its indictments of both himself and of the false gods worshipped by current Rush followers.

Derych is not proud of his old world views - not because they aren't politically correct in his newly adopted thought environs - but because as the basic immorality, hypocrisy and fairness of them were exposed, he didn't like what it said about him as a subscriber. Derych's effort at absolution includes his account of his own conversion. As he bravely discarded his misguided opinions, one by one, they fell by the wayside and his personal narrative makes for a powerful argument to abandon the right-wing rhetoric. It is Derych's hope that his confession will help others follow the same path and open some heretofore stubborn minds to an alternative view from the Rush world dictum; he also offers his story as a series of lessons to be learned and successfully applied to those who attempt to convert other dittoheads.

Growing up in a conservative, Nixon Republican household, Derych went to college in Tennessee, not exactly a bastion of liberal thought. His father was a big Rush fan and Derych got hooked, like millions of others, on the slippery slope of needing to justify one's baser instincts. On his first introduction to Rushspeak, Derych was young and innocent, void of political views, as he describes himself at the time - the perfect audience. Derych explains the technique: Rush rants are spoken with authority and certainty and are argued with a convincing passion, making them hard to resist for the uninformed. Rush caters to those who long to live in an ordered world that has a simple solution to every problem. Even if they don't start out in total agreement with the Rush view of the world, it's easy to get there with Rush logic. As Derych explains, a "constant theme of Rush ... is getting you halfway to an unsupported allegation and then letting you go the rest of the way on your own." Rush is not for deep thinkers or even anyone with any modicum of intellectual honesty, as Derych paints the mindset. As one who understands Rush's popularity and the millions of listeners who have not crossed the line, Derych sets out to demystify Rush thinking.

Since Derych spent a lot of time listening to Rush rants, admiring Rush, nodding "ditto" to others who also were effusive in their admiration, he is in a good position to deconstruct the tenets of belief that he once upheld. As we read through Derych's account of his evolution, it is apparent that Derych already owned some fairly standard conservative views that were reinforced by the Rush patrol. Derych confesses to feelings of insecurity and describes how Rush makes his audience feel like they're not alone, that they are part of a group that takes pride in their knowledge of the world.

There's no way to document the mind of the Rush listening audience, and Derych doesn't try since this is his personal story. We have to assume that Rush fans have something in common with Derych's past political consciousness, and the narrative of his personal experience makes this a logical conclusion; after all, for many years, he was part of the Rush choir. On the other hand, though the process had begun before he knew his wife, being married to a Democrat probably gave him a push, or at least some intrinsic reward for change. Most dittoheads probably travel in more closed circles.

Like all effective propaganda, the Limbaugh rhetoric preys on people's fears and insecurities and has little to do with facts. In Derych's analysis, "the conservative worldview is based on ignorance." He comes to this conclusion based on a review of his old belief system and how he acquired it; ditto- he swallowed all the partial truths Rush profusely supplied - ultimately getting all his "news" and views directly from Rush, no questions asked. Apparently, this is the basic hallmark of all Rush fans: Rush supplies the "facts," which are confirmed by Fox News. Case closed""no other information can get in.

As Derych slowly became disillusioned by a series of events that continued to offer an alternative reality--facts that he couldn't easily dismiss--he started to listen more carefully and question some of the premises. As he did so, he discovered the duplicity of the arguments. One by one, his core beliefs went by the wayside.

Derych describes this transformation in an easy-to-read style, allowing the reader a glimpse of what it takes to undergo such radical change about controversial issues: abortion, gay rights, religion, and fiscal policy, to name a few. Derych's candor allows you to enter the mindset and follow the logic (or illogic). For those who are already on the Left, it's an interesting read with some practical advise on how to talk to a Rush fan and score points in the process. For those on the Right, if you can get them to read the book, they may be able to empathize and identify with Derych enough to start to chisel away at the façade of what Derych tags "the right-wing reasoning chip."

Derych takes each issue, pulls apart the Rush logic and explains how to crack open the door. As a professional financial planner, Derych is particularly strong on making his case in fiscal matters, including taxes, government spending and Social Security. It seems like arguing with facts would be self-evident, but to the "dittiot" (Derych's term for those who have lost all sense of reason and follow blindly), it is not. Derych argues that dittoheads must be force-fed with truth and he cautions that it is not an easy task mostly because dittoheads have been brainwashed to believe that the "facts" fed by Rush are true - no proof required. There is no critical thinking going on in the brain of a dittohead.

By providing the facts and showing the illogic used by the average dittohead, Derych reveals their game. Not that dittoheads are insincere and believe they are wrong; they don't. They have given their minds to Rush so that he can mold them in his own image. With Derych as a counter, it's possible that Rush could lose some of his audience. But first they'd have to read the book, or at least be approached by someone who has. If there's hope for spreading truth, this is a step in the right direction.

Derych states that dittoheads are immune to any information that runs counter to their view. One could argue that most people filter out counter views and in the polarized world of politics that we live in today, this pattern seems to be more widespread than ever. Looking at the splintered Left, it's not so much that they don't attend to counterarguments, but that on each issue, the Right has forced them into a position of scrambling to defend facts rather than advance real differences in basic opinions about how the facts should be used in the ideation of policy. The faith-based reality clung to by the conservatives who now dominate the Republican Party filters out facts, facts that are well-documented and until rather recently, would not be in dispute. This makes it impossible to have a civil discourse, puts the Democrats on the defensive, and further fractures the Left. When the facts are changed to fit the doctrine, it's hard to keep an argument at normal decibels.

There used to be Republicans who could defend their tenets without resorting to falsifying and distorting information; they may have had a different perspective, but they weren't dishonest and they didn't depend on bogus claims. One could disagree, but both sides were arguing from the same reality. In the last couple of decades that has changed. Derych has made a big contribution to showing how that divide may be narrowed. Like the early days of the Gingrich movement, one small step at a time on a personal level where each cut bleeds a little and needs fresh air to heal. Derych supplies some fresh air.
Rate It | View Ratings

Lynne Glasner Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Lynne Glasner is a freelance writer/editor based in New York City. She has edited numerous books, fiction and nonfiction, many on political subjects. Her essays have appeared in Commondreams, MediaChannel.org, and Huffington Post as well as OpEd (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Book Review: Conservatives Without Conscience, by John W. Dean

Crime and Punishment: Scholars Weigh In on the Bush Legacy

Book Review: Unacceptable: The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina

The State of the Union Is Frozen

Luck and the Trifecta of Politics

Going Rogue in the Military: The McChrystal Strategy and Original Intent

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend