Political psychology caught my interest before I knew it was a legitimate area of study. By asking questions like, “Why do people hold a seemingly arbitrary collection of policy opinions?” or “Does biology drive ideology?” I backed into a sub-field almost as old as psychology itself. Still a dabbler, I can’t claim any special expertise compared to, say, Chris Mooney, who’s made it his blogging beat. You know who else is a longtime political psychologist? He’s been right in front of me all along: Rush Limbaugh. Sure, his methodology is more like mind-reading, but so was Freud’s. Limbaugh must be a more skillful psychologist than Freud, too, given his ability to diagnose from afar based not on deeds or words but on hidden thoughts.

This week, Limbaugh revealed the psyche of liberals, the pathology that infects minds with despair, ennui, and existential dread. The leftist worldview, he said, is “one of pessimism and darkness, sadness. They’re never happy, are they? They’re always angry about something. No matter what they get, they’re always angry.” Because he was not speaking about the right-wing worldview, he did not go on to say that conservatives, too, are always angry. At least, Limbaugh himself is always angry. On his show, he is constantly raising his voice, raging at his microphone, and not because he’s hard of hearing or because he’s jolly and mirthful.

As an example of the leftist worldview, Limbaugh segued immediately to Robin Williams, a well-known Democrat. Williams’ suicide “fits a certain image that the left has,” meaning that Williams’ financial problems and survivor guilt were due to “a constant measurement that is made by political leftists,” a failure to achieve the “false promises of America” that liberals believe. Now, did Limbaugh literally say, “Robin Williams killed himself because of a leftist attitude”? No, but he combined those two topics, and critics jumped on him for it (as they do). On Wednesday, Limbaugh walked back his comments, sort of, pretending the controversy was about his criticism of media reports that he felt were, by praising Williams’ career up until his last day, glorifying suicide. Although he says he never speculated that a “leftist worldview” caused Williams to take his own life… he did. In context, that’s exactly what he speculated, using the suicide of a celebrity Democrat to portray liberalism as a mental illness.

Scientifically speaking, what does political psychology say about Dr. Limbaugh’s conjecture? Well, Mooney last month linked to a 2010 study (PDF) that suggested conservatives are more emotionally stable whereas liberals are more neurotic, even though other studies show conservatives are more jumpy when presented with threatening stimuli. However, for suicide specifically, a study last year found higher rates in conservative-leaning states. Evidently, more gun ownership offsets the positive effect of church adherence. State-level data can’t reveal the psychology of those who actually commit suicide, so perhaps sad, dark, pessimistic leftists are snuffing themselves at higher rates in states where liberal living is less easy. If so, it’s not because of any ideological support for suicide, which a 2011 poll found was universally frowned upon (except for assisted suicide, which is controversial). So the data is puzzling, inconclusive. Dr. Limbaugh has discovered a gap in the data, a fruitful vein for further research.

If he believes it, that is. Not being a mind-reader myself, I don’t know if Limbaugh is sincere, but it’s obviously untrue that liberals are all suicidal. I mean, there wouldn’t be any still alive, right? And then Limbaugh would be out of a job. So why would he say an obviously untrue thing? The “leftist worldview” comment confirms for his audience that they are healthy, proper, correct. It reinforces the bubble of tribal solidarity. The danger of political psychology has always been the temptation to pathologize one’s opponents. Done right, political psychology cannot assume that one view is right while another is in need of a cure. The diligent, responsible scientist observes differences, searches for explanations, and lets society decide how to employ that knowledge. Can anyone imagine Rush Limbaugh approaching any question with an open attitude? I’m starting to think that he isn’t a psychologist at all.