I would like to more about the people who support and enable the strongmen to gain power, What is their motivations? Please guide the perplexed. Donald Trump's supporters, especially. Irealize one size does not fit all.
I would like to more about the people who support and enable the strongmen to gain power, What is their motivations? Please guide the perplexed. Donald Trump's supporters, especially. Irealize one size does not fit all.
I think this article seems on the money about those that vote for DT, and ultimately will be probably putting JDV in the White House as president, since it is rumored he will use Article 25 when he gets in, as our Christo-fascist president.
Reader comment by Robert Ritchie in Joyce Vance’s Substack on Sept 9, 2024
The Cult of Opposition: Understanding the Psychology Behind Trump’s Supporters
In modern political discourse, the relationship between leaders and their supporters often reflects a symbiotic exchange—one of mutual benefit. Typically, a leader provides tangible improvements to the supporters’ lives, who in turn offer their allegiance. However, Donald Trump's presidency introduced a paradigm shift that baffled many analysts. A significant portion of Trump’s base does not measure his success by what he does *for* them, but rather by what he does against those they consider adversaries. This phenomenon raises a critical question: why do Trump's supporters define his success not by policy achievements or personal benefit but by his ability to antagonize perceived enemies? In this research paper, we explore the psychology, sociocultural factors, and communication strategies behind this phenomenon, offering a deep dive into the mechanisms that sustain this unwavering loyalty.
The Psychology of "Othering"
At the heart of this dynamic lies a fundamental psychological concept known as *othering.* Othering refers to the process of creating a division between "us" and "them," where "them" are people deemed different or antagonistic to one's own group. Social identity theory posits that individuals derive part of their self-worth from their membership in groups (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). When Trump attacks certain groups—be they immigrants, Democrats, or marginalized communities—his supporters feel that their in-group (conservative, predominantly white Americans) is being validated. The "other," typically those outside their cultural or political bubble, becomes a target of scorn and aggression. By constantly positioning himself against these groups, Trump reassures his supporters that they are on the winning side of a cultural war.
This is where the success metrics diverge from typical political calculations. Success, in the eyes of Trump's supporters, is not rooted in economic growth or policy achievements, but in the symbolic victories won over those they disdain. Trump’s antagonistic rhetoric serves as a rallying cry for a base that measures success by how effectively he torments the "other."
Fear as a Unifying Emotion
The divisiveness Trump exploits is not built solely on disdain for others but on deep-rooted fear. Research has shown that political conservatism often correlates with heightened fear responses (Hibbing, Smith, & Alford, 2014). These fears manifest in concerns over demographic changes, perceived threats to cultural identity, and economic anxiety—particularly in the wake of globalization and immigration. For Trump’s base, he offers not only validation of their fears but also an outlet for their anxiety: the vilification of outsiders.
By acting against these outsiders—whether through harsh immigration policies, vilification of the media, or incendiary tweets targeting "leftist elites"—Trump provides a sense of catharsis to his supporters. It’s not about building bridges or creating new opportunities; it’s about protecting their identity and keeping perceived threats at bay. In their minds, Trump’s success is defined by his defense of the status quo against forces of change.
The Appeal of a Strongman
This dynamic is exacerbated by the allure of authoritarian leadership, often characterized by a leader who promises protection and order while silencing dissent. Trump's rhetoric—filled with hyperbole, aggressive language, and dismissive attitudes toward political correctness—resonates deeply with those who feel disempowered by societal changes. Studies have shown that authoritarian personalities are drawn to leaders who project strength and offer simple, binary solutions to complex problems (Feldman, 2003). Trump’s combative style against the "other" fits neatly into this framework.
In this context, Trump is seen as the protector, someone who will go to any length to defend his supporters from external threats. His aggressive behavior—though often condemned by critics—is perceived by his base as a strength. In their eyes, his relentless attacks on groups like the media, the "deep state," or racial minorities are evidence of his success as a leader willing to do whatever it takes to secure their safety and identity.
The Role of Media and Propaganda
An essential factor in maintaining this dynamic is the role of right-wing media in amplifying Trump’s actions *against* others while downplaying or ignoring any lack of substantive achievements. Fox News, Breitbart, and other conservative outlets often frame Trump’s attacks on immigrants, liberals, and the media as necessary battles in a larger cultural war. Through selective reporting, these outlets reinforce the idea that Trump’s presidency is less about improving the lives of his supporters through policy and more about the symbolic victories he achieves through opposition to their perceived enemies.
Trump himself understood the power of media manipulation, often stoking controversy to keep his name in the headlines. As noted by philosopher Hannah Arendt, in authoritarian regimes, propaganda serves to simplify the world into friend versus foe (Arendt, 1951). By keeping the public focused on his skirmishes against the "other," Trump ensured that his base remained engaged and energized, even when his policies provided little material benefit to their lives.
The Social Contract of Aggrievement
This relationship between Trump and his supporters can be understood as a kind of *social contract of aggrievement.* While traditional politicians offer economic benefits, infrastructure improvements, or social programs, Trump offers emotional validation. His base, particularly those who feel marginalized by economic shifts or demographic changes, finds solace in his outward displays of aggression. His ability to provoke outrage in the "other" reassures them that they are still relevant in a world they fear is changing too fast.
Interestingly, this contract does not require Trump to follow through on traditional metrics of success like job creation or healthcare reform. His supporters are not primarily concerned with how he improves their lives directly. Instead, they focus on how he reinforces their worldview—one where they are under constant attack and where Trump is their defender. This emotional satisfaction creates a loyalty that transcends policy, rooted instead in the shared sense of grievance and resentment.
Conclusion: A Loyalty That Transcends
In understanding Trump’s success, it is critical to recognize the unique metrics by which his supporters measure his achievements. His base does not primarily seek economic relief or policy victories; they seek validation of their fears and grievances. By acting *against* the "other," Trump provides emotional and psychological sustenance that traditional political figures often fail to deliver. His success, therefore, lies in his ability to symbolize and enact opposition rather than constructively improve the lives of his supporters. As long as Trump continues to antagonize those perceived as threats, his base will remain loyal, even in the absence of tangible benefits.
In the end, the tormenting of the "others" does more than sustain them—it defines them.
Another aspect of the support of the strongman is personality type/disorders. The psychological study by Borris Duspara & Tobias Greitemeyer called " The Dark Tetrad and Political Orientation" shows a disturbing trend.
"Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy and everyday sadism were associated with right wing political orientation, whereas narcissism and psychopathy were associated with political extremism. Machiavellianism turned out to be the most important predictor of the dark side of human personality for political orientation. Machiavellianism is associated with misanthropy, anti-social tendencies, cold heartedness and immoral beliefs."
Those who would support a fascist candidate, likely share a similar personality to that of their hero. It is likely that they have one or more of the Dark Tetrad components. tRump of course has all four.
I would like to more about the people who support and enable the strongmen to gain power, What is their motivations? Please guide the perplexed. Donald Trump's supporters, especially. Irealize one size does not fit all.
Robert, here’s one reason:
https://youtu.be/KrU6F-S8VMo?si=s6klN6OYK0k3yDOU
I think this article seems on the money about those that vote for DT, and ultimately will be probably putting JDV in the White House as president, since it is rumored he will use Article 25 when he gets in, as our Christo-fascist president.
Reader comment by Robert Ritchie in Joyce Vance’s Substack on Sept 9, 2024
The Cult of Opposition: Understanding the Psychology Behind Trump’s Supporters
In modern political discourse, the relationship between leaders and their supporters often reflects a symbiotic exchange—one of mutual benefit. Typically, a leader provides tangible improvements to the supporters’ lives, who in turn offer their allegiance. However, Donald Trump's presidency introduced a paradigm shift that baffled many analysts. A significant portion of Trump’s base does not measure his success by what he does *for* them, but rather by what he does against those they consider adversaries. This phenomenon raises a critical question: why do Trump's supporters define his success not by policy achievements or personal benefit but by his ability to antagonize perceived enemies? In this research paper, we explore the psychology, sociocultural factors, and communication strategies behind this phenomenon, offering a deep dive into the mechanisms that sustain this unwavering loyalty.
The Psychology of "Othering"
At the heart of this dynamic lies a fundamental psychological concept known as *othering.* Othering refers to the process of creating a division between "us" and "them," where "them" are people deemed different or antagonistic to one's own group. Social identity theory posits that individuals derive part of their self-worth from their membership in groups (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). When Trump attacks certain groups—be they immigrants, Democrats, or marginalized communities—his supporters feel that their in-group (conservative, predominantly white Americans) is being validated. The "other," typically those outside their cultural or political bubble, becomes a target of scorn and aggression. By constantly positioning himself against these groups, Trump reassures his supporters that they are on the winning side of a cultural war.
This is where the success metrics diverge from typical political calculations. Success, in the eyes of Trump's supporters, is not rooted in economic growth or policy achievements, but in the symbolic victories won over those they disdain. Trump’s antagonistic rhetoric serves as a rallying cry for a base that measures success by how effectively he torments the "other."
Fear as a Unifying Emotion
The divisiveness Trump exploits is not built solely on disdain for others but on deep-rooted fear. Research has shown that political conservatism often correlates with heightened fear responses (Hibbing, Smith, & Alford, 2014). These fears manifest in concerns over demographic changes, perceived threats to cultural identity, and economic anxiety—particularly in the wake of globalization and immigration. For Trump’s base, he offers not only validation of their fears but also an outlet for their anxiety: the vilification of outsiders.
By acting against these outsiders—whether through harsh immigration policies, vilification of the media, or incendiary tweets targeting "leftist elites"—Trump provides a sense of catharsis to his supporters. It’s not about building bridges or creating new opportunities; it’s about protecting their identity and keeping perceived threats at bay. In their minds, Trump’s success is defined by his defense of the status quo against forces of change.
The Appeal of a Strongman
This dynamic is exacerbated by the allure of authoritarian leadership, often characterized by a leader who promises protection and order while silencing dissent. Trump's rhetoric—filled with hyperbole, aggressive language, and dismissive attitudes toward political correctness—resonates deeply with those who feel disempowered by societal changes. Studies have shown that authoritarian personalities are drawn to leaders who project strength and offer simple, binary solutions to complex problems (Feldman, 2003). Trump’s combative style against the "other" fits neatly into this framework.
In this context, Trump is seen as the protector, someone who will go to any length to defend his supporters from external threats. His aggressive behavior—though often condemned by critics—is perceived by his base as a strength. In their eyes, his relentless attacks on groups like the media, the "deep state," or racial minorities are evidence of his success as a leader willing to do whatever it takes to secure their safety and identity.
The Role of Media and Propaganda
An essential factor in maintaining this dynamic is the role of right-wing media in amplifying Trump’s actions *against* others while downplaying or ignoring any lack of substantive achievements. Fox News, Breitbart, and other conservative outlets often frame Trump’s attacks on immigrants, liberals, and the media as necessary battles in a larger cultural war. Through selective reporting, these outlets reinforce the idea that Trump’s presidency is less about improving the lives of his supporters through policy and more about the symbolic victories he achieves through opposition to their perceived enemies.
Trump himself understood the power of media manipulation, often stoking controversy to keep his name in the headlines. As noted by philosopher Hannah Arendt, in authoritarian regimes, propaganda serves to simplify the world into friend versus foe (Arendt, 1951). By keeping the public focused on his skirmishes against the "other," Trump ensured that his base remained engaged and energized, even when his policies provided little material benefit to their lives.
The Social Contract of Aggrievement
This relationship between Trump and his supporters can be understood as a kind of *social contract of aggrievement.* While traditional politicians offer economic benefits, infrastructure improvements, or social programs, Trump offers emotional validation. His base, particularly those who feel marginalized by economic shifts or demographic changes, finds solace in his outward displays of aggression. His ability to provoke outrage in the "other" reassures them that they are still relevant in a world they fear is changing too fast.
Interestingly, this contract does not require Trump to follow through on traditional metrics of success like job creation or healthcare reform. His supporters are not primarily concerned with how he improves their lives directly. Instead, they focus on how he reinforces their worldview—one where they are under constant attack and where Trump is their defender. This emotional satisfaction creates a loyalty that transcends policy, rooted instead in the shared sense of grievance and resentment.
Conclusion: A Loyalty That Transcends
In understanding Trump’s success, it is critical to recognize the unique metrics by which his supporters measure his achievements. His base does not primarily seek economic relief or policy victories; they seek validation of their fears and grievances. By acting *against* the "other," Trump provides emotional and psychological sustenance that traditional political figures often fail to deliver. His success, therefore, lies in his ability to symbolize and enact opposition rather than constructively improve the lives of his supporters. As long as Trump continues to antagonize those perceived as threats, his base will remain loyal, even in the absence of tangible benefits.
In the end, the tormenting of the "others" does more than sustain them—it defines them.
I will be writing about that very soon!
Another aspect of the support of the strongman is personality type/disorders. The psychological study by Borris Duspara & Tobias Greitemeyer called " The Dark Tetrad and Political Orientation" shows a disturbing trend.
"Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy and everyday sadism were associated with right wing political orientation, whereas narcissism and psychopathy were associated with political extremism. Machiavellianism turned out to be the most important predictor of the dark side of human personality for political orientation. Machiavellianism is associated with misanthropy, anti-social tendencies, cold heartedness and immoral beliefs."
Those who would support a fascist candidate, likely share a similar personality to that of their hero. It is likely that they have one or more of the Dark Tetrad components. tRump of course has all four.