A Facebook post (now posted here earlier today) by my dear friend Steve Shiffrin moved me to comment of one aspect of his post, to which is added a preliminary attempt to explain this phenomenon in group psychological terms that draw from the wellspring of psychoanalysis.
Replacement “theory” is not really a theory, and we accord it sociological and political (or simply scientific) plausibility if not credibility should we use this term indiscriminately and or uncritically. It is part of a rigid if not closed ideological belief system that is racist and implicitly or explicitly cleaves to notions of white supremacy. This idea is part myth, part phantasy (with a history: according to a recent op-ed in the LA Times by Jason Stanley and Federico Finchelstein, white replacement phantasy and ‘its ideological predecessors have been central to fascist movements in Europe, Asia, the United States and elsewhere’) and invites if not imbibes both illusions and delusions. In Freudian terms, it is born of primary mental functioning and processes (hence the disregard of logic and fundamental forms of reasoning, tolerating contradictions if not incoherence, the use of densely symbolic imagery and indirect and distorted forms of representation, etc.), rather than secondary process psychic functioning which respects grammatical and syntactical rules and denotative symbols, giving pride of place to reasoning and consistent links between belief and desire (in general, the ego predominates). We need, I believe, to examine this ideological myth in psychological terms, in particular, as it relates to group psychology and forms of collective belief and identity, including nationalism (in this instance, xenophobic forms of same based on mythic narratives). Trump’s presidency and ongoing political celebrity out of office has tapped into the darker forces of an American psyche, if you will, forces that are regressive in the worst sense (i.e., it is not in service of the ego or one with sublimation, as we find, say, in artistic creativity). In the words of Thomas A. Singer,
“Donald Trump uncovered a huge sinkhole of dark, raw emotions in the national psyche for all of us see [heretofore they did not find sufficient legitimation or encouragement among powerful politicians but existed on the margins of society as well as being, on the level of the individual, more or less ‘repressed,’ albeit with occasional exceptions in the form of crime sprees, acts of terrorism, mass shootings, flagrant violations of social norms, etc.]. Rage, hatred, envy, and fear surfaced in a forgotten, despairing white underclass [to be honest, it was not just among this group, but in the precarious lower and middle classes as well] who had little reason to believe that the future would hold the promise of a brighter life-affirming purpose. Trump tapped into the negative feelings many Americans have about the things [presumably] that we are supposed to be compassionate [or at minimum, tolerant] about—ethnic, racial, gender, [sexual], and religious differences. What a relief, so many must have thought, to hear a politician speak their unspoken [at least in polite society, as we say] resentments and express their rage.”
More specifically if not etiologically, in the words of Elizabeth Mika, Trump’s malignant narcissism “is the main attraction for his followers, who project their hopes and dreams onto him.” If we consider Trump a would-be tyrant, “[t]hrough the process of identification, the tyrant’s followers absorbed his omnipotence and glory and imagine themselves as powerful as he is [this is a vicarious or substitute expression of his power, which some will imagine themselves to actually possess, hence the ‘acting out’ we have witnessed in recent mass shootings by young white men], the winners in the game of life [if whites become a minority, they will see themselves as ‘losers’]. This identification [is a temporary salve for] the follower’s narcissistic wounds … [which] tends to shut down their [ability to] reason and [their exercise of] conscience, allowing them to engage in immoral and criminal behaviors with a sense of impunity engendered by this identification. Without the support of his narcissistic followers, who seen in the tyrant a reflection and vindication of their long-nursed dreams [nightmares for the rest of us] of glory, the tyrant would remain a middling nobody.” This is not revelatory, psychoanalytically speaking, as Erich Fromm earlier wrote of such phenomena in several books, including Escape from Freedom (1941) and The Heart of Man: Its Genius for Good and Evil (1964).
White rage, envy, and resentment can be characterized in terms of what the sociologist Michael Kimmel terms “aggrieved entitlement,” that is, a “narcissistic mixture of elevated expectations, resentments, and desire for revenge on specified targets and/or society in general for not meeting those expectations” [see his 2013 book, Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era]. Existing structures and exercises of white power and privilege constitute one such set of “elevated expectations,” insofar are thought to deserved or justified and thus not open to questioning or criticism.
Narcissistic collusion between Trump (or any would-be tyrant or Trump-wannabe) and his followers typically involves “good-sounding” as well as “openly unrealistic, bordering on delusional—promises to his supporters” that he usually has no intention—or even ability—of fulfilling. “He holds his supporters in contempt, as he does ‘weaker’ human beings in general, and uses them only as props in his domination- and adulation-oriented schemes.” As we saw during and after Trump’s presidency, the “narcissistic collusion between the [would-be] tyrant and his supporters is also driven by the latter’s need for revenge, for the tyrant is always chosen to perform this psychically restorative function: to avenge the humiliations (narcissistic wounds) of his followers and punish those who afflicted them.” The target of such vengeance is based on what Freud brilliantly defined as the “narcissism of small differences,” meaning “the Other” is anyone who does not share the ideological worldview of white supremacy. This is where, notoriously, scapegoating (displacement and projection) enters the picture, as Trump’s supporters act out their narcissistic revenge in one way or another:
“The tyrant [‘would-be,’ in Trump’s case] and his followers typically choose as vessels for their negative projections and aggression the members of society who are not just different but weaker. The tyrant fuels the aggression [and violence] in order to solidify his power (while simultaneously increasing the vicarious power of his followers) but also to deflect it from himself, shield his own narcissism, and repair his own narcissistic injuries dating to his childhood.” Further psychological analysis speaks to the tyrant as a father-protector and messianic figure (in which case the theology and symbolism of Christianity becomes relevant).
Two books I have found quite helpful by way of providing a group psychological explanation largely within the parameters of psychoanalytic theory:
- Glass, James M. Psychosis and Power: Threats to Democracy in the Self and the Group (Cornell University Press, 1995).
- Lee, Bandy, ed. The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 37 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President (Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin’s Press, updated ed., 2019). In particular, please see the consecutive contributions by Steve Wruble, Thomas Singer, and Elizabeth Mika in Part 3: “The Trump Effect,” 273-308. While there is some repetition and overlap among the many contributions, there are a handful of excellent pieces that help one make psychological and political sense both of Donald Trump (as both ‘mad and bad’) and his perfervid followers and political lackeys. There is also an indispensable article near the end of the volume (which should have been placed at the beginning!) by Nassir Ghaemi, “The Goldwater Rule and the Silence of American Psychiatry,” which might be read in conjunction with the book, First Do No Harm: The Paradoxical Encounters of Psychoanalysis, Warmaking, and Resistance (Routledge, 2010), edited by Adrienne Harris and Steven Botticelli.
Relevant Bibliographies
- After Slavery & Reconstruction: The Black Struggle in the U.S. for Freedom, Equality, and Self-Realization
- Beyond Inequality: Toward Welfare, Well-Being and Human Flourishing
- Capitalist and Other Distortions of Democratic Education
- Constitutionalism
- Democratic Theory and Praxis
- Elections and Voting
- Human Nature, Personhood, and Personal Identity
- Immigration & Refugees: Ethics, Law, and Politics
- The Political Philosophy of Liberalism
- Marxism
- Mass Media: Politics, Political Economy, and Law
- Psychoanalytic Psychology and Therapy
- Workers, the World of Work, and Labor Law
Comments