I AM THE FIRST VICTIM OF MY HATRED OR ANIMOSITY
A closer look at the Trump supporter psychology
I AM THE FIRST VICTIM OF MY HATRED OR ANIMOSITY
It might seem that there are no big advantages to having hatred.
And though it can’t be more obvious many seem to hold on to it,
Maybe we can focus on Trump’s malignant animosity for a second?
This person hones in on anybody who he perceives had wronged him,
How it always turns out with him - holding grudges for years,
Each one momentarily in his orbit are fearful of this until they’re not.
For there is no wisdom is such behavior - only angst pervades the scene,
Indeed there is some power in his promotion of fear - short lasting,
Republicans on the whole are controlled by such fear it might seem,
So this precarious house of cards remains unbelievably long,
Trump is only a schoolyard bully - we have observed this now for years.
Virtually every day we watch this clothless emperor strut like a rooster,
I see that he truly has millions fooled by this song and dance,
Certainly it might seem that some might catch on over time,
Trump has more strange respect than one might ever guess,
I would have thought the light might have turned on faster than it has,
Many chances have come to those to shed him - mostly only cowards.
Of the nation’s time this guy has wasted - and he’s not through yet,
For the train wreck has been only in super slow motion.
Maybe so much hatred directed at him has impeded his exit,
Yes the millions of contrarians perhaps are getting some kind of kick.
Hatred of the other, whomever that might be may be part of neuroticism,
As about 30% of our global population is high in neuroticism,
Trump supporters are apparently a high proportion of this type,
Realistically they have a hard time in normal life,
Everyone of these folks aren’t necessarily who you want to run things,
Detrimental to our country these 30% most likely are on a good day.
Oh, and these are probably the are the last to ever seek needed help,
Republican neurotics - millions of them - can we displace these folks.
Authoritarian types these folks tend to gravitate to,
Now this Trump character pushes all their neurotic buttons,
Indeed the mess we’re in doesn’t seem to be very resolvable,
Maybe I’m only being a little bit of an apocalypticist - a naysayer,
Only it all seems rather daunting to actually think sincerely about,
So even with Trump out of the picture what next kook will they follow,
I can only try to keep my side of the street sane it might seem,
Today maybe all we can do is do our meditation,
Yet we better keep one eye open from now on.
I AM THE FIRST VICTIM OF MY HATRED OR ANIMOSITY
“When I observe myself and find that I am generating anger, ill will, or animosity, I realize that I am the first victim of the hatred or animosity I am generating within myself. Only afterwards do I start harming others. And if I am free from these negativities, nature or God Almighty starts rewarding me: I feel so peaceful.”
Satya Narayana Goenka (30 January 1924 – 29 September 2013) was an Indian teacher of vipassanā [(literally "special, super (vi-), seeing (-passanā)", are two qualities of the mind developed in tandem in Buddhist practice] meditation. Born in Burma to an Indian business family, he moved to India in 1969 and started teaching meditation. His teaching emphasized that the Buddha’s path to liberation was non-sectarian, universal, and scientific in character. He became an influential teacher and played an important role in establishing non-commercial Vipassana meditation centers globally. He was awarded the Padma Bhushan by the Government of India in 2012, an award given for distinguished service of high order.
Neuroticism, deprivation and racial bias: Trump’s unique authoritarian appeal
Written by
Published
2 February 2023
Many academics and commentators have puzzled over why Donald Trump is so popular despite his disregard for democratic norms. We have analysed the psychological traits of more than three million US citizens, and matched them with other factors such as demographics and economic situation. The analysis incorporates 18 distinct measures including birthweight, obesity, health, income and education, as well as the presence of traditional industries in their regions. The outcome showed a unique cocktail of factors contributed to Trump's support.
From a psychological perspective, people living in regions that voted for Trump in both elections have higher levels of neuroticism, a personality trait characterised by negative emotions such as anxiety, fear and anger. Those who have higher levels of neuroticism agree with statements such as “I see myself as someone who worries a lot” and as someone who feels “depressed, blue”. But circumstantial factors were also at play: people in poorer areas were more likely to vote for Trump, as were white voters and those prone to anti-Black racial bias.
Trump also improved his vote in 2020 in regions with poor health, where voters are traditionally Democrat
Trump voters generally live in areas where manufacturing and farming are in decline, and feel they have something to lose. Living in regions with low incomes, lower levels of internet access and less geographic mobility, they’re not part of the new tech economy for instance, and it may be that the threat of falling further that feeds their fear and anxiety.
Interestingly, the very poorest in the US still tended to vote Democrat: for Hilary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020. This includes people who have dropped out of high school and are on the breadline. Meanwhile, voters in wealthier areas of the country tended to back more traditional conservative candidates.
Another factor stood out in our analysis: a lack of college degree. Those who didn’t progress to higher education were more likely to vote Trump, in the primaries and in both elections.
The unique appeal of Trump
Trump succeeded in winning support in areas where previous Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney did not, back in 2012. He won over more people than Romney in regions where neuroticism was particularly high, and also where there was greater economic hardship and less ethnic diversity.
Analyses of the 2016 primaries revealed that this particular mix accounted for Trump’s appeal; there was little overlap among supporters of Trump and supporters of other Republican candidates such as John Kasich and Marco Rubio, who both won votes in areas that were better off. Like Trump, rivals Ted Cruz and Democrat Bernie Sanders won votes in more economically deprived regions during the primaries. But only Trump won votes in areas with high levels of neuroticism, economic deprivation and lack of ethnic diversity. From this analysis, we can’t say Trump supporters resemble typical right wing or populist left wing voters.
Trump voters... feel they have something to lose
The mix of characteristics that distinguishes Trump voters bears an uncanny similarity to the characteristics of those who supported the historical figure most associated with the rise of authoritarianism, Adolf Hitler. Both leaders won support among voters who have more to lose: the working poor who largely have jobs and aren’t at rock bottom. In the US, the poorest – who are more likely to be ethnic minorities – still vote mostly Democrat, and in interwar Germany, the poorest largely voted for the Communists.
As academics note, people who feel under threat – from demographic change, economic decline and who are prone to negative emotions – tend to favour authoritarian leaders.
Another presidential bid
What can politicians take from these findings? Interestingly, in the 2020 election, Trump gained in areas that are traditionally the preserve of Democrats, by winning over more ethnically diverse regions – although Democrats still won the largest share of the ethnic vote. Trump also improved his vote in 2020 in regions with poor health, where voters are traditionally Democrat.
This should raise a warning flag for Democrats to focus on areas such as education, health and wealth, especially in ethnically diverse areas as Trump embarks upon another presidential bid.
Fear and Deprivation in Trump’s America: A Regional Analysis of Voting Behavior in the 2016 and 2020 U.S. Presidential Elections
Sanaz Talaifar
@sanaaaaaaaz
Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Michael Stuetzer
Department of Industry, Baden Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University, Mannheim, Germany; Faculty of Economic Sciences and Media, Institute of Economics, Ilmenau University of Technology, Ilmenau, Germany
Peter J. Rentfrow
Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Jeff Potter
Samuel D. Gosling
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA; School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
[Twitter - translated from Turkish - Samuel D. Gosling, a social psychologist at the University of Texas, studied the personality traits of those who describe themselves as "dog-friendly" and "cat-friendly" and came to the following conclusions:
Cat lovers are more neurotic and open to experience. Dog lovers are more extroverted, agreeable and conscientious.]
Abstract
Since Trump was elected U.S. President in 2016, researchers have sought to explain his support, with some focusing on structural factors (e.g., economics) and others focusing on psychological factors (e.g., negative emotions). We integrate these perspectives in a regional analysis of 18+ structural variables capturing economic, demographic, and health factors as well as the aggregated neuroticism scores of 3+ million individuals. Results revealed that regions that voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 had high levels of neuroticism and economic deprivation. Regions that voted for Trump also had high anti-Black implicit bias and low ethnic diversity, though Trump made gains in ethnically diverse regions in 2020. Trump’s voter base differed from the voter base of more traditional Republican candidates and Democrat Bernie Sanders. In sum, structural and psychological factors both explain Trump’s unique authoritarian appeal.
World Psychiatry. 2017 Jun; 16(2): 144–145. Published online 2017 May 12.
Neuroticism is a fundamental domain of personality with enormous public health implications
Neuroticism is the trait disposition to experience negative affects, including anger, anxiety, self‐consciousness, irritability, emotional instability, and depression. Persons with elevated levels of neuroticism respond poorly to environmental stress, interpret ordinary situations as threatening, and can experience minor frustrations as hopelessly overwhelming. Neuroticism is one of the more well established and empirically validated personality trait domains, with a substantial body of research to support its heritability, childhood antecedents, temporal stability across the life span, and universal presence.
Neuroticism has enormous public health implications. It provides a dispositional vulnerability for a wide array of different forms of psychopathology, including anxiety, mood, substance, somatic symptom, and eating disorders. Many instances of maladaptive substance use are efforts to quell or quash the dismay, anxiousness, dysphoria, and emotional instability of neuroticism. Clinically significant episodes of anxiety and depressed mood states will often represent an interaction of the trait or temperament of neuroticism with a life stressor.
Neuroticism is comparably associated with a wide array of physical maladies, such as cardiac problems, disrupted immune functioning, asthma, atopic eczema, irritable bowel syndrome, and even increased risk for mortality. The relationship of neuroticism to physical problems is both direct and indirect, in that neuroticism provides a vulnerability for the development of these conditions, as well as a disposition to exaggerate their importance and a failure to respond effectively to their treatment.
Neuroticism is also associated with a diminished quality of life, including feelings of ill‐will, excessive worry, occupational failure, and marital dissatisfaction. High levels of neuroticism will contribute to poor work performance due to emotional preoccupation, exhaustion, and distraction. Similar to the duel‐edged effect of neuroticism on physical conditions, high levels of neuroticism will result in actual impairment to marital relationships but also subjective feelings of marital dissatisfaction even when there is no objective basis for such feelings, which can though in turn lead to actual spousal frustration and withdrawal.
Given the contribution of neuroticism to so many negative life outcomes, it has been recommended that the general population be screened for clinically significant levels of neuroticism during routine medical visits. Screening in the absence of available treatment would be problematic. However, neuroticism is responsive to pharmacologic intervention. Pharmacotherapy can and does effectively lower levels of the personality trait of neuroticism. Barlow et al have also developed an empirically‐validated cognitive‐behavioral treatment of neuroticism, called the Unified Protocol (UP). They have suggested that current psychological treatments have become overly specialized, focusing on disorder‐specific symptoms. The UP was designed to be transdiagnostic. Recognizing the impact of neuroticism across a diverse array of physical and mental health care concerns, the authors of the UP again note that “the public‐health implications of directly treating and even preventing the development of neuroticism would be substantial”.
Neuroticism has long been recognized since the beginning of basic science personality research and may even be the first domain of personality that was identified within psychology. Given its central importance for so many different forms of mental and physical dysfunction, it is not surprising that neuroticism is evident within the predominant models of personality, personality disorder, and psychopathology.
Neuroticism is one of the fundamental domains of general personality included within the five‐factor model or Big Five. It is also within the dimensional trait model included in Section III of the DSM‐5 for emerging measures and models. This trait model consists of five broad domains, including negative affectivity (along with detachment, psychoticism, antagonism, and disinhibition). As expressed in the DSM‐5, “these five broad domains are maladaptive variants of the five domains of the extensively validated and replicated personality model known as the ‘Big Five’ or Five Factor Model of personality”.
Neuroticism is likewise aligned with the negative affective domain included within the dimensional trait model of personality disorder proposed for the ICD‐119. Finally, it is also evident within the transdiagnostic Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) of the National Institute of Mental Health, as RDoC negative valence encapsulates such constructs as fear, distress, frustration, and perceived loss. It would be inaccurate to suggest that RDoC negative valence is equivalent to neuroticism, but it is self‐evident that they are closely aligned.
Currently, there is considerable interest in the general factors of psychopathology, personality disorder, and personality. To the extent that degree of impairment and dysfunction (which largely defines the general factors) is associated with level of distress and dismay, which is quite likely to be the case, we would propose that neuroticism will explain a substantial proportion of the variance in those general factors.
In sum, neuroticism is a fundamental domain of personality that has enormous public health implications, impacting a wide array of psychopathological and physical health care concerns. It contributes to the occurrence of many significantly harmful life outcomes, as well as impairing the ability of persons to adequately address them. It has long been recognized as one of the more important and significant domains of personality and is being increasingly recognized as a fundamental domain of personality disorder and psychopathology more generally.
Besides, around 30% of the global population can be expected to score between above average and high on neuroticism, so they have an inherent (and biologically determined) tendency to worry more, make pessimistic and negative interpretations of events, and be self-critical. Unless they can somehow replace their personality, we should not expect them to become cheerful or optimistic. Moreover, one would expect a fair, diverse, and inclusive society to accept them for who they are, rather than condemn or ostracize them for not fitting into an idealized cultural archetype (which, incidentally, is intellectually vacuous).
“It is necessary to be tolerant, in order to be tolerated.”
N. Macdonald.
MACDONALD, NORMAN, born in New York , 1792 ; an American writer , and author of " Maxims and Moral Reflections, " ( New York , 1827. )
“What do the persecuted ask of their oppressors? Toleration.”
— R. M. Johnson
Richard Mentor Johnson (October 17, 1780– November 19, 1850) was an American lawyer, military officer and politician who served as the ninth Vice President of the United States from 1837 to 1841 under President Martin Van Buren. He is the only vice president elected by the United States Senate under the provisions of the Twelfth Amendment. Johnson also represented Kentucky in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate. He began and ended his political career in the Kentucky House of Representatives.
Johnson lost his reelection to the Senate in part due to his personal life. He had never married but had a common-law wife, a slave whom he inherited from his father. They lived together as a family when he was in Kentucky and had two daughters. When she died in 1833, he had two subsequent mistresses, who were also black or mixed race. Many people knew about Johnson’s personal life, and it was not a major issue when he served in the House. However, it became a liability for him in statewide Senate campaigns and national elections. During his campaign for vice president, some Virginian politicians refused to support Johnson in part because of his personal life. While serving in the House from 1829 to 1837, Johnson was a supporter and friend of President Andrew Jackson and became strongly allied with the Democratic Party. He had considerable power in the House due to his long congressional career. In the election of 1836, Jackson promoted Johnson as Martin Van Buren’s vice president to balance the ticket. Johnson had strong military experience and was seen as a war hero, whereas Van Buren had not fought in the War of 1812. Although Van Buren won the presidential election, Johnson fell one vote short of the majority he needed. Thus the race was put to the Senate, which voted for Johnson. He is the only vice president to be elected by the Senate. As vice president, Johnson did not have a close relationship with Van Buren and had little influence in the administration. He presided over the Senate, assigned Senators to committees, and cast tie-breaking votes. He was considered a competent but unremarkable vice president. In the election of 1840, Johnson was considered a liability to Van Buren but instead of nominating someone else, the Democratic Party chose not to nominate anyone nationally but to allow state party organizations to select their vice presidents. In the end, Johnson had little effect on the election, and William Henry Harrison defeated Van Buren for the presidency. Johnson returned to private life in Kentucky after the election, running his farm and tavern. He served in the Kentucky legislature from 1841 to 1843 and was again elected in 1850 but he never took office. He died of a stroke on November 19, 1850.
I can now do my pseudo-sonnet as I haven’t hogged the storage this time around.
So Many Wearing the Grinches Mask
Seems that “MAGAism” comes with neuroticism and a hitch,
Worrywarts in all kinds and people who have trouble with personal relations,
Propensity to abuse all kinds of liquid libations,
Seems their brains tend to go awry with many a glitch,
And so many are suffering economically - little new clothes - no stitch,
Extreme hatred and fear directed to law abiding Haitians,
Obsessed at all times with brown and black skinned forced exportation,
A And always most irrationally siding with the filthy rich.
But we realize we must be the ones promoting tolerance in this scenario,
Yes even for this pack of jerks,
There always seems to be a few at our place of work,
We have to take careful aim with our societal Cupid’s arrow,
Honestly I have mixed emotions over my total tolerance task,
With so many of us wearing the grinches mask.
That is what I have for you today. I hope there was some new information contained in all this effort. I gave it my Montana State University fighting bobcat’s try.
206th posting, October 3, 2024.