The Followers

 

 

I am becoming more annoyed when hearing the excessive lying by individuals on social media, radio or on television. One senator said something to the effect that 74 million persons feel disfranchised by their vote. Does he really believe what he said? Did he or someone else personally interview 74 million individuals and ask them about their vote? Was this Yale trained lawyer senator purposely lying by making up something obviously false for political and economic gain?   It’s clear that 74 million individuals have not been asked about being disfranchised. His position suggest that the Machiavellian concept of moral egoism overrides or gets in the way of doing what’s right morally.  Why should he exhibit rational and moral behavior? Is it important for him to be rational or moral?  Importantly, is this Senators stance and behavior good for our country? Is lying the norm?

Another individual, in personal communication with my friend Paul, said something to the effect that Trump turned 2 US battleships into hospital ships to combat the pandemic. When he was told that the last US battleship, the USS Missouri, was placed in mothballs in 1992 and that the USNS Mercy and the USNS Comfort were fully equipped hospital ships and sent to New York and Los Angeles, he was left speechless. Did this individual intentionally make up this falsehood or was he just repeating what he heard? In both cases, he was lying. First, he did not question or research this intentional misrepresentation of fact nor was he, in any case, seeking truth. His lie could’ve been related to his ignorance by not exercising all the means necessary to gather the facts. Ignorance is no excuse nor does it justify lying behavior.  Does one believe a pathological liar and not trust the 62 court decisions combating the lie? Does his self-interest distort the reality?  Does he lack the desire to do what’s right? This disquisition focuses on a character of submission and the need to affiliate with an authoritarian leader.

The quest for freedom and democracy is not new per sapient history. About 75 years or so, our country faced an authoritarian threat by Hitler. Nazi-ism was very popular among the German people. Hitler had many disciples as well as preponderance of submissive followers. He was a leader, clear and simple and ruled in an authoritarian manner as many of the people lost civil liberties by losing their homes, places of work, and religious ideologies. Others, served and carried out inhumane practices. It didn’t seem to matter to the followers that Hitler and his culprits were cunning, lied or used trickery. In fact, almost the entire population were the will-less object of betrayal and terror. He tore down his people and country.   Were these German people fighting for the defense of freedom or were they actually escaping from freedom-of thought, rationality, wisdom, and morality? Was it just the mesmerizing of Hitler or were there other factors like character and the institutions at play?

John Dewey American philosopher and psychologist over 81 years ago stated “The serious threat to our democracy is not the existence of foreign totalitarian states. It is the existence within our own personal attitudes and within our own institutions of conditions which have given a victory to external authority, discipline, uniformity and dependence upon the leader in foreign countries. The battlefield is also accordingly-within ourselves and our institutions.”

John Dewey was correct in that we must look at ourselves and our institutions. Within ourselves, there can be a tendency toward submission to an authority over which one has little or no control.  Of course within any system, the character of the individual is affected by economic and social conditions. Character development of submission, lust for power and/or sadomasochism can follow.  Initially, the individual has to meet its primary safety needs of food, water, warmth, cold and air. Then, additional needs are developed and influenced by the capitalistic, economic, and political systems of the culture and society.

According to Erich Fromm,” submission to an overt authority can be related to individual conscience; to an inner compulsion; to an anonymous authoritarian or to and insatiable lust for power. In an authoritarian dynamic, we have a political system that does not operate or appeal to rational forces but diabolical ones.” Within capitalism, significant needs for ambition, achievement, fame, power, possessions, success, greed and work are created.

Initially, in the character development for submission, within a capitalism economic system, there is a threatening, external or authoritarian and controlling parenting figure. In order to be a” good boy,” the son has to submit by repressing or suppressing anger, over and over. With repression, hostility will follow and that leads to behaviors of defiance and oppositionalness toward others, other groups as in prejudice, hate, and discrimination as well as toward life itself. Additional unequal or submission interactions occur throughout one’s lifetime with teachers, coaches, police, military, supervisors, employers, various interpersonal interactions etc. We learn to submit, take orders, go along with someone else’s program and often bite our lip in the process. The tendency for sadomasochism is easily created.  One of my friends served in the military in Vietnam. He did not like all the rules and regulations and therefore exhibited oppositional acting out behavior toward authority. However, in the process, he ingested alcohol too much and was often inebriated. This was an example of repressed anger faced with strict standards and rigid rules that produced strong self-defeating and unhealthy behavior toward others and self. His behavior was irrational and harmful. Thus, with development, the character structure can lead to behaviors of destructiveness, sadism, submission, and lust for power, self-aggrandizement, and passion for thrift, sensuous pleasure or fear of sensuality.

Turning to our institutions, we see the tentacles by the powerful, celebrity, and authoritarian leader. At the head of the federal government departments pertaining to Secretary of State, Department of Defense, Justice Department, CIA, FBI etc., we find his appointed loyalists. Do not forget the Congress. These loyalists, in turn submit, and then in turn act out sadistic policies directed by the leader. At the state and local level, more of the same occurs. Some of the followers are totally blind and follow faithfully; some are partially blind; some require cataract surgery; and some require glasses. As far as the rest of the followers, some are limited educationally, intellectually and do not have the cognitive resources in determining fact from fiction. Perhaps, moral egoism is at play as well. Some because of cognitive dissonance find it easier and simpler to follow the algorithms placed by the social media platforms; and listen to Fox news and hate radio.  Witness the Georgia election and the criminality at the Capital. In other words, John Dewey was right in that institutions are also controlled and corrupted by the tentacles of the octopus leader.

Returning to the fragile and insecure nature of a sapient, is the need to avoid aloneness. Belongingness or affiliation can be to ideas, values, groups, religion, and nationalism or to a corrupt, impeached and lying criminal leader.  One can still feel alone, even in a relationship, and be fearful of separation. Breaking up and getting together again and again is one illustration of the fear of being alone. The anxiety of insignificance, is very powerful to say the least. Individuals have to belong or affiliate with someone or something in order to avoid isolation, and moral aloneness. One has to seek security and unite in some way in the world. The drive for seeking security is all-encompassing. However, a loss of freedom and/ or moral integrity can be by products.

The character type of submission, as a result, often seeks an authoritarian leader or group to become a part of and belong to. It doesn’t seem to matter whether or not the leader is amoral, has nondemocratic values, lies, cheats, is sadistic, or attempts to divide. It doesn’t seem to matter how or by what means that leader uses to remain in power. It seems that the drive for submission and following that leader remains in full force. It’s not about the democratic institutions, reality, objectivity, wisdom or truth. It’s about the character structure and the primitive emotions of the followers that’s important and the driving force, so that lying or acting out, as symptoms, remains in full force. In essence, these individuals are of quisquous character. Just observe their behavior, at the Capital, on the 6^th of January.

Machiavelli’s concept of moral egoism is a conscious explanation of behavior to a leader. Other examples of justification include consciously or unconsciously the following 1. I like his policies 2. He’s a celebrity 3. He’s a billionaire 4. He’s a member of the correct political party 5. I like his rhetoric 6. I like that he’s a racist 7. I like his power 8. Feeling powerless, insignificant and inadequate 9. Some impairment, inadequacy, insecurity or stress related to academic or educational achievement; current job options, employment or unemployment; physical and/or mental health concerns; marital or family discord; lack of meaning or significance in life; and a doom and gloom future.

I agree with Mitt Romney when he said “tell them the truth” in response to Ted Cruz’s comments earlier.