I'd add to this very insightful post that blinding political loyalties cut both ways. I used to reflexively presume that all consersative beliefs were rooted in disinformation. At some point, I began checking things out for myself and realized that I was wrong about certain things that my tribe takes as gospel truth. I now try to hold my opinions lightly until I've had a chance to hear from all sides, which includes doing my own fact-checking on what everyone is asserting.
I often thought about some of the dynamics you described as I was navigating the most challenging aspects of several years of dealing with my health insurance company as I pushed back against their nonsense to avoid financial ruin. The banality of those customer service agents who could not have cared less if I was bankrupted or landed in the street. Or the VP who sent a letter that, effective immediately, kicked me out of the care of my specialist. The cruelty of it was remarkable. Zero empathy.
I chose to file complaints and insisted on speaking up and pushing back against the cruelty.
While it was no fun to endure - and I did prevail, fortunately - I am well aware that, ironically, it was good training for the unfolding times we're in now.
This is why I believe that it's important to take a moral stand along the lines of it not being right to treat anyone the way people are being treated as ICE carts them away. I think it's important to bring focus to the issues of humanity so that the callousness cannot completely take over. It's not about judging or characterizing folks who still support Trump; there's also cult mind control going on there and trauma binding, IMHO.
I think it's important to state loudly, clearly, and repeatedly that empathy is an important aspect of our national character. This is why we will not stand for more and more cruelty.
Hi Nella, thanks for your thoughtful reply to my article. Yes, there is a parallel between the people denying insurance coverage and those carrying out Trump’s orders. I’m sorry you had to deal with that misery, but you’re right to frame it as good preparation for our current struggle. And yes, we must demand more compassion from our leaders and fellow citizen.
Hi Karin, if you haven't already watched Anand Giridharadas' (the.Ink on Substack) most recent interview with Ruth Ben-Ghiat, I encourage you to do so. They speak of the importance of radical love in responding to authoritarianism. I haven't yet finished it, but have found it fascinating so far and would be curious to hear your take on the topic, too.
I think you'll really like Anand and his work. I haven't yet watched his recent interview with Michigan Senate Candidate Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, which is about radical empathy and radical change. Good stuff!
Another reason for empathy for T voters relates specifically to narcissism and the dynamics of narcissistic abuse. Anyone who's been through that and come out clear-eyed can likely see those dynamics at play between him and his supporters.
I'm guessing you're familiar with the work of Dr. Bandy X. Lee?
Are there accounts from or studies of those who initially supported the Nazis, but later changed to be anti-Nazi ( as atrocities were revealed or even as extremism spread)?
Yes, there were people inside Nazi Germany who changed their minds and turned against the regime before it collapsed, though they were rare and often paid an enormous price. Some, like Hans and Sophie Scholl of the White Rose, moved from youthful enthusiasm to active resistance when they realized what the regime was doing. Others, like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Claus von Stauffenberg, initially supported aspects of the government but turned sharply against it as the reality of Nazi atrocities became clear. Oskar Schindler famously began as a Nazi Party member and businessman but used his position to save over a thousand Jews.
What all these examples show is that change was possible, but it was hard, dangerous, and usually required both a moral awakening and an alternative source of purpose or belonging. This is exactly why today, if we want people to break with Trump, we have to offer them not just criticism, but also pathways to dignity, community, and meaning on the other side.
Another example is white supremacists who have left hate groups. The book "Rising from Hatred" is one such story. Also check out the inspiring work of Darryl Davis who has persuaded hundreds of KKK members to hang up their hoods and Christian Picciolini who supports poeple who are exiting hate groups.
I was in Charlottesville, the Unite the Right rally. I was a Neo-Confederate with a Confederate flag. The League of Women Voters wrote a brilliant argument against Confederate monuments. I couldn't counter it. The LWV delivered us the knockout punch! I learned that supporting these ideas are discriminatory, inflammatory and fascist. It was painful to watch those monuments come down but I am learning to accept and commit to change. I just joined the LWV and will help them fight for our democracy.
My oh my such an amazing analysis starting from a simple tearjerker. But you completely missed the real reason Trump doesn’t lose votes because of those stories. It’s because almost invariably they are either pure fiction or there are critical facts left out of the story by reporters who invariably are Democrats. Your entire analysis is based on the false assumption, that the story is accurate as written.
Hi Andrew, thanks for taking the time to comment. You’re right. Trump’s supporters often don’t believe reports of inhumane acts under his Administration and that explains why some people don’t break with him. The same was true in Nazi Germany when many people continued to support Hitler because they didn’t believe reports of the atrocities of the Holocaust. It sounds like you think widespread media reports are incorrect and that the Trump Administration is treating migrants humanely during the deportation process. If so, then it makes sense to disregard them. That said, I have a question. If you were to learn the reports were actually accurate (because they were verified by a source you trust), would that change your opinion of Trump and his Administration or would you feel the same regardless? Thanks again for your thoughts!
Well, that was quick. Jump right to Nazis. In any case, 30 seconds of research on the story you quote shows that the mother of the child was offered the chance to leave the child with friends in the US but declined. The mother is the illegal alien. Next, the term migrant implies some sort of legal status. The mother was in the US illegally. Finally, yes they are treated humanely. They are not beaten or starved or hurt in any way. They are merely expelled.
I mean, I am not a mother, but that's a decision I would hate to have to make. Can you imagine? Leave your child behind to suffer and maybe die without you, or keep this person you *created* and love more than yourself by your side despite the risks?
Do you perceive civil infractions as being equal to or worse than criminal infractions? What harm was that women doing?
I’ve been thinking things along these lines but you do such great job of drawing out all the implications of admitting error and losing one’s tribe and purpose. I work in Marjorie Taylor Greene’s district, so most of my friends support Trump. They are great guys. I love them. They just support a terrible man. Thanks for those great insights.
I was stopped by this sentence, because part of it has such deep roots.
"They are ordinary individuals swept up by loyalty, fear, social pressure, and the gradual erosion of moral boundaries."
I can accept the normal human traits of loyalty, fear, and social social pressure. These are all in our genes as a species.
What is not, I think, is the logic behind erosion of moral boundaries.
When senior leaders' behaviors break norms, and they either deny or get away with it or both, the boundaries that keep our society within rational guardrails blur. And as we see, they can blur away completely.
This phenomenon has occurred throughout our nation's history, but for most of the time there were consequences for misbehaving.
I can't point to a specific time of change, but Agnew was cast out, and Nixon was never fully held to account. Clinton denied some pretty bad behavior, and then we get Donald Trump who completely erased all boundaries with NO consequences (stand in 5th Ave...).
An understanding of ethics plays a major part in all of this, both by the individual and society.
And I am not calling for some puritanical retrenchment, but we can all hold leaders accountable for bad behavior that is ultimately destructive to our society.
These guardrails keep our democracy safe, and we need to reinforce them to stay safe.
People make mistakes, but they need to demonstrate accountability and we the people can support them in that.
Thanks, Jim. You make an important point. People are not absolved of moral culpability for their actions simply because they were heavily influenced by external factors This is especially true for leaders.
Well your points are certainly important and well put. I just wish I could fully agree with them. Unfortunately, it comes too close, in my opinion, to “There were good people on both sides,” when obviously there were not and are not. I’m sorry, but as a retired educator, people who believe that gun rights are more important than the rights of kids and teachers to feel safe in schools? Those are bad people. Period. I don’t care what else they may do or think or say, they’re just basically bad people. And I don’t care how they came to hold those views; if they, as adults, hold to them, then they have become bad people. However, it is not advantageous to treat them as if they are irredeemable. No one is irredeemable. But recognizing that they have utterly lost their basic humanity and, therefore, need redeeming (and I don’t mean that in a religious sense), that seems tragically obvious to me. I think it’s important to be clear-eyed about the fact that there are genuinely dangerous people in our world, dangerous to our democracy and dangerous to our personal safety. Actually, maybe that’s a better way to think about the good/bad issue: there are dangerous people, and there are not-dangerous people, and to your point, nothing is more important than learning how to diffuse the cultural and personal weapons dangerous people hold and are willing to use.
Hi, I was one of those Charlottesville fascists. I know what you mean. I met a man with a gun at a hotel room. I was wrong to be there. I am learning to change. I'm on here to learn other ideas.
Thank you, Jeff, so very much. People like you who have the courage to
recognize they’ve taken a wrong turn and are willing to look in another direction - you are the ones who can heal the wounds of the country. You have given me much-needed hope today.
Debra, Thank you too. As I mentioned above, I was a Neo-Confederate who learned that those monuments must come down. One non-partisan, but actually progressive group, the League of Women voters, explained in a paper why the monuments are symbolic of authoritarianism, etc. As a southerner with a Confederate flag on that horrible day, I later learned that the NAZI's got ideas from the Old South. The truth is that President Lincoln and the Union were righteous and victorious! I actually joined the LWV and am willing to learn more about Equality and Democracy. I am particularly interested in voting rights, ending gerrymandering, etc. which is big in my state. I will listen to and consider voting for Democratic candidates moving forward. I say this as a MAGAt. Lol..... Well, not so much MAGA anymore.
You are truly a jewel, Jeff, and a genuine patriot. I’m a LWV member too. :) Are you familiar with the Rev. Dr. William Barber? He has a powerful way of speaking about class and race that unifies issues under a bigger umbrella. He doesn’t mince words, and he doesn’t back down!
Hi Michele, thanks for your comment. I’ve seen lots of methodological and substantive critiques of both studies, but I’ve yet to encounter anything that invalidated their core findings. If you can direct me toward such, I’d be very appreciative. The last I heard was that the Milgram study had been replicated a few years ago in Europe with roughly the same results.
*****[W]hen ordinary people stop questioning, stop resisting, and silence their better judgment, terrible things can happen.
[...]
When we misunderstand the problem, we end up using the wrong political strategy to achieve change, focusing on overpowering rather than persuading. We treat opponents as enemies to crush, rather than fellow citizens to engage in dialogue.
[...]
If we want to stop Trump and save democracy, we cannot afford to dismiss half the country as irredeemable.
Instead, we need to resist the pull of moral judgment and meet our fellow citizens where they are. By focusing on shared interests, addressing cognitive dissonance with compassion, and offering belonging without demanding immediate change, we create the conditions where transformation becomes possible.
.
.
This is HIGHLY resonant with passages in my May 1 essay.
*****The first 100 days of the current administration have made clear a wrenching reality: The president of the United States imperils the survival and success of liberty in our very own country. This is not an abstraction. The danger is real.
I know that very many people – including valued friends – do not yet agree with this. To prove it, echoing the Founders in the Declaration of Independence, I submit “to a candid world” the facts below.
[...]
Today, May 1, is Law Day. Both the United States Courts and American Bar Association provide resources for a richer understanding and commemoration of it. To my mind, the best commemoration of it, for the remainder of this month and for many months to come, is to open one’s imagination, recognize the danger, and do what one can in support and defense of the rule of law under our Constitutional republic.
What one can do will differ from person to person. It may mean communicating about the danger with family, friends, and neighbors. It may mean communicating these concerns to one’s elected officials and challenging them to make bolder and more concerted efforts to address the danger. It may also mean lending support to organizations, such as those that appear in the detail below and others, that are championing the cause of liberty.
Most urgent of all, especially for those who do not yet agree about this danger, is to remain curious and attentive to all that is happening around us and to resist the temptation to either accept or reject it simply on the basis of habits of political thought and comfort in the company of those who share them. It is essential that we come together as a large, politically diverse community that takes responsibility for the health of our republic and our civil society.*****
Thank you for this article. I’m wondering if you have any thoughts on if decades of propaganda (Fox/MSNBC) makes us more prone to tribalism. And why at a time when most have unlimited access to diverse informational sources, we are too lazy or disinterested to avail ourselves.
I'd add to this very insightful post that blinding political loyalties cut both ways. I used to reflexively presume that all consersative beliefs were rooted in disinformation. At some point, I began checking things out for myself and realized that I was wrong about certain things that my tribe takes as gospel truth. I now try to hold my opinions lightly until I've had a chance to hear from all sides, which includes doing my own fact-checking on what everyone is asserting.
Thank you for great post.
I often thought about some of the dynamics you described as I was navigating the most challenging aspects of several years of dealing with my health insurance company as I pushed back against their nonsense to avoid financial ruin. The banality of those customer service agents who could not have cared less if I was bankrupted or landed in the street. Or the VP who sent a letter that, effective immediately, kicked me out of the care of my specialist. The cruelty of it was remarkable. Zero empathy.
I chose to file complaints and insisted on speaking up and pushing back against the cruelty.
While it was no fun to endure - and I did prevail, fortunately - I am well aware that, ironically, it was good training for the unfolding times we're in now.
This is why I believe that it's important to take a moral stand along the lines of it not being right to treat anyone the way people are being treated as ICE carts them away. I think it's important to bring focus to the issues of humanity so that the callousness cannot completely take over. It's not about judging or characterizing folks who still support Trump; there's also cult mind control going on there and trauma binding, IMHO.
I think it's important to state loudly, clearly, and repeatedly that empathy is an important aspect of our national character. This is why we will not stand for more and more cruelty.
Hi Nella, thanks for your thoughtful reply to my article. Yes, there is a parallel between the people denying insurance coverage and those carrying out Trump’s orders. I’m sorry you had to deal with that misery, but you’re right to frame it as good preparation for our current struggle. And yes, we must demand more compassion from our leaders and fellow citizen.
Hi Karin, if you haven't already watched Anand Giridharadas' (the.Ink on Substack) most recent interview with Ruth Ben-Ghiat, I encourage you to do so. They speak of the importance of radical love in responding to authoritarianism. I haven't yet finished it, but have found it fascinating so far and would be curious to hear your take on the topic, too.
I haven’t but will definitely check it out. I think compassion is imperative. As Dr. King said, “Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.”
I think you'll really like Anand and his work. I haven't yet watched his recent interview with Michigan Senate Candidate Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, which is about radical empathy and radical change. Good stuff!
https://the.ink/p/essay-a-cure-for-trumpism-radical
Another reason for empathy for T voters relates specifically to narcissism and the dynamics of narcissistic abuse. Anyone who's been through that and come out clear-eyed can likely see those dynamics at play between him and his supporters.
I'm guessing you're familiar with the work of Dr. Bandy X. Lee?
Are there accounts from or studies of those who initially supported the Nazis, but later changed to be anti-Nazi ( as atrocities were revealed or even as extremism spread)?
Thank you for this thoughtful question, Jill.
Yes, there were people inside Nazi Germany who changed their minds and turned against the regime before it collapsed, though they were rare and often paid an enormous price. Some, like Hans and Sophie Scholl of the White Rose, moved from youthful enthusiasm to active resistance when they realized what the regime was doing. Others, like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Claus von Stauffenberg, initially supported aspects of the government but turned sharply against it as the reality of Nazi atrocities became clear. Oskar Schindler famously began as a Nazi Party member and businessman but used his position to save over a thousand Jews.
What all these examples show is that change was possible, but it was hard, dangerous, and usually required both a moral awakening and an alternative source of purpose or belonging. This is exactly why today, if we want people to break with Trump, we have to offer them not just criticism, but also pathways to dignity, community, and meaning on the other side.
Thank you for this response.
Another example is white supremacists who have left hate groups. The book "Rising from Hatred" is one such story. Also check out the inspiring work of Darryl Davis who has persuaded hundreds of KKK members to hang up their hoods and Christian Picciolini who supports poeple who are exiting hate groups.
I was in Charlottesville, the Unite the Right rally. I was a Neo-Confederate with a Confederate flag. The League of Women Voters wrote a brilliant argument against Confederate monuments. I couldn't counter it. The LWV delivered us the knockout punch! I learned that supporting these ideas are discriminatory, inflammatory and fascist. It was painful to watch those monuments come down but I am learning to accept and commit to change. I just joined the LWV and will help them fight for our democracy.
Thanks so much for sharing your story, Jeff. Keep telling it. It’s a story many people need to hear.
My oh my such an amazing analysis starting from a simple tearjerker. But you completely missed the real reason Trump doesn’t lose votes because of those stories. It’s because almost invariably they are either pure fiction or there are critical facts left out of the story by reporters who invariably are Democrats. Your entire analysis is based on the false assumption, that the story is accurate as written.
Hi Andrew, thanks for taking the time to comment. You’re right. Trump’s supporters often don’t believe reports of inhumane acts under his Administration and that explains why some people don’t break with him. The same was true in Nazi Germany when many people continued to support Hitler because they didn’t believe reports of the atrocities of the Holocaust. It sounds like you think widespread media reports are incorrect and that the Trump Administration is treating migrants humanely during the deportation process. If so, then it makes sense to disregard them. That said, I have a question. If you were to learn the reports were actually accurate (because they were verified by a source you trust), would that change your opinion of Trump and his Administration or would you feel the same regardless? Thanks again for your thoughts!
Well, that was quick. Jump right to Nazis. In any case, 30 seconds of research on the story you quote shows that the mother of the child was offered the chance to leave the child with friends in the US but declined. The mother is the illegal alien. Next, the term migrant implies some sort of legal status. The mother was in the US illegally. Finally, yes they are treated humanely. They are not beaten or starved or hurt in any way. They are merely expelled.
I mean, I am not a mother, but that's a decision I would hate to have to make. Can you imagine? Leave your child behind to suffer and maybe die without you, or keep this person you *created* and love more than yourself by your side despite the risks?
Do you perceive civil infractions as being equal to or worse than criminal infractions? What harm was that women doing?
I’ve been thinking things along these lines but you do such great job of drawing out all the implications of admitting error and losing one’s tribe and purpose. I work in Marjorie Taylor Greene’s district, so most of my friends support Trump. They are great guys. I love them. They just support a terrible man. Thanks for those great insights.
I was stopped by this sentence, because part of it has such deep roots.
"They are ordinary individuals swept up by loyalty, fear, social pressure, and the gradual erosion of moral boundaries."
I can accept the normal human traits of loyalty, fear, and social social pressure. These are all in our genes as a species.
What is not, I think, is the logic behind erosion of moral boundaries.
When senior leaders' behaviors break norms, and they either deny or get away with it or both, the boundaries that keep our society within rational guardrails blur. And as we see, they can blur away completely.
This phenomenon has occurred throughout our nation's history, but for most of the time there were consequences for misbehaving.
I can't point to a specific time of change, but Agnew was cast out, and Nixon was never fully held to account. Clinton denied some pretty bad behavior, and then we get Donald Trump who completely erased all boundaries with NO consequences (stand in 5th Ave...).
An understanding of ethics plays a major part in all of this, both by the individual and society.
And I am not calling for some puritanical retrenchment, but we can all hold leaders accountable for bad behavior that is ultimately destructive to our society.
These guardrails keep our democracy safe, and we need to reinforce them to stay safe.
People make mistakes, but they need to demonstrate accountability and we the people can support them in that.
Thanks, Jim. You make an important point. People are not absolved of moral culpability for their actions simply because they were heavily influenced by external factors This is especially true for leaders.
Right on. Great clarity.
Well your points are certainly important and well put. I just wish I could fully agree with them. Unfortunately, it comes too close, in my opinion, to “There were good people on both sides,” when obviously there were not and are not. I’m sorry, but as a retired educator, people who believe that gun rights are more important than the rights of kids and teachers to feel safe in schools? Those are bad people. Period. I don’t care what else they may do or think or say, they’re just basically bad people. And I don’t care how they came to hold those views; if they, as adults, hold to them, then they have become bad people. However, it is not advantageous to treat them as if they are irredeemable. No one is irredeemable. But recognizing that they have utterly lost their basic humanity and, therefore, need redeeming (and I don’t mean that in a religious sense), that seems tragically obvious to me. I think it’s important to be clear-eyed about the fact that there are genuinely dangerous people in our world, dangerous to our democracy and dangerous to our personal safety. Actually, maybe that’s a better way to think about the good/bad issue: there are dangerous people, and there are not-dangerous people, and to your point, nothing is more important than learning how to diffuse the cultural and personal weapons dangerous people hold and are willing to use.
Hi, I was one of those Charlottesville fascists. I know what you mean. I met a man with a gun at a hotel room. I was wrong to be there. I am learning to change. I'm on here to learn other ideas.
Thank you, Jeff, so very much. People like you who have the courage to
recognize they’ve taken a wrong turn and are willing to look in another direction - you are the ones who can heal the wounds of the country. You have given me much-needed hope today.
I send this with deep gratitude and admiration.
Debra, Thank you too. As I mentioned above, I was a Neo-Confederate who learned that those monuments must come down. One non-partisan, but actually progressive group, the League of Women voters, explained in a paper why the monuments are symbolic of authoritarianism, etc. As a southerner with a Confederate flag on that horrible day, I later learned that the NAZI's got ideas from the Old South. The truth is that President Lincoln and the Union were righteous and victorious! I actually joined the LWV and am willing to learn more about Equality and Democracy. I am particularly interested in voting rights, ending gerrymandering, etc. which is big in my state. I will listen to and consider voting for Democratic candidates moving forward. I say this as a MAGAt. Lol..... Well, not so much MAGA anymore.
You are truly a jewel, Jeff, and a genuine patriot. I’m a LWV member too. :) Are you familiar with the Rev. Dr. William Barber? He has a powerful way of speaking about class and race that unifies issues under a bigger umbrella. He doesn’t mince words, and he doesn’t back down!
Love making your acquaintance, Jeff.
Again, you’ve given me hope today.
Thank you! Forward together!
No, I'll check him out.
You know that Milgram and the Stanford Prison Experiment were debunked right?
A small point, but a point none the less.
Atrocities are a collection of norm breaking until people just don't think about it any more.
Hi Michele, thanks for your comment. I’ve seen lots of methodological and substantive critiques of both studies, but I’ve yet to encounter anything that invalidated their core findings. If you can direct me toward such, I’d be very appreciative. The last I heard was that the Milgram study had been replicated a few years ago in Europe with roughly the same results.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31380664/
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1151023362
https://www.psypost.org/unpublished-data-from-stanley-milgrams-experiments-casts-doubts-on-his-claims-about-obedience/
I've seen some questions raised about Stanford but wasn't aware of any problelms with Milgram study.
Karen Tamerius wrote:
*****[W]hen ordinary people stop questioning, stop resisting, and silence their better judgment, terrible things can happen.
[...]
When we misunderstand the problem, we end up using the wrong political strategy to achieve change, focusing on overpowering rather than persuading. We treat opponents as enemies to crush, rather than fellow citizens to engage in dialogue.
[...]
If we want to stop Trump and save democracy, we cannot afford to dismiss half the country as irredeemable.
Instead, we need to resist the pull of moral judgment and meet our fellow citizens where they are. By focusing on shared interests, addressing cognitive dissonance with compassion, and offering belonging without demanding immediate change, we create the conditions where transformation becomes possible.
.
.
This is HIGHLY resonant with passages in my May 1 essay.
https://decencyandsense.substack.com/p/to-a-candid-world
*****The first 100 days of the current administration have made clear a wrenching reality: The president of the United States imperils the survival and success of liberty in our very own country. This is not an abstraction. The danger is real.
I know that very many people – including valued friends – do not yet agree with this. To prove it, echoing the Founders in the Declaration of Independence, I submit “to a candid world” the facts below.
[...]
Today, May 1, is Law Day. Both the United States Courts and American Bar Association provide resources for a richer understanding and commemoration of it. To my mind, the best commemoration of it, for the remainder of this month and for many months to come, is to open one’s imagination, recognize the danger, and do what one can in support and defense of the rule of law under our Constitutional republic.
What one can do will differ from person to person. It may mean communicating about the danger with family, friends, and neighbors. It may mean communicating these concerns to one’s elected officials and challenging them to make bolder and more concerted efforts to address the danger. It may also mean lending support to organizations, such as those that appear in the detail below and others, that are championing the cause of liberty.
Most urgent of all, especially for those who do not yet agree about this danger, is to remain curious and attentive to all that is happening around us and to resist the temptation to either accept or reject it simply on the basis of habits of political thought and comfort in the company of those who share them. It is essential that we come together as a large, politically diverse community that takes responsibility for the health of our republic and our civil society.*****
Thank you for this article. I’m wondering if you have any thoughts on if decades of propaganda (Fox/MSNBC) makes us more prone to tribalism. And why at a time when most have unlimited access to diverse informational sources, we are too lazy or disinterested to avail ourselves.