(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
The Symbiotic Relationship between Trump & his Followers [1]
['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']
Date: 2023-11-18
The "Strongman" and his followers use each other to combat their deep self-doubts
My work this week on my next book (current title “DIVING BENEATH THE WRECK—AND RESURFACING: A Discourse on the Origin & Consequences of Sexual Inequality,” is on a chapter tentatively titled “Putting the Dick in Dictator,” on a psychological malady I call Acute Masculine Insecurity Disorder (AMID). In the course of my research, I reread Erich Fromm’s 1957 essay, “The Authoritarian Personality.” It has much to say to us in our current crisis.
I will argue in the book that authoritarians are self-made-up men. Their weakness masquerades as strength. Trump speaks loudly because he is terrified that his stick isn’t big enough.
The male followers of the self-made-up men who strike up poses as “strongmen” also suffer from insecure masculinity. As Fromm noted, while the Leader and his followers seem to be very different, the “two forms of authoritarian personality are actually tightly bound together”—two sides of the same coin, as the cliché puts it. “What they have in common, what defines the essence of the authoritarian personality is an inability: the inability to rely on oneself, to be independent, to put it in other words: to endure freedom.”
Though Fromm didn’t make the link explicit, the capacities people with an authoritarian personality lack are associated in most cultures with masculinity. Being deficient in them makes one fit the stereotype of a woman. Hence, males with such inabilities develop fears that they are not “real men”—the psychological disorder I call AMID.
Fromm said that the follower of an authoritarian “belittles himself so that he can — as part of something greater — become great himself. The individual wants to receive commands, so that he does not have the necessity to make decisions and carry responsibility.” Such submissive individuals, Fromm contended, are the people “on which the authoritarian systems — Nazism and Stalinism — rest.” We can now add, among others, Trumpism.
The authoritarian leader is as dependent on his followers as they are on him. He “feels strong because he has incorporated others — if possible, many others — he has devoured them.” His goal, Fromm says, is:
to master and control another individual, to make him a helpless object of one’s will, to become his ruler, to dispose over him as one sees fit and without limitations. Humiliation and enslavement are just means to this purpose, and the most radical means to this is to make him suffer; as there is no greater power over a person than to make him suffer, to force him to endure pains without resistance.
The strongman appears to be powerful, but that is an illusion dependent on his position and “on the masses’ applause.” “When he can no longer devour others, when he is on his own,” it dissolves. Picture the Wicked Witch of the West melting when Dorothy throws a bucket of water on her.
Fromm says that those who bind themselves to an authoritarian think that they must make themselves “small and the authority great. I have to make it great, so that I — as one of its particles — can also become great.”
Fromm’s analysis is spot on but, as I see it, he left out a key element—the one that is my focus in the book. The fears and desires of both the “strongman” and his adherents are rooted in the ingrained binary conception of opposite sexes, one of which is superior to the other. What both males who seek to become authoritarian rulers and those who cede their souls and minds to them fear is that they are incapable of living up to the demanding standards of a “real man.” In a vertical binary, that would put them in the subordinate category: women.
Notice that everything a strongman demands of his followers—submission, subservience, not thinking for themselves, turning over their will to the man who rules them, seeing their route to greatness as self-abnegation and doing whatever he tells them to do in order to advance his interests—is what has for so very long been expected of women.
The motivation of a male who inwardly fears that he doesn’t “measure up” appears to go something like this: I am a nobody but joining a movement with other nobodies to follow “The Man” makes me a somebody—a man.
The model—the prototype—for the follower of a “Leader” is the stereotype misogynists have of women.
How ironic.
For anyone interested in more, here is an abridged version of Fromm’s essay, with some of what I see as important points for us to understand today in bold:
What do we mean by “authoritarian personality”? We usually see a clear difference between the individual who wants to rule, control, or restrain others and the individual who tends to submit, obey, or to be humiliated. To use a somewhat friendlier term, we might talk of the leader and his followers. As natural as the difference between the ruling and the ruled might — in many ways — be, we also have to admit that these two types, or as we can also say, these two forms of authoritarian personality are actually tightly bound together.
What they have in common, what defines the essence of the authoritarian personality is an inability: the inability to rely on one’s self, to be independent, to put it in other words: to endure freedom. The opposite of the authoritarian character is the mature person: a person who does not need to cling to others because he actively embraces and grasps the world, the people, and the things around him. … Love means recognizing the world as an emotional experience. However, there is also another way of recognizing, understanding with the mind. We call this kind of understanding reason. … Reason is something else. Reason is the activity of the mind which attempts to get through the surface to reach the core of things, to grasp what really lies behind these things, what the forces and drives are that — themselves invisible — operate and determine the manifestations. … The authoritarian character has not reached maturity; he can neither love nor make use of reason. As a result, he is extremely alone which means that he is gripped by a deeply rooted fear. He needs to feel a bond, which requires neither love nor reason — and he finds it in the symbiotic relationship, in feeling-one with others; not by reserving his own identity, but rather by fusing, by destroying his own identity. The authoritarian character needs another person to fuse with because he cannot endure his own aloneness and fear. But here we reach the boundaries of what both forms of the authoritarian character — the ruling and the ruled — have in common. The passive-authoritarian, or in other words, the masochistic and submissive character aims — at least subconsciously — to become a part of a larger unit, a pendant, a particle, at least a small one, of this “great” person, this “great” institution, or this “great” idea. The person, institution, or idea may actually be significant, powerful, or just incredibly inflated by the individual believing in them. What is necessary, is that — in a subjective manner — the individual is convinced that “his” leader, party, state, or idea is all-powerful and supreme, that he himself is strong and great, that he is a part of something “greater.” The paradox of this passive form of the authoritarian character is: the individual belittles himself so that he can — as part of something greater — become great himself. The individual wants to receive commands, so that he does not have the necessity to make decisions and carry responsibility. This masochistic individual looking for dependency is in his depth frightened – often only subconsciously — a feeling of inferiority, powerlessness, aloneness. Because of this, he is looking for the “leader,” the great power, to feel safe and protected through participation and to overcome his own inferiority. Subconsciously, he feels his own powerlessness and needs the leader to control this feeling. This masochistic and submissive individual, who fears freedom and escapes into idolatry, is the person on which the authoritarian systems — Nazism and Stalinism — rest. More difficult than understanding the passive-authoritarian, masochistic character is understanding the active-authoritarian, the sadistic character. To his followers he seems self-confident and powerful but yet he is as frightened and alone as the masochistic character. While the masochist feels strong because he is a small part of something greater, the sadist feels strong because he has incorporated others — if possible many others; he has devoured them, so to speak. The sadistic-authoritarian character is as dependent on the ruled as the masochistic-authoritarian character on the ruler. However the image is misleading. As long as he holds power, the leader appears — to himself and to others — strong and powerful. His powerlessness becomes only apparent when he has lost his power, when he can no longer devour others, when he is on his own. … The different forms of sadism which we can observe have their root in a striving, which is to master and control another individual, to make him a helpless object of one’s will, to become his ruler, to dispose over him as one sees fit and without limitations. Humiliation and enslavement are just means to this purpose, and the most radical means to this is to make him suffer; as there is no greater power over a person than to make him suffer, to force him to endure pains without resistance. … Or to name a better known example: Hitler. He was driven by the desire to rule all, the German nation and finally the world, to make them powerless objects of his will. And still, this same man was extremely dependent; dependent on the masses’ applause, on his advisers’ approval, and on what he called the higher power of nature, history, and fate. … Irrational authority is different. It is based on emotional submission of my person to another person: I believe in him being right, not because he is, objectively speaking, competent nor because I rationally recognize his competence. In the bonds to the irrational authority, there exists a masochistic submission by making myself small and the authority great. I have to make it great, so that I can — as one of its particles — can also become great. The rational authority tends to negate itself, because the more I understand the smaller the distance to the authority becomes. The irrational authority tends to deepen and to prolong itself. The longer and the more dependent I am the weaker I will become and the more I will need to cling to the irrational authority and submit. All the great dictatorial movements of our times were (and are) based on irrational authority. Its driving forces were the submissive individual’s feeling of powerlessness, fear, and admiration for the “leader.” All the great and fruitful cultures are founded on the existence of rational authority: on people, who are able to muster the given functions intellectually and socially and have therefore no need to appeal to irrational desires. But I do not want to close without emphasizing that the individual’s goal must be to become his own authority; i.e. to have a consciousness in moral issues, conviction in questions of intellect, and fidelity in emotional matters. However, the individual can only have such an inner authority if he has matured enough to understand the world with reason and love. The development of these characteristics is the basis for one’s own authority and therefore the basis for political democracy.
{Robert S. McElvaine is a Professor of History Emeritus at Millsaps College, the author of eleven books, most recently, The Times They Were a-Changin’ –1964: The Year “The Sixties” Arrived and the Battle Lines of Today Were Drawn, and writes “Musings & Amusings of a B-List Writer” on Substack.}
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/11/18/2206658/-The-Symbiotic-Relationship-between-Trump-his-Followers?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=latest_community&pm_medium=web
Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/
