Showing posts with label Fear-Based Messaging. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fear-Based Messaging. Show all posts

Thursday, April 3, 2025

MaGA...Running Blind

In the world of political extremes, the unwavering support for Donald Trump among his MaGA (the "a" lowered in a half mast nod to the damages done to the country by that group, until they stop), followers can often appear perplexing, especially in the face of mounting controversies, legal challenges, and widespread criticism. For many, the commitment to Trump transcends rational political reasoning and ventures into the territory of emotional investment and identity. 

Elon at the end of his government destruction? Trump told his cabinet he's leaving soon.

Also, Trump recently discovered the word, "groceries" the other day, an old word, a beautiiful word", he said. No one uses the word for like, "grocery store"? This man is the dumbest SOB I've ever in the White House, or in business, or in the United States, or on planet Earth. Truly.

I can only see one reason Donald Trump became POTUS: blind paradimetrics. Ignorance, unrequited pain, disingenuous frustration, and misplaced vengeance— Truly, such fine qualities for the Republican Party to explore & exemplify. #convictedFelonTrumpGOP

There is some good news. "Map Shows Pres. Donald Trump's Approval Rating in Each State 2 Months Into Term" - Trump's approval rating has turned negative for the 1st time since his ridiculous return to the WH.


Also after $20 some Million spent in the Wisconsin judicial race, Elon lost, the Trump MaGA GOP lost and America and democracy won, big time. 1 big "W" for democracy, 1 big "L" for the kakistocracy led by Trump, the big dumb is diminishing, just not soon enough. Musk said it would decide Western Civilization, then immeidately turned away when he lost saying he'd expected to lose (sounds like Trump there). 

And Trump hates losers. Elon lost. 'Nuff Said!

Brief aside...I asked ChatGPT, who I like to call, "Chuck", in a call back to the TV show "Supernatural" (see, "God"): "Could it be said that the world is starting to look at the USA under Donald Trump (America's 1st convinced felon POTUS, #47, as the little bitch country of the world? Or something on that order?"

Its response:

"That’s definitely a blunt way of putting it, but you’re not alone in wondering how the world is perceiving the U.S. under a potential second Trump term. Many foreign policy analysts have speculated that Trump's "America First" approach, his transactional view of alliances, and his history of cozying up to authoritarian leaders could weaken the country’s global standing.""

If he follows through on threats to abandon NATO, cut off traditional allies, and push isolationist policies, the U.S. could be seen as unreliable, weaker in influence, and more beholden to stronger global powers like China and Russia. Some might argue that this would make the U.S. a "pushover" or a diminished force on the world stage, which could resemble what you’re describing."

Of course, Trump supporters would argue the opposite—that his leadership would make America "tougher" by refusing to play by old diplomatic norms. But globally, leaders who rely on strong alliances may see the U.S. as more of a wildcard or even a liability." I did read that the EU is beginning to realize that America is now becoming an "adversary". Purposely. 

Let's face it, more and more of America no longer cares what the Trump Kakistocratic Party is thinking, as the clowns they elected tear down America, democracy, our economy, and push all of that into the world at large. WILL Trump crash the world economy? 

He doesn't know, he just wants to find out.

Anyway...

I could exercise my psychology degree long and hard on the Trump authoritarian political personality cult known as MaGA. They seem to be one giant Milgram study. The Milgram experiment (1961) was a psychological study by Stanley Milgram at Yale University, designed to test obedience to authority. I had to learn about it, among many others, before getting my degree in 1984.

Participants were instructed to administer increasingly severe electric shocks to a "learner" (an actor) whenever they answered incorrectly. Despite hearing the learner’s cries of pain (which were faked), most participants continued delivering shocks when urged by an authority figure. The study revealed how ordinary people could commit harmful acts under authoritative pressure, shedding light on obedience in extreme situations, including historical atrocities.

Like in the Milgram experiment, many MaGA supporters follow Trump's directives despite ethical concerns, driven by authority, social pressure, and emotional investment. Just as participants in the study ignored their own moral discomfort to obey commands, MaGA followers often dismiss facts, legal issues, and harm to others, prioritizing loyalty over critical thinking. This highlights how strong leadership, combined with fear and group identity, can override personal judgment and ethical boundaries.

This phenomenon can be understood through psychological concepts like the running blind effect, where individuals continue on a path of belief despite overwhelming evidence suggesting they might be wrong. Fear-based messaging, blame-shifting, and a deep-seated attachment to a divisive narrative fuel this dynamic, creating an environment where supporters double down rather than reassess their positions. 

In this context, the fervent loyalty to Trump may not just be about policies or political ideologies but about the need to preserve a worldview that, for them, is defined by a constant battle against perceived threats.

Running blind is primarily an idiom rather than a formally recognized psychological theory. It describes acting without sufficient knowledge, foresight, or awareness of consequences. While it overlaps with concepts in psychology—such as escalation of commitment, confirmation bias, and motivated reasoning—there is no specific "Running Blind Effect" formally defined in academic literature.

As for MaGA and motivated reasoning? It could absolutely be said that many within the MAGA movement have failed on the Four Ways to Avoid the Pitfalls of Motivated Moral Reasoning

Let’s break it down:

  1. The "Front Page" Test – Many MaGA supporters seem unconcerned about how their actions or beliefs would appear in an objective public setting. Instead, they often exist in media bubbles where their beliefs are reinforced rather than challenged. The movement’s leaders, including their convicted felon Trump, thrive on secrecy, misinformation, and alternative narratives that sidestep accountability.

  2. Don’t Go It Alone – Rather than surrounding themselves with dissenting voices, MaGA supporters often reject mainstream sources of information and listen exclusively to right-wing media that echoes their views. The culture of Trumpism discourages critical self-reflection and punishes those who question its dogma (e.g., the backlash against former allies who criticize Trump).

  3. Avoid Ambiguity – The MaGA movement thrives on ambiguity, using vague terms like "deep state," "election fraud," or "America First" without clear, fact-based definitions. These ambiguous narratives allow followers to justify actions that might otherwise be seen as unethical or extreme.

  4. Stay Humble – Trumpism is built on a rejection of humility. The movement, much like Trump himself, tends to dismiss criticism outright, often attacking those who disagree rather than engaging in self-reflection. The idea of "never admitting defeat" or "owning the libs" has replaced intellectual humility with a defensive, combative stance.

By failing in these four areas, the MaGA movement has created an environment where motivated reasoning runs unchecked, reinforcing tribalism and making it difficult for supporters to critically assess their beliefs.

Overall? A troubling testament to blind loyalty over critical thought, where emotion eclipses reason and tribalism replaces integrity. Their problem isn't so much the failure, but the striking out at others for their own failings, ascribing those failings repeatedly to others. And in the political arena, they harm others and weaken the very country they claim to love.

There are various ways to view this: For Decades, a Behavioral Blind Spot Has Plagued Political Development

And, A massive experiment on choice blindness in political decisions: Confidence, confabulation, and unconscious detection of self-deception

The running blind effect could definitely be a factor in how hardcore MaGA supporters process and respond to information. The term generally refers to situations where individuals continue down a chosen path despite mounting evidence that it may not be in their best interest, often due to emotional investment, identity reinforcement, or cognitive biases.

For MaGA supporters who are deeply entrenched in their beliefs:

  • Fear-Based Messaging: Many consume media that constantly reinforces a narrative of impending doom, socialist takeover, or moral decay. This repeated exposure triggers a heightened emotional response, leading to what’s known as motivated reasoning—they seek out and accept information that supports their fears while rejecting anything that contradicts them.

  • Blame as a Coping Mechanism: Assigning blame (to liberals, immigrants, deep state actors, etc.) helps maintain a black-and-white worldview, avoiding cognitive dissonance. If things are bad, it’s easier to believe that someone else (Democrats, RINOs, "woke" corporations) is sabotaging America rather than reconsidering their own stance.

  • Commitment Escalation: The running blind effect plays out in their unwavering commitment to Trump. Even when faced with legal issues, policy failures, or contradictions, many will double down instead of re-evaluating. This is partly because admitting they were wrong would threaten their identity and sense of belonging.

So, yes, the running blind effect could explain why some MaGA supporters persist in supporting Trump despite growing legal, ethical, and political red flags—because reversing course would feel like an existential loss rather than just a change of opinion.

The "running blind effect" isn't a widely recognized term in political psychology. However, it could refer to phenomena such as the escalation of commitment or choice blindness, both of which have significant implications in political contexts.Negotiations Ninja

Escalation of Commitment: This concept describes the tendency of individuals or groups to continue investing in a decision despite evidence of its negative outcomes. In politics, this can manifest as unwavering support for a policy or leader even when faced with mounting failures or controversies. For instance, a study titled "The escalation of commitment in political decision-making groups" explores how political groups might persist with failing initiatives due to prior investments.Wiley Online Library+1Wiley Online Library+1

Choice Blindness: This refers to the phenomenon where individuals fail to notice discrepancies between their intentions and subsequent choices, leading them to accept outcomes they might not have originally endorsed. In political decision-making, choice blindness can result in voters supporting candidates or policies without fully recognizing their implications. A relevant study titled "A massive experiment on choice blindness in political decisions" examines this effect in the context of political choices.WikipediaPMC

Understanding these psychological tendencies is crucial for fostering more informed and reflective political engagement.

To neutralize the running blind effect and break free from the cycle of fear and blind loyalty, it’s crucial to encourage open dialogue and empathy. Creating spaces where individuals can engage with different perspectives without feeling attacked or ridiculed is key. 

Promoting critical thinking and media literacy helps people recognize biased or manipulative messaging. It's also important to encourage self-reflection, helping individuals separate their identity from their political beliefs. By fostering an environment where curiosity is valued over confirmation, we can begin to counteract the entrenched narratives that keep people stuck in a polarized mindset.

Of course, eliminating people like Donald Trump from the national stage and keeping them out of public office through a proper court trial for the crimes that have been blocked would also help.


Compiled with aid of ChatGPT