The Narcissism of Power: How Trump’s ‘Drain the Swamp’ Rhetoric Fuels Authoritarianism

The dynamic between Donald Trump’s supporters and his opponents can be understood through psychological and sociopolitical lenses, particularly in relation to narcissism and authoritarianism.

First off, let's talk about the mechanics of this nonsense.

The mesolimbic system, often called the brain's "reward pathway," plays a crucial role in motivation, pleasure, reinforcement learning, and addiction. It involves the release of dopamine, reinforcing behaviors that are perceived as rewarding, whether beneficial or harmful.

In the case of MaGA Trump supporters who seem impervious to reality, their engagement can be understood through this neurobiological framework:

1. Reinforcement and Reward

   • Trump’s rhetoric and MaGA culture provide a strong sense of belonging, identity, and emotional highs akin to addiction.

   • The dopamine-driven reinforcement from rallies, social media echo chambers, and community validation makes it hard for individuals to accept contradictory information, as doing so would disrupt their reward cycle.

2. Cognitive Dissonance Avoidance

   • If reality contradicts their worldview, processing it would cause psychological discomfort. Instead of adapting, they double down, seeking reinforcement from the same sources that reward their beliefs.

   • The mesolimbic system encourages behaviors that avoid pain—admitting they were deceived or wrong would be painful, so the brain resists.

3. Fear and Threat Processing

   • The amygdala (linked to the mesolimbic system) is highly active when individuals feel threatened. Trump's messaging often uses fear (immigrants, deep state, etc.), which hijacks rational processing in favor of emotional responses.

   • Once the brain perceives a group or idea as a "threat," logic takes a backseat to emotion-driven responses.

4. Loss Aversion and Sunk Cost Fallacy

   • Many Trump supporters have invested years of identity into MaGA ideology. The mesolimbic system reinforces continued investment rather than accepting loss and moving on.

   • If they absorbed exactly where they were headed (authoritarianism, personal harm, national instability), it would require them to admit a massive personal and ideological loss—something their brain chemistry fights against.

In essence, the MaGA movement operates like a dopamine-reinforced loop, where the fear of loss, social validation, and emotional highs keep individuals trapped in an alternate reality. If they could break that reinforcement cycle, many might recognize the path they’re on and abandon it—but their neurobiology makes that extremely difficult.

Now how about this nonsense?

As of today, March 22, 2025, only a few Republican members of Congress have publicly opposed the idea of President Donald Trump seeking a third term. Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma stated he would not support Trump running for a third term unless the U.S. Constitution is amended to allow it, emphasizing that such a change should reflect the will of the American people.​

Additionally, Representative Andy Ogles of Tennessee introduced a proposal to amend the Twenty-second Amendment, aiming to permit presidents who have served non-consecutive terms to run for a third term. This proposal is widely viewed as a means to enable Trump to seek another term.

However, these instances appear to be exceptions rather than the norm. The majority of congressional Republicans have not publicly expressed opposition to Trump's potential pursuit of a third term. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska has criticized her colleagues for their reluctance to challenge Trump, attributing it to fears of primary challenges and media backlash. She emphasized the importance of maintaining integrity, even in the face of potential threats from influential figures like Elon Musk. ​Politico

In summary, while a small number of Republican lawmakers have taken stands against Trump's third-term ambitions, there is no widespread opposition within the party. Many Republicans continue to support Trump, reflecting his significant influence over the party.

Getting back to the direct issue at hand...​

1. Trump's Narcissism and Authoritarian Appeal

Donald Trump exhibits traits consistent with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), including:

• Grandiosity: An exaggerated sense of self-importance.

• Lack of Empathy: An inability or unwillingness to understand others' perspectives.

• Need for Admiration: Constant validation and loyalty from followers.

• Manipulative Behavior: Gaslighting, deflecting blame, and creating an "us vs. them" mentality.

These traits align closely with authoritarian leadership, which emphasizes:

• Strongman politics: A leader who projects power and infallibility.

• Control over norms and institutions: Undermining checks and balances, rejecting legal constraints.

• Demonization of outsiders: Defining clear enemies (immigrants, media, political opponents) to unify followers.

2. Why Trump Supporters Are Drawn to Him

Many of Trump's supporters resonate with his narcissistic tendencies because of psychological, social, and political factors:

• Authoritarian Personality Theory: Some individuals are naturally inclined toward hierarchical, strongman leadership. They seek order, clear rules, and an authoritative figure who claims to protect them from chaos.

• Mirroring and Identification: Many of his supporters either admire or unconsciously mimic his behavior. They see his refusal to apologize, his aggression, and his self-assurance as qualities of strength.

• Fear and Resentment: Trump validates their grievances, whether about economic hardship, racial demographic changes, or perceived cultural decline.

• Desire for Belonging: His movement offers a sense of identity and unity, with shared values and a common enemy.

3. Why Opponents Cannot Connect With Their Mindset

Those who oppose Trump generally do not share authoritarian or narcissistic tendencies, making it difficult for them to empathize with his supporters:

• Higher Empathy and Tolerance: Many Trump opponents value inclusivity, diversity, and democracy, which contradict authoritarianism.

• Analytical vs. Emotional Thinking: Trump's base often responds to emotional narratives, while his opponents focus more on rational arguments and fact-checking.

• Disgust at Narcissism: Narcissistic behavior—such as lying, bragging, or lacking empathy—is seen as repulsive rather than admirable.

• Skepticism Toward Absolute Authority: Many of Trump's critics prefer decentralized power, institutional accountability, and collective decision-making over following a singular leader.

4. The Incompatibility Between the Two Groups

The fundamental reason why Trump's supporters and opponents cannot see eye to eye is that they operate from fundamentally different worldviews:

• One side admires strength, dominance, and unwavering confidence (even at the cost of truth).

• The other values humility, cooperation, and adherence to facts and norms.

This psychological and moral divide makes it nearly impossible for each side to understand or respect the other’s orientation. Trump's supporters view his critics as weak, naive, or unpatriotic, while his opponents see his followers as manipulated, authoritarian-leaning, or complicit in narcissistic behavior.

Trump and his allies often claim that their movement is about fixing the government, shrinking the federal bureaucracy, and restoring power to "the people." This rhetoric taps into long-standing conservative and libertarian ideals about small government and deregulation. However, when we compare what they say with what they actually do, contradictions emerge.

---

1. CLAIM: “Shrinking the Federal Government”

• RHETORIC: Trump and his supporters argue that they want to reduce the size of government, eliminate waste, and return power to states and individuals.

• REALITY:

  • Expansion of Executive Power: Rather than decentralizing power, Trump concentrated more control in the executive branch, undermining checks and balances.

  • Selective Cuts: While Trump talked about cutting government, he primarily targeted agencies that regulate corporations (EPA, FDA, etc.) while expanding spending on defense, border security, and tax cuts for the wealthy.

  • Project 2025: A Heritage Foundation-backed plan supported by Trump allies seeks to purge the federal workforce of career civil servants and replace them with ideological loyalists—a move that increases executive power, not shrinks it.

---

2. CLAIM: “Draining the Swamp”

• RHETORIC: Trump campaigned on eliminating corruption, removing “deep state” bureaucrats, and putting the government back in the hands of the people.

• REALITY:

  • Increased Cronyism: Instead of eliminating corruption, Trump filled his administration with lobbyists, industry insiders, and personal loyalists. Many of them, such as Steve Mnuchin (Treasury), Betsy DeVos (Education), and Wilbur Ross (Commerce), had deep financial ties that benefitted from their government roles.

  • Weaponizing the Government for Personal Use: Trump repeatedly used the DOJ to protect himself and his allies while pressuring it to investigate political opponents.

  • Profiting from the Presidency: Trump and his family directly profited from his presidency through foreign business dealings, government contracts at Trump properties, and funneling campaign money into his businesses.

---

3. CLAIM: “Fighting for Freedom and Small Government”

• RHETORIC: Trump and his allies present themselves as champions of individual liberty, opposing government overreach.

• REALITY:

  • Authoritarian Policies: Despite talking about freedom, Trump has endorsed policies that centralize power:

    • Proposing to deploy the military against domestic protesters (2020).

    • Supporting state-level abortion bans that override individual rights.

    • Promoting censorship of political opponents and media outlets that criticize him.

  • Using the Government Against Enemies: Trump frequently suggests he will use federal agencies to punish critics, imprison political opponents, and retaliate against perceived disloyalty.

  • Expanding Federal Surveillance: Despite libertarian rhetoric, Trump continued mass surveillance programs and even tried to use the NSA and FBI to benefit himself.

---

4. CLAIM: “Law and Order”

• RHETORIC: Trump’s movement claims to stand for law, order, and public safety.

• REALITY:

  • Selective Enforcement: Trump and his allies want a justice system that punishes their enemies while protecting their own.

    • He pardoned convicted criminals who were his political allies, including Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and Paul Manafort.

    • He demonizes federal law enforcement when it investigates him (FBI, DOJ) but uses it aggressively against others (BLM, immigration raids).

  • Encouraging Lawlessness: Trump’s rhetoric has emboldened:

    • January 6 insurrectionists, whom he has called “patriots.”

    • Vigilante groups and extremist militias that operate outside legal frameworks.

    • Erosion of accountability, as he suggests that if re-elected, he will go after prosecutors, judges, and opponents who challenge him.

---

5. CLAIM: “The People Are in Charge”

• RHETORIC: Trump supporters argue that their movement is about giving power back to regular Americans rather than elites.

• REALITY:

  • Elitist Power Grab: Trump’s policies overwhelmingly benefited the wealthy, with tax cuts that favored corporations and billionaires while increasing the deficit.

  • Undermining Democracy: Instead of empowering "the people," Trump and his allies:

    • Attempted to overturn the 2020 election.

    • Spread false election fraud claims to justify suppressing votes.

    • Encourage rule by force, not by democratic institutions.

---

CONCLUSION

Trump and his movement promote a myth of small government, anti-corruption, and populism while enacting policies that expand executive power, protect elites, and erode democratic institutions. His supporters believe they are fighting against an overreaching government, but in reality, they are enabling a more centralized, authoritarian system that prioritizes loyalty over competence.

Brief aside:

Does Trump Have ADHD? My Professional Opinion | HuffPost Latest News

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Authoritarianism, and the Inevitable Rise of Eugenics

OK so... her family falls under TEP, Trump Eugenics Policy, as yet undisclosed: "Eliminate all health drains on resources to Make America Great." It seems reminiscent of Germany before WWII, somehow. What do you THINK is going on there? Here is the video to catch up.

From 🌒September🌕Rayne🌘 @Lippyaddiction

Next up...

Welcome to Trump's United States of FAFO - "Fuck Around and Find Out":

FYI - FAFO has two common meanings, depending on context:

1. "Fck Around and Find Out"** – A warning or statement implying that reckless actions will lead to consequences. Often used in a confrontational or humorous way.

2. "Fire And Forget Operations" – A military term referring to weapons (like certain missiles) that do not require further guidance after launch.

Now...

Drawing from Timothy Snyder’s work, particularly On Tyranny and Bloodlands, eugenics typically emerges once authoritarian rule is consolidating but before full-scale repression escalates into mass violence. In the timeline of fascist takeovers, it tends to appear at the "consolidation of ideology and state control" stage, after initial democratic erosion but before widespread purges or extermination campaigns.

Stages Where Eugenics Fits In:

1. Subversion of Democracy – Discrediting elections, demonizing opposition, and weakening institutions.
2. Defining the “Pure” vs. the “Other” – Establishing a narrative of national rebirth that requires "cleansing" undesirable elements.
3. State-Sanctioned Discrimination – Legal restrictions, sterilization programs, or exclusionary policies targeting those deemed unworthy.
4. Biopolitical Control & Elimination – Expanding eugenic policies into forced removals, incarceration, or even extermination.

Snyder emphasizes that the shift to eugenics happens before outright genocide, often justified as economic necessity, national security, or public health. This was the case in Nazi Germany, where eugenics began as forced sterilization programs years before the Holocaust.

If we apply Snyder’s framework to modern political rhetoric, we can see early warning signs of eugenic thinking creeping into policy discussions—often disguised as economic pragmatism or "national greatness."

Key Modern Parallels:

1. Defining "Burdens on the Nation" – When leaders start framing certain groups (the disabled, chronically ill, or elderly) as economic drains rather than citizens with rights, this mirrors early fascist rhetoric.

   • Example: Calls to reduce healthcare support for those with pre-existing conditions, Social Security cuts, or suggesting that some people are simply "not productive" enough for assistance.

2. Dehumanization Through Policy – When policies are proposed that subtly (or overtly) make life harder for vulnerable groups, leading to exclusion, suffering, or premature death.

   • Example: Medicaid work requirements, gutting disability benefits, or defunding mental health care, effectively sidelining those deemed “unfit.”

3. “Making the Nation Stronger” by Removing the Weak – The idea that a country can be restored to greatness by eliminating social or economic "burdens" is directly linked to historical eugenics movements.

   • Example: Trump-era policies that deprioritized COVID care for the elderly, rhetoric about certain populations being “useless eaters” (a phrase used in Nazi Germany), or suggestions that only the strong deserve survival.

Where Are We Now?

In Snyder’s terms, we’re in a precarious middle stage—where eugenic ideology is not yet official policy but is being tested through rhetoric and selective policies. If history is a guide, the next steps could involve further institutionalizing discrimination, removing safety nets, and ultimately, escalating the logic of exclusion to more dangerous ends.

President Trump's recent actions have significantly increased the costs of life-saving medications, adversely affecting many Americans.

Reversal of Drug Pricing Initiatives: On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order reversing policies aimed at reducing prescription drug costs for Medicare and Medicaid recipients. This action has led to higher medication expenses for seniors and low-income individuals.

AJMC

Project 2025 Impact: The administration's "Project 2025" has further escalated prescription drug prices for seniors by rescinding previous efforts to cap insulin prices and limit out-of-pocket costs. This rollback undermines financial protections for those reliant on essential medications.

Democrats Budget

Medicaid Funding Cuts: Proposed Medicaid cuts to finance other policy initiatives threaten access to affordable healthcare for approximately 72 million Americans. Such reductions could lead to increased out-of-pocket expenses for medications and medical services.

The Wall Street Journal

Disruption of Medical Research Funding: The administration has halted medical research funding, delaying critical studies and potentially hindering the development of new, cost-effective treatments. This disruption may lead to long-term increases in drug prices due to slowed innovation.

The Guardian

These policy decisions collectively contribute to the rising costs of life-saving drugs, placing a heavier financial burden on vulnerable populations.

Trump’s policies raising the cost of life-saving drugs and cutting healthcare access align with a soft form of eugenics, where economic barriers function as a tool of exclusion—determining who lives or dies based on their financial means. Timothy Snyder warns that authoritarian regimes often implement biopolitical control in stages, beginning with economic strangulation of vulnerable populations before advancing to more direct forms of exclusion and harm.

How This Links to Eugenics & Authoritarianism:

1. Economic-Based Survival (“The Fit vs. The Weak”)

   • By making essential medications unaffordable, the government filters out those who can’t "contribute" economically—a hallmark of eugenic thinking.
   • Cutting Medicaid and reversing drug price caps disproportionately harms the disabled, elderly, and chronically ill, echoing early 20th-century policies that framed them as burdens rather than citizens.

2. "Let the Market Decide Who Survives"

   • Shifting healthcare away from public support and into a fully privatized model turns life-or-death access into a profit-driven equation—mirroring historical eugenics policies that used cost-saving justifications to deny care.
   • Example: Nazi Germany’s early T4 program began as cost-saving euthanasia for the “incurably ill.”

3. Destroying Public Healthcare as a Form of Democratic Erosion

   • Universal healthcare and medicine price controls are fundamental to democratic, egalitarian societies. Weakening these protections enforces a hierarchy of worthiness—where the rich thrive and the poor struggle to survive.
   • Historically, dismantling social safety nets has been a precursor to authoritarian consolidation, as it creates a weakened, desperate population less able to resist state control.

Where This Leads If Left Unchecked:

• Further removal of legal protections for the disabled, elderly, and marginalized.
• Worsening economic disparity leading to shorter lifespans for those deemed “unworthy.”
• Expansion of state control over reproductive and medical decisions (who gets care, who doesn’t).

Snyder warns that authoritarians rarely start with mass violence—they begin by shifting who deserves to live well and who doesn’t. If Trump’s policies continue in this direction, it’s not just about cost-cutting—it’s about reshaping the nation based on an ideology of survival-of-the-fittest.

Will America retain enough of its democratic foundations in the near future to counter these actions—to remove those Trump has installed through his own and Elon Musk’s purges—and to preserve the democracy and principles upon which the nation was originally founded?

Or are we already lost?

Explaining the image above...

The image visually represents the themes of authoritarian control and societal division that tie into your blog's focus on how eugenics can emerge under authoritarian rule. Here’s how it connects:

• The Tattered American Flag → Symbolizes democracy under threat, reflecting concerns about whether America will remain true to its founding principles.
• The Shadowy Figure in Power → Represents authoritarian leadership, akin to Trump’s consolidation of control and political purges.
• The Divided Crowd (Some in Light, Others in Darkness) → Illustrates social stratification, a hallmark of eugenic policies where some are deemed more “worthy” than others.
• Industrial, Ominous Setting → Evokes historical parallels to regimes that have used economic and political means to enact exclusionary policies.

Why "MaGA" not "MAGA"?

The term "MaGA" is a play on the well-known "MAGA" (Make America Great Again) slogan associated with convicted felong POTUS47 Donald Trump and his supporters. However, "MaGA" is used as a critique or rebranding of the movement, suggesting that it has lost its original intent of promoting American greatness. Instead, "MaGA" implies that this group has veered into actions and ideologies that are seen as antithetical to the principles of democracy, liberty, and the Constitution.

Here’s a breakdown of the concept:

1. Disrespecting America: The obvious observation is that MaGA supporters, by embracing rhetoric that attacks the integrity of the U.S. government, the media, and institutions, have undermined the country's foundational values. This includes actions like promoting conspiracy theories, undermining elections, or attacking the legitimacy of democratic processes.

2. Attacking a Liberal Democratic Constitutional Republic: The term "liberal democracy" refers to a system where the rule of law, civil rights, free elections, and separation of powers are key. Critical observations of MaGA show that certain elements within this movement have embraced authoritarian tactics, such as supporting leaders who subvert democratic norms or ignore checks and balances, which goes against the core principles of the liberal democratic constitutional republic Ameria is and was meant to be.

3. Supporting Fascism: Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology that emphasizes dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society. "MaGA" has been observed worldwide, as a critique of the movement's embrace of extreme nationalism, intolerance toward dissent, and support for leaders or policies, that mirror fascist tendencies, such as authoritarian rule, state control, and the erosion of civil liberties.

So, the use of "MaGA" as opposed to "MAGA" reflects a critical stance against the movement, suggesting that it has strayed from the values that typically define a democratic society, instead endorsing actions and ideologies associated with authoritarianism and fascism. It’s a way of emphasizing that the movement may be hurting the nation rather than uplifting it.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT