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

Commander in Cheat: When Golf (or Sports) and Despotism Go Hand in Hand

Trump's rhetoric draws alarming comparisons to autocratic leaders and dictators.

We've seen odd behaviors from such types. And remember, how much Trump cozies up to these types (Putin, Kim Jong Il, Xi, etc.), and not out of any political cleverness, but merely for a desire to be one of them. 

We’ve seen odd behaviors from autocratic despots and dictators throughout history—leaders who manipulate, exaggerate, and bend the truth to maintain control. What’s striking is that Trump doesn’t simply align with these figures for political gain or out of strategic acumen; he cozies up to them because he admires their style of leadership. 

Trump's relationship with figures like Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong-un, and other strongmen isn’t based on common ideological ground but on a shared desire for unchecked power. Trump's attraction to these leaders goes beyond diplomatic interests—it’s rooted in his own yearning to emulate their ability to dominate, control, and defy established norms. Instead of challenging their methods, he seeks to be one of them, reflecting an authoritarian impulse more than a pursuit of democratic principles.

Kim Jong-Il was a dictator who went to great links

Then the day Kim Jong IL became the world's best golfer. Kind of laughable, right? WE don't do that kind of thing...right?

I mean, who DOES that? OK sure, North Korea? But who else? Sure, it's just NK lies & Nonsense...but ON our American Despotic front?

"Donald Trump admits it was 'probably' his last golf tournament." OK, he's old, so hanging up his (faux) Pro-clubs in "playing" in golf "championships". One's he sponsors, so one HE "Wins".

Although this championship "win" wasn't THAT surprising. After all, Trump has claimed "Victories" at this event for the past several years.

Donald Trump likened to Kim Jong Un by tennis legend over outlandish golf claim" Irish Star - and this from a country known for tall tales.

"The U.S. President appears to have developed a knack for over-exaggerating his success on the greens and has recently come under fire for something he claimed to have achieved in 2022." Overexaggerating? These are outright lies anyone who has ever played with him knows about. Though his supporters and Republicans do lie about it: "Another user backed the cheating claims, tweeted: 'Trump has been known to pick up the ball and put it in the cup so…��‍♀️' "

In fact, Trump's fantastically claimed "Wins" are notorious throughout the golf world. This type of lying behavior by a despot is often referred to as "megalomaniacal propaganda" or "cult of personality fabrication.

Jimmy Kimmel Remixes North Korean State Media to Mock Trump’s Golf Tournament Claims | Video

Martina Navratilova criticizes Donald Trump with Kim Jong Un comparison over US President's old golf claim.

Multiple individuals who have played golf with former President Donald Trump have publicly claimed that he engages in cheating during rounds. Notable accounts include:

• Rick Reilly, a sportswriter who has played with Trump, authored the book Commander in Cheat: How Golf Explains Trump, detailing various alleged cheating tactics. Reilly claims Trump uses a "turbo-charged golf cart" to get ahead of his competition, allowing him to move balls before others catch up.

  People.com

• Suzann Pettersen, a professional golfer with 15 LPGA Tour wins, stated in a 2018 interview that Trump "cheats like hell" on the golf course.

  The Guardian

• Mike Tirico, a sportscaster, recounted an incident where he hit a near-perfect shot, only to find his ball mysteriously in a sand trap later. He was later informed that Trump had thrown his ball into the bunker.

  GolfDigest.com

These accounts provide firsthand perspectives on Trump's alleged behavior on the golf course.

This type of lying behavior by a despot is often referred to as "megalomaniacal propaganda" or "cult of personality fabrication." More specifically, it can fall under several psychological and political concepts, such as:

1. Pathological Lying (Pseudologia Fantastica) – Habitual or grandiose falsehoods intended to create an exaggerated image of greatness.
2. Mythmaking Propaganda – Creating absurd or superhuman myths to reinforce the ruler's divine or infallible status.
3. Authoritarian Gaslighting – Manipulating public perception to make people question reality and accept the leader’s version of events.
4. Omnipotence Illusion – Presenting the leader as all-powerful and superhuman to discourage dissent and solidify loyalty.

Kim Jong-il (not Kim Jong-un) was famously reported to have shot 38 under par, including 11 hole-in-ones, during his first-ever golf game, a claim that fits within these categories of despotic deception.

Accusations of despotism against former U.S. President Donald Trump stem from several actions and statements perceived as authoritarian:

1. Expansion of Executive Power: In February 2025, Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport 261 alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador, despite a federal judge's order to halt such deportations. This unprecedented use of a wartime law during peacetime was viewed by legal experts as an illegal misuse of power and a direct threat to the rule of law.

   The Australian

2. Defiance of Judicial Authority: Trump's administration proceeded with deportations even after court orders blocked such actions, challenging the judiciary's role as a check on executive power. Critics argue this defiance undermines constitutional checks and balances, posing risks to American democracy.

   Times Union

3. Rhetoric Suggesting Authoritarian Intentions: During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump remarked he would act as a dictator only on "day one" to implement specific policies, such as closing the border. While some dismissed this as rhetoric, others viewed it as an indication of authoritarian ambitions.

   Wikipedia

4. Dehumanizing Language and Threats of Violence: Trump's campaign employed increasingly dehumanizing and violent rhetoric against political adversaries and immigrants. Historians and scholars have described this language as populist, authoritarian, and fascist, raising concerns about its implications for democratic norms.

   Wikipedia

5. Challenges to Constitutional Checks and Balances: Trump's actions, such as defying court orders and expanding executive authority, have been characterized as a "bald power grab," leading to fears that the U.S. could be on a path toward dictatorship. Legal experts warn that unchecked executive authority undermines the foundational principles of American democracy.

   The Guardian

These actions and statements have contributed to perceptions of Trump as exhibiting despotic tendencies, prompting debates about the resilience of democratic institutions in the United States.

Trump’s alleged golf cheating fits a broader pattern seen in authoritarian leaders who fabricate personal greatness to reinforce their image. Just as despots throughout history have exaggerated their achievements—like Kim Jong Il claiming to shoot 38 under par—Trump has been accused by sportswriters, professional golfers, and playing partners of bending the rules to maintain a myth of dominance. 

Rick Reilly’s Commander in Cheat details how Trump manipulates the game, while LPGA pro Suzann Pettersen and sportscaster Mike Tirico recount firsthand instances of him moving balls and falsifying scores. These behaviors reflect a deeper authoritarian tendency: the need to control narratives, even in trivial matters, to project infallibility and superiority.

One last thing...

We have an entire cohort of co called "conservatives" who for decades have believed themselves to be that, while the party which serves that group have moved consistently into the extreme and the Fascist.

A statement that is largely accurate when looking at the political trajectory of the Republican Party in the U.S. over the past few decades. Many self-identified conservatives still see themselves as supporting traditional conservative values—such as limited government, free markets, and individual freedoms—while the party itself has increasingly embraced far-right populism, authoritarian tendencies, and nationalist rhetoric.

This shift has been noted by historians and political analysts, who highlight that the Republican Party has moved away from traditional conservatism (e.g., as represented by figures like Dwight Eisenhower or even Ronald Reagan) and toward more extreme positions. The embrace of Trumpism, conspiracy theories, election denialism, and policies that undermine democratic norms has led some former conservatives to break away, while others remain within the party, either unaware of or unwilling to acknowledge its transformation.

This kind of deception isn’t just about golf—it’s a hallmark of despots who manufacture their own greatness to maintain power and admiration. From claiming impossible athletic feats to rewriting history, authoritarian leaders rely on lies to craft an image of superiority. Whether on the fairway or the political stage, the need to cheat to win reveals not strength, but insecurity—the defining flaw of every despot.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Escaping the Political Gravitational Pull: Hope Beyond Destructive Ideologies

Time dilation, as described in general relativity, explains how time moves slower in stronger gravitational fields or at higher velocities. The closer you get to a massive object, like a planet or a black hole, the more time slows down. It's a concept that challenges our common-sense understanding of time, making it seem almost fluid and relative based on the circumstances.

Now, applying this concept to politics is a fascinating idea. Just as gravitational fields warp time, political ideologies warp perceptions of reality. People within certain political "fields" experience time differently, based on the ideologies and alliances they subscribe to. For example, in the case of Trump, JD Vance, and Lindsey Graham, we might see this "time dilation" in how their political careers and actions unfold in different contexts.

Trump, as the central political figure in this metaphor, can be seen as a massive force, akin to a black hole of political gravity. His rhetoric, controversies, and style have created a gravitational pull that bends the perceptions of time for his followers and opponents alike. For Trump supporters (MaGA), time seems to be running at a different pace—they experience a political reality that is far removed from what others perceive as "normal." Political events that might cause outrage or concern for those outside this gravitational field barely register within it.

JD Vance and Lindsey Graham, though caught in Trump's orbit, have a different relationship with the political "time" in which they exist. Vance, for example, has leaned into Trump's narrative, shaping his political career around that gravitational pull. His time in the political sphere is marked by accelerated movements toward policies that align with Trump’s worldview, even if they are seen as eccentric or extreme to outsiders. Meanwhile, Graham, often oscillating between support and criticism of Trump, might experience a form of political "time" that feels constantly shifting, like an object in a fluctuating gravitational field. His oscillations between positions create a sense of instability in his political trajectory.

The contrast between these figures is like observing different time rates in close proximity to one another. Some are accelerating toward certain extreme views, while others are caught in a cycle of adaptation and change, constantly orbiting the larger force of Trump’s political influence.

In this "political time dilation," the slower-paced areas—the moderates or those outside the immediate gravitational influence—see the actions of Trump, Vance, and Graham as more extreme, out of step with conventional political time. Meanwhile, inside their orbit, it feels like a natural progression, even if it appears wildly inconsistent or erratic to outsiders.

Just as in general relativity, where different observers experience time differently depending on their proximity to a gravitational source, political observers feel the impact of major political figures and ideologies in dramatically different ways. Time, in politics, isn’t just a measurement—it’s shaped by the power dynamics that govern who is in control of the "gravitational field."

Fascism has an outsized weight or density to politics and sensibilities, just as does Donald Trump.

Destructive ideologies, like fascism, tend to have greater weight in politics for several reasons, much like how heavy gravitational fields have a more profound impact on time or objects within their reach. Here’s how this works in both a theoretical and practical sense:

1. Centralized Power and Charismatic Leadership: Fascism often gravitates toward a highly centralized, authoritarian structure, where a single leader or a small group controls the political system. The leader becomes a focal point of authority and influence, much like a massive object that pulls everything toward it. This concentration of power makes it easier for destructive thought to spread quickly, because the state machinery, propaganda, and security forces can all be harnessed to reinforce and normalize these ideas.

   In this sense, fascism becomes like a political black hole—everything around it gets drawn in and warped. Once established, fascism tends to consume all opposing views and consolidate its power by eliminating or silencing dissent. Over time, this centralization of control allows fascism to dominate and reshape the political "field" around it.

2. Us vs. Them Mentality: Fascist ideologies thrive on creating clear divides between groups—often based on race, ethnicity, nationalism, or other identity markers. This "us vs. them" mentality can serve to polarize societies and make opposing political thought feel like a threat. By establishing an "enemy" or "outsider," fascism has the power to unify its base under a common cause while justifying the marginalization or violence against those who don’t align with the ideology.

   This division acts like a political gravitational force, warping public discourse and leading to the normalization of violence or oppressive policies. Once this narrative takes hold, it’s harder for more moderate or inclusive viewpoints to be heard, much like how time dilation makes it harder for external observers to perceive events within a gravitational well.

3. Crisis Exploitation: Fascist movements often emerge during times of crisis—whether economic, social, or political. During crises, people tend to feel more vulnerable and desperate for solutions. A charismatic leader promising strong, decisive action can appeal to these anxieties. This creates fertile ground for fascism to flourish, as it promises a way out of chaos through authoritarian control, scapegoating, and radical change.

   The weight of fascism in such contexts is amplified because it feeds on fear and uncertainty. The longer it can dominate the discourse, the harder it becomes for more rational or democratic ideas to push through the distorted political landscape. In a way, the crisis acts as the "initial mass" that accelerates the pull of fascist ideologies, making them even harder to resist.

4. Cultural and Historical Memory: In many cases, fascism doesn't just present new ideas; it taps into historical grievances, cultural myths, and long-standing fears. This historical resonance makes fascist thought more weighty, as it draws on deep-seated prejudices, resentments, and fears. For example, fascist rhetoric may appeal to a nostalgic sense of "lost glory," "national pride," or the idea of restoring a mythical past, creating a sense of urgency to act in a way that is seen as "patriotic" or "necessary."

   The historical weight behind these ideas can be powerful, distorting perceptions of the present and future. Much like how an object with immense mass can alter the trajectory of smaller objects around it, fascist ideas can change the course of political movements and societies.

5. Media and Propaganda: In the modern age, fascist movements have effectively utilized media and propaganda to disseminate their views. By controlling or influencing the narrative, they can shape public opinion and distort the reality of a situation. Propaganda serves as the vehicle that carries fascist ideas, amplifying their weight and reach. The more they saturate public discourse, the harder it becomes for other ideologies to break through.

   In this sense, fascist ideologies spread like a gravitational field that distorts the political conversation. The more people are exposed to the narrative, the more likely they are to accept or normalize it, even if it’s destructive or oppressive. Over time, this manipulation of the media and information becomes a powerful tool to ensure the ideologies maintain their weight in politics.

6. Resistance to Change: Once fascism has taken root in a society, it can create a feedback loop that makes it difficult to break free from. Institutions, laws, and societal norms may be reshaped to align with fascist principles, and these changes become entrenched. The longer this lasts, the harder it is to undo the damage, much like how time becomes irrevocably distorted near a black hole. Even if the political environment changes, the lingering effects of fascism—through laws, economic systems, and social divisions—can persist.

In short, the weight of fascism in politics stems from its ability to consolidate power, create fear-driven unity, exploit crises, draw on historical memory, manipulate media, and resist change. Just as a black hole’s immense gravity warps space and time, fascism warps political systems and societies, often making it harder for moderate or democratic forces to challenge its dominance. The more these elements combine, the greater the ideological pull—and the more difficult it becomes to break free from its influence.

Despite the heavy gravitational pull of destructive ideologies like fascism, there is always potential for resistance and renewal. Just as light can escape from the edges of a black hole if the right conditions align, so too can societies break free from oppressive political forces when people come together with shared values of justice, equality, and democracy. History has shown us that even in the darkest times, movements for freedom, human rights, and progress have emerged stronger, challenging the status quo and restoring balance.

The key is the power of collective action—individuals and communities who refuse to be swayed by fear or division, who seek truth, and who build inclusive political environments. Whether through peaceful protest, the advocacy of truth, or the formation of resilient democratic institutions, it is possible to create a political "field" where hope, compassion, and understanding have a greater weight than fear, hate, and division.

In the end, while ideologies may hold sway for a time, they are not permanent fixtures. People have the power to reshape the trajectory of politics, to rewrite the story, and to move toward a future where the forces of justice and compassion are the ones that define the pace and direction of change.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

 

America's "National IQ" in Trumpian Freefall

America's "national IQ" in freefall—rejecting history, reason, freedom for all rather than the few & democracy by re-electing convicted felon Donald Trump who undermines institutions, foments chaos, & pardoned violent insurrectionists and sides with our international autocratic enemies like war criminal Vladimir Putin. 

A nation embracing autocracy is a nation in decline. 

If we were to imagine a "national IQ" as a metaphor for collective reasoning, decision-making, and long-term planning, the trajectory of the U.S. would suggest a severe decline in critical thinking and civic responsibility under the scenario you describe.

After the Obama and Biden administrations—both of which emphasized democratic norms, institutional stability, and a return to global alliances—the re-election of a convicted felon with autocratic tendencies and a history of undermining democratic institutions would indicate a failure of national judgment. It would suggest that a significant portion of the electorate is either unable or unwilling to recognize the dangers of authoritarianism, misinformation, and corruption, despite the clear historical warnings.

The pardoning of convicted violent criminals from the January 6 insurrection would further signal a breakdown in the rule of law and an embrace of political violence as an acceptable tool of governance. This would mark a shift from a nation that values democratic principles to one that tolerates or even encourages lawlessness when it serves the interests of those in power.

If a nation’s IQ were measured in its ability to uphold democratic values, sustain rational governance, and protect its institutions from internal sabotage, then under these conditions, the U.S. would be in intellectual and moral freefall. It would indicate not just ignorance, but an active rejection of wisdom, history, and accountability—factors that typically lead civilizations into decline.

The terms disease and malady are often used interchangeably, but they have distinct meanings and connotations:

1. Disease – A specific pathological condition with identifiable signs, symptoms, and causes, often related to infections, genetic disorders, or environmental factors. It typically implies a medical diagnosis.

   • Example: Diabetes, tuberculosis, and cancer are diseases.

2. Malady – A broader term that can refer to any kind of disorder, affliction, or condition affecting health, including physical, mental, or societal issues. It has a more general and sometimes metaphorical use.

   • Example: Anxiety, corruption, or social unrest can be called maladies.

Key Differences:

• Medical specificity: "Disease" is more medically precise, while "malady" is more general.
• Formality: "Disease" is the preferred term in medical and scientific contexts; "malady" is often used in literature or philosophy.
• Scope: "Malady" can refer to non-medical afflictions (e.g., "the malady of greed"), whereas "disease" does not.

People susceptible to authoritarian or extremist ideologies, including MaGA’s more extreme elements (or perhaps any element), often share specific psychological traits and cognitive tendencies. While not all supporters fit this mold, those who become deeply entrenched in authoritarian thinking or conspiratorial beliefs tend to exhibit some of the following characteristics:

Psychological Traits Susceptible to "Mind Worms" Like Authoritarianism

1. High Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) – Prone to submission to perceived authority, aggression toward outsiders, and conventionalism.
2. Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) – Preference for hierarchy and dominance over perceived lower-status groups.
3. Low Cognitive Reflection – Quick to accept intuitive (but often incorrect) answers instead of engaging in deeper analysis.
4. Need for Cognitive Closure – Discomfort with uncertainty, leading to a preference for black-and-white thinking.
5. Fear-Based Thinking – Higher susceptibility to fear messaging, often linked to personal or societal insecurity.
6. Low Openness to Experience – Resistance to new ideas, cultures, or perspectives, preferring familiar and traditional norms.
7. High Conspiratorial Thinking – Tendency to believe in grand conspiracies that explain complex realities in simple terms.
8. Collectivist vs. Individualist Loyalty – Often prioritizes group identity (e.g., party, nation, race) over independent moral reasoning.

Why "Mind Worms" Work on This Personality Type

• Repetition & Echo Chambers – The more a claim is repeated, the more it feels true (illusory truth effect).
• Identity-Driven Politics – When ideology is tied to personal identity, questioning it feels like an attack on the self.
• Emotional Manipulation – Fear, anger, and grievance are powerful motivators, often overriding logic.
• Us vs. Them Mentality – Encourages tribalism and distrust of "outsiders" or "elites."

This isn’t exclusive to MAGA—historically, all forms of authoritarianism (left or right) thrive on these traits. But MAGA’s blend of nationalism, grievance politics, and anti-institutional rhetoric makes it particularly effective at exploiting these vulnerabilities.

If the U.S. were in full democratic crisis (as it is nnow)—facing an autocrat in power, the erosion of institutions, replacing agency and department heads with sycophants loyal to Pres. Trump and not the US Constitution or the People, in the pardoning of insurrectionists to send the message, "Break the law for ME and you'll be protected"—the emergency path to restoration would require immediate and decisive action. 

Here’s what should happen right now:

1. Mass Mobilization & Public Pressure

• Organize nationwide peaceful protests and strikes to demand accountability.
• Pressure Congress, state legislatures, and courts to act swiftly against authoritarian moves.
• Mobilize civil society groups to coordinate resistance against anti-democratic actions.

2. Legal & Congressional Action

• Invoke the 14th Amendment, Section 3 to bar insurrectionists from holding office.
• Fast-track impeachment or constitutional remedies if abuse of power escalates.
• State attorneys general must challenge unconstitutional actions through lawsuits and injunctions.

3. Protect Elections & Voting Rights

• Secure upcoming elections by fighting voter suppression laws and ensuring election oversight.
• Fund and mobilize voter turnout at unprecedented levels.
• Challenge any fraudulent election interference in courts immediately.

4. Federal & State Resistance

• Governors and state officials must refuse to enforce unlawful federal orders that undermine democracy.
• States can pass emergency laws protecting election officials, judges, and prosecutors from political interference.

5. Whistleblower & Insider Resistance

• Federal and state employees must document and expose illegal or unconstitutional directives.
• The judiciary and military must uphold the Constitution over any authoritarian commands.

6. International Pressure & Sanctions

• Allies must be engaged to condemn anti-democratic moves and threaten economic/political consequences.
• The UN, EU, and other democratic nations must apply diplomatic pressure and sanctions if necessary.

7. General Strike as Last Resort

• If democracy is being actively dismantled, a coordinated nationwide general strike could cripple the economy and force change.

This is not a time for passive hope—it’s a time for organized, legal, and relentless action to defend democracy before it's too late.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

The Point of Government Over Business and Why They're Different

The point of government over business and why they're different.

A government and a business serve fundamentally different purposes and operate under different principles:

Purpose
Government: Exists to serve the public by providing essential services, maintaining order, enforcing laws, protecting rights, and promoting the welfare of its citizens. It is driven by public service rather than profit.
Business: Exists to generate profit for its owners or shareholders. Its primary goal is financial growth and maximizing returns.\

Funding
Government: Funded primarily through taxation, fees, and sometimes borrowing. Citizens pay taxes to support public services.
Business: Funded through revenue generated by selling goods or services to customers.

Decision-Making
Government: Decision-making is influenced by laws, policies, public interest, and democratic or authoritarian structures. Public officials are (ideally) accountable to the people.
Business: Decisions are made based on market demands, competition, and profitability, with accountability primarily to owners, shareholders, and customers.

Profit Motive
Government: Not driven by profit; instead, it focuses on public welfare, stability, and equity. Some services (e.g., police, fire departments, public healthcare) are not meant to be profitable but are necessary for society.
Business: Operates to make money and sustain growth. If a product or service is unprofitable, it may be cut, even if it's essential to some customers.

Services vs. Products
Government: Provides infrastructure, education, national defense, law enforcement, emergency services, and regulatory oversight—services that benefit society as a whole.
Business: Provides goods or services that customers pay for voluntarily.

Accountability
Government: Accountable through elections, public oversight, laws, and checks and balances.
Business: Accountable to owners, investors, and the marketplace.

If a country were run purely like a business, as the image suggests, unprofitable but essential services (such as emergency services, healthcare, or public schools) might be cut or privatized, potentially leading to inequities and service gaps.

Looking at our latest incarnation of "Government as Business"... an autocratic attempt at altering American democracy constitutional republic into an autocracy via an oligarchy and kakistocracy, is Donald Trump and his MaGA political cult of personality.

By the way...  terms like "TDS" thrown at anyone questioning Donald Trump, something only his MaGA cult can acquire, is just a "thought-terminating cliché." Yes, there IS a name for that kind of attempted debate-neutralizing tactic.

A thought-terminating cliché is a phrase or term used to shut down debate or critical thinking by dismissing opposing arguments without engaging with them. It’s often used to delegitimize criticism without addressing its substance.

In the case of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (TDS), it's used by Trump supporters to dismiss any criticism of him as irrational or obsessive, rather than engaging with the actual points being made. 

Other examples of thought-terminating clichés include:

• "If you don't like it, leave."
• "That's just fake news."
• "It's just common sense."
• "Haters gonna hate."
• "You're just a never Trumper."
• "You just have Trump Derangement Syndrome, TDS."

These phrases act as rhetorical shields, preventing further discussion and making it easier to ignore or discredit opposing viewpoints.

Now, on "TDS"...

The term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (TDS) is often used to describe individuals whose intense dislike for Donald Trump leads them to react irrationally or with impaired judgment toward his actions and policies. Originally coined by political columnist Charles Krauthammer, TDS suggests that opposition to Trump can become so extreme that it clouds objective analysis.

en.wikipedia.org

However, it's important to note that the use of "TDS" is controversial. Supporters of Trump may use it to dismiss legitimate criticisms by labeling them as irrational, while critics argue that it's a thought-terminating cliché designed to shut down meaningful discourse. Therefore, while "TDS" is a commonly used term, its application and validity are subjects of debate.

What would be a more fun and correct term for Trump's excessive supporters to use, avoiding partisanship?

A more neutral and fun term that avoids partisanship, you could consider something like "Trump Fatigue Syndrome" (TFS).

This phrase playfully acknowledges the weariness some might feel in dealing with constant political drama without suggesting irrationality or obsession. It reflects a reasonable dissatisfaction or exhaustion with a leader, while keeping it lighthearted and less accusatory.

At least that involves reality, although it would still be used mostly for those simply making accurate observations of Donald Trump.

On a more positive note?

Dismantling government won’t make it more efficient–investing in it will
COMMENTARY | The work federal employees do is often invisible, but it’s always essential.

So, thought, planning, and action are better than disassembly and dysfunction?
Who knew?

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Weird CFPOTUS47 Trump's Weird Broligarchy is different than Putin's Oligarchy

The oligarchic structures under convicted felon CFPOTUS47 Donald Trump and war criminal Vladimir Putin exhibit notable differences, particularly in their composition and the nature of their alliances.

First up, CFPOTUS47 Donald Trump's EOs:

Tracking Trump's executive orders: What he's signed so far (from Axios).

Oh, and this: Female Bishop Calls Out Trump to His Face at Church Service

Moving on...

Jon Stewart on The Daily Show, on weird Trump's weird "broligarchy" and more.

Putin's Oligarchy: In Russia, the oligarchy primarily consists of individuals who capitalized on the post-Soviet economic turmoil to amass wealth, often through acquiring state assets at undervalued prices. These oligarchs typically have backgrounds in traditional industries such as oil, gas, and minerals. Their relationship with Putin is symbiotic; they support his regime and, in return, receive protection and opportunities to maintain and expand their wealth. However, this alliance is precarious, as any dissent or miscalculation can lead to severe repercussions, including loss of assets or imprisonment.

Financial Times

Trump's Oligarchy: In contrast, the emerging oligarchy in the United States under Donald Trump's leadership is characterized by the involvement of tech magnates and billionaires from the technology sector. Figures such as Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg have shown significant support for Trump's administration, attending private events and making substantial financial contributions. This alliance suggests a potential shift in American politics, where ultra-wealthy tech elites hold considerable influence over government policies. Unlike the Russian model, this oligarchy is deeply intertwined with the technology industry, potentially affecting areas like federal regulations, government spending, and the dissemination of information.

The Atlantic

Key Differences:

• Industry Focus: Russia's oligarchy is rooted in traditional industries like energy and minerals, whereas the U.S. version under Trump is heavily influenced by the technology sector.

• Nature of Alliances: In Russia, oligarchs often emerged from the privatization chaos of the 1990s, forming alliances based on mutual survival and benefit. In the U.S., tech billionaires are aligning with the government to potentially shape policies that favor technological advancement and deregulation.

• Stability of Relationships: Russian oligarchs operate in a more volatile environment, where falling out of favor with Putin can lead to dire consequences. In contrast, U.S. tech magnates engage in a more stable political climate, using their influence to steer policies without the same level of personal risk.

These distinctions highlight how different political and economic contexts shape the formation and operation of oligarchies in Russia and the United States.

So, Trump has less control of his?

In Russia, President Vladimir Putin exercises substantial control over the oligarchs. During his tenure, he restructured the power dynamics established in the 1990s, ensuring that oligarchs operated under the state's influence. This transformation led to a system where oligarchs serve at the discretion of state officials, consolidating wealth and power within a close-knit circle. Notably, 110 individuals control 35% of Russia's wealth, reflecting the concentration of economic power.

Wikipedia

Trump's Relationship with Tech Billionaires:

In contrast, during Donald Trump's presidency, the relationship between the administration and tech billionaires like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg was more collaborative than controlling. These tech magnates actively supported Trump's administration, participating in private events and making substantial financial contributions. For instance, Elon Musk contributed $200 million to Trump's Super PAC and was prominently featured during the inauguration ceremonies. This support suggests a mutual alignment of interests rather than direct control by the state over these individuals.

AP News

Comparative Analysis:

While Putin maintains a hierarchical structure where oligarchs are subordinate to state authority, Trump's interaction with tech billionaires indicates a partnership model. In this model, both the administration and the tech leaders pursue shared goals, such as reducing federal bureaucracy and influencing policy directions. Therefore, it can be inferred that Trump has less direct control over his allied billionaires compared to Putin's authoritative stance over Russian oligarchs.

Tech Billionaires' Influence in Trump's Administration

AP News
Elon Musk's prominence during inauguration ceremonies stamps tech titan's place in Trump's orbit

The Atlantic
The Tech Oligarchy Arrives

AP News
As Biden warns of an 'oligarchy,' Trump will be flanked by tech billionaires at his inauguration

Which is more dangerous for their country?

Elon Musk, January 20, 2025

Putin's Oligarchy:

Characteristics:

• Centralized Control: Putin's tight grip over Russian oligarchs creates a system where dissent is punished, leading to reduced checks on government power.
• Economic Dependency: A significant portion of Russia's wealth is concentrated in traditional industries (oil, gas, and minerals), making the economy vulnerable to external shocks like sanctions or fluctuating commodity prices.
• Suppression of Dissent: This system stifles political opposition, independent media, and civil society, fostering authoritarianism.
• Global Risks: The reliance on state-controlled oligarchs allows Putin to weaponize economic resources (e.g., gas supplies to Europe), affecting international stability.

Dangers to Russia:

• Concentrated power undermines democratic development.
• Economic stagnation due to corruption and lack of innovation.
• Long-term instability if the system collapses without Putin's centralized control.

---

Trump's Oligarchy:

Characteristics:

• Decentralized Influence: U.S. billionaires like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg exert influence independently, often shaping policy through lobbying, donations, and media ownership.
• Focus on Technology: The dominance of tech magnates introduces risks of monopolization, privacy violations, and algorithmic manipulation.
• Weaker Government Control: Unlike Putin, Trump does not directly control these individuals but aligns with them on policies that benefit their interests, such as deregulation and tax cuts.
• Polarization: The relationship between wealthy elites and government may exacerbate political polarization and inequality, undermining public trust in institutions.

Dangers to the U.S.:

• Increased inequality and erosion of public trust in democracy.
• Greater influence of unelected billionaires on public policy.
• Potential manipulation of information ecosystems (e.g., social media algorithms) to shape public opinion and elections.

---

Which is More Dangerous?

1. To Their Own Country:

   • Putin's oligarchy is arguably more dangerous to Russia due to its suppression of political freedoms, economic stagnation, and reliance on authoritarianism, which can lead to long-term instability and collapse.
   • Trump's oligarchy presents a subtler danger through the erosion of democratic norms, increasing inequality, and empowering tech giants to influence policy without accountability.

2. To Global Stability:

   • Putin's oligarchy poses a more immediate threat to international stability through aggressive foreign policies and economic weaponization.
   • Trump's oligarchy might destabilize the global tech landscape, raising concerns about privacy, monopolization, and the spread of disinformation.

Conclusion: While both systems have significant risks, Putin's oligarchy appears more dangerous in the short term due to its authoritarian grip and international aggressiveness. 

However, Convicted Feon POTUS Trump's model could well have longer-term ramifications for democracy and global governance, particularly if left unchecked.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT