Understanding MAGA

[Slartibartfast]

The vast majority of MAGAts have a very inflated opinion of themselves, just like their hero Trump. And the vast majority of the time, it's totally undeserved.

Their inability to ever admit they are incorrect about anything, even when confronted with facts and evidence from experts, is very indicative of this.

They are convinced that their worldview is correct. And absolutely nothing will ever convince them otherwise. There is extreme rigidity in their thinking, which indicates a lack of education and intelligence more than anything else. Total simpletons.

They are broken people but they want to be broken because it’s easier than self improvement.

We need to start pointing out and how weird their ideology is. The more that general society becomes repulsed by them, the better off we will be long term.

We should always offer them an open hand for those who hit a low point and what to be helped.

 

[poppopfox]

Such a conclusion cannot be drawn by whether you or I "believe" in it. Only an evidentiary-based approach can confirm or fail to support your assertion here, and as of now I have not seen any such data to support your claim.

Discrimination against people of color is well-documented.

Racial Discrimination in Contemporary America
These data show that, in many ways, the structures and forces that necessitated civil rights legislation and a broader focus on racial equity still exist, and those same structural barriers continue to necessitate remedial action. Despite progress over the last sixty years, the evidence is clear that race continues to be a significant determinant of economic well-being in the lives of many Americans.

It is important to highlight that racial bias leads to racial gaps precisely in settings where the rules are race-neutral. Discrimination from bias is often prevalent whenever people have discretion, such as in calling back a job applicant or deciding whether to give a break to a speeding driver.[6] In such cases, the rules are race-neutral, but the application of the rules is not. Even if individuals making decisions may not have demonstrated explicit biases, their implicit biases may still impact their decisions. Indeed, in many of the examples above, measures of implicit bias are as predictive (and often more predictive) of discriminatory gaps as measures of explicit bias. The prevalence and effect of implicit bias shows the limitations of relying solely on race-neutral tools to advance equality of opportunity. In various contexts, the research suggests that race-conscious action may be necessary to truly achieve equality of opportunity for all Americans irrespective of race, creed, and color.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Did writing this give you a dopamine rush?

MAGA simply means Make America Great Again. It's a slogan. It's not an addiction. If it makes people feel good, well so did "Yes we can", or "Build back better" or even "Morning in America".

And since you're expecting it, here goes. TDS is a drug. It too gives a dopamine rush.

The slogan and acronym are not the issue. It's the cult-like behavior of its membership. The attitude that says Trump is the ultimate flawless hero, and if you always support him, you'll always be a hero too. He showed them how to feel like winners - just pretend you won no matter what - and they've become addicted to it. That's why they've embraced the whole "fake news" and "alternate facts" phenomenon. To heroically defend the hero. It's also why they've embraced moonbat conspiracy theories, and why they don't care about Trump's crimes, corruption, and habitual lying, while claiming to be against criminal, corrupt, lying politicians. The irony and hypocrisy are ignored. The hero is made out to be the victim, and then they heroically defend the hero. We've seen it time and time again. From downplaying his campaign's involvement with Russian agents, to downplaying the attempted blackmail of a foreign government, to downplaying his mis-handling of COVID, to downplaying his shameless lies about the 2020 election, to downplaying his blatant crimes related to 1/6, the list goes on. Whatever it takes to get that fix. They're so addicted they're willing to take America down with them.

 

[Ginger Ale]

You are correct! I think of them like I do sports fans. I think it comes down to a "bad" football team, a "bad" coach and some very dedicated hometown fans.

The key here is they've tasted victory once upon a time, so they're always motivated for a possible win again.

It doesn't matter what their coach does, or says, he's the coach!! They listen, and mimic. Their team can lose, and lose and lose but they're diehard fans regardless!

This is why it makes no sense, and they find themselves at the end of all his controversy, still supporting the man. They might just die doing it. They remember the good ole days when they were winners in high school.

 

[Hello My Son]

Discrimination against people of color is well-documented.

Racial Discrimination in Contemporary America
These data show that, in many ways, the structures and forces that necessitated civil rights legislation and a broader focus on racial equity still exist, and those same structural barriers continue to necessitate remedial action. Despite progress over the last sixty years, the evidence is clear that race continues to be a significant determinant of economic well-being in the lives of many Americans.

It is important to highlight that racial bias leads to racial gaps precisely in settings where the rules are race-neutral. Discrimination from bias is often prevalent whenever people have discretion, such as in calling back a job applicant or deciding whether to give a break to a speeding driver.[6] In such cases, the rules are race-neutral, but the application of the rules is not. Even if individuals making decisions may not have demonstrated explicit biases, their implicit biases may still impact their decisions. Indeed, in many of the examples above, measures of implicit bias are as predictive (and often more predictive) of discriminatory gaps as measures of explicit bias. The prevalence and effect of implicit bias shows the limitations of relying solely on race-neutral tools to advance equality of opportunity. In various contexts, the research suggests that race-conscious action may be necessary to truly achieve equality of opportunity for all Americans irrespective of race, creed, and color.

"I have not seen any data that supports your claim that 'a huge percentage of [Trump supporters] happen to be racists and misogynists'" is not the same thing as saying, "I have not seen any data that supports the claim that racial discrimination in contemporary America exists."

 

[Hello My Son]

They are broken people but they want to be broken because it’s easier than self improvement.

Pretty much every broken and down-on-their-luck person demonstrates this. It's a common symptom of both learned helplessness/disempowerment and depression.

We need to start pointing out and how weird their ideology is. The more that general society becomes repulsed by them, the better off we will be long term.

Agreed. Making logical counterarguments will accomplish a lot more than emotionality and ad hominem.

We should always offer them an open hand for those who hit a low point and what to be helped.

100% agree. One cannot claim to be better than their opposition if they do exactly what they accuse/criticize the opposition for doing.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Nobody has ever accomplished getting cultish people to leave their faith behind by calling them crazy and completely ostracizing them.

On the contrary, it just isolates people and drives them even further into their cult when you constantly treat them like that.

I'm not talking to them, I'm talking to Planet Earth. If you'll note, I've said we shouldn't reward their gaslighting and re-inventing of reality by engaging with it and giving them even more opportunities to defend their hero.

 

[Fearandloathing]

As human beings, it feels great when we can be proud of ourselves for something. A promotion at work, a compliment from a friend, a well-handled situation with family, or a successful DIY project can all reward us with little dopamine hits for a job well done.

But on the other hand, as human beings we’re not perfect. We all have certain limitations and inadequacies in our lives that we’re not proud of. Maybe we’re not as smart, attractive, or strong as we wish we were. Maybe we can’t handle certain situations as well as we’d like. Maybe we haven’t achieved the level of financial success and/or career prestige that we wish we had or think we deserve. When we think about these shortcomings in our lives, it can leave us feeling anxiety and stress. How we deal with that stress varies from person to person.

Donald Trump has shown people one way to do it: Be a legend in your own mind. Be a hero who is always right and good, never wrong or bad. Reject the version of reality that makes you feel inferior, and substitute your own that makes you feel special. Either your inadequacies and imperfections don’t exist, or they’re someone else’s fault, not yours. If a fact is good for you or bad for your rival, it’s true, but if it’s bad for you or good for your rival, it’s false. If words sound positive, they’re about you. If they sound negative, they’re about your rival. Heads I win, tails you lose, and if you don’t like that, tails I win, heads you lose. This way you’re guaranteed to always feel great about yourself. Just pretend to win and you can feel like a winner without actually having to win.

Thinking like this is addictive. Not only are you free from all the stress and anxiety of being less than perfect, but more significantly, you enjoy a constant stream of dopamine from feeling good about yourself. For being a hero who is always right, never wrong. It’s like being addicted to a drug.

MAGA is little more than a mass addiction to playing hero. Trump, by inventing a reality for himself where he is the ultimate blameless hero, has addicted his followers to feeling eternally heroic in support of him. It’s not just that he could shoot somebody on 5th Avenue and not lose a single vote, it’s that even if he did, he would still pose as the absolute moral authority. It can’t possibly be wrong or bad, because he’s the hero and the hero is always right and good. So if the hero did it, then by definition it must have been right and good.

This is how cults are. This is what cults do.

MAGA members will probably reply to this with some variation of “TDS”. That will give them a little dopamine hit for playing hero by defending the ultimate hero. And if we reply with any sort of factual and rational response, it just gives them another chance to defend Trump, facts and truth be damned, and get another little dopamine hit for playing hero by defending the ultimate hero.

Credit to and inspired by this guy.

Niccolò Machiavelli

The political theorist of the 16th century perfectly forecast Trump!

In "The Prince", he creates a cunning individual who, in an uncanny resemblance to Trump, creates fear, uncertainty and doubt in the Kingdom, where there was none (like convincing people the economy sucks when its raging hot, that criminals, rapists and thieves are overwhelming the border); then proceeds to convince most of the populace that he, and he alone can save the nation from this great emergency.

It used to be required reading in high school. See what happens when you start banning and burning books?

 

[Donatello]

Sure I have. With more people than I could count. Both in my profession and in my personal life.

It's amazing what people will open up and say when you don't start off by being a complete narcissistic prick toward them.
.


That hasn't been my experience with about 80-90% of them. The other remaining ones definitely fit that description, which is comparable to the percentage of leftists I've engaged with who are like talking to a brick wall. It turns out that the most extremist fringes have those tendencies in general.



You seem to be talking to yourself with this part, because nothing I've said has anything remotely to do with this part of your rant.

I agree that there are radical left and radical right. Are you more afraid or concerned about one sides extremism more than the other?

 

[Binary_Digit]

creates fear, uncertainty and doubt in the Kingdom, where there was none (like convincing people the economy sucks when its raging hot, that criminals, rapists and thieves are overwhelming the border); then proceeds to convince most of the populace that he, and he alone can save the nation from this great emergency.

If something is good for Trump or bad for his rivals then it's true, but if it's bad for Trump or good for his rivals then it's false.

 

[Michael Cole]

Even if their chosen solution is insane, it doesn't mean that their underlying struggle is insane. Perhaps we would do better as a society to work on understanding how someone could feel so desperate that they'd end up choosing to do an insane thing rather than neglecting their issues until they reach that point of insanity, and then castigating them for it.

The point is that we've passed the insanity mark. There used to be disqualifiers in this country. Gary Hart was caught cheating on his wife. That's all it took. Today, someone can attempt to overturn an election, steal classified information, all the while praising world dictators, and be elected President of the United States.

Anyone who supports such a man has passed the point of insanity.

 

[Hello My Son]

I'm not talking to them, I'm talking to Planet Earth. If you'll note, I've said we shouldn't reward their gaslighting and re-inventing of reality by engaging with it and giving them even more opportunities to defend their hero.

Which is exactly why we're still dealing with Trump all these years later.

That is a method that has resulted in self-sabotage for those whom are in opposition to MAGA, and the proof is in the pudding.

 

[Hello My Son]

I agree that there are radical left and radical right. Are you more afraid or concerned about one sides extremism more than the other?

Both have shown quite a propensity for violence and cultism when they don't get their way or are upset about something, so no.

 

[Hello My Son]

The point is that we've passed the insanity mark. There used to be disqualifiers in this country. Gary Hart was caught cheating on his wife. That's all it took. Today, someone can attempt to overturn an election, steal classified information, all the while praising world dictators, and be elected President of the United States.

Anyone who supports such a man has passed the point of insanity.

That doesn't negate anything I've said about the effectiveness or lack thereof of different methods of interacting with Trump supporters and/or getting to the bottom of comprehending their actual reasons (not reasons made up out of thin air by third-parties) for supporting him.

 

[Donatello]

Both have shown quite a propensity for violence and cultism when they don't get their way or are upset about something, so no.

I admit my bias here, but what kinds of violence and cultism has been showed by the left? Not saying you're wrong, just looking for an example. I would point to January 6th as dangerous extremism from the right. What do you believe is an equivalent from the left?

 

[poppopfox]

"I have not seen any data that supports your claim that 'a huge percentage of [Trump supporters] happen to be racists and misogynists'" is not the same thing as saying, "I have not seen any data that supports the claim that racial discrimination in contemporary America exists."

Maybe not "huge" but certainly significant.
Not surprisingly, then, support for Trump correlates highly with a standard scale of modern racism (r= +.48; VanAssche& Pettigrew, 2016.)
Social Psychological Perspectives on Trump Supporters
(Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2017,Vol. 5(1), 107–116)

This one is easier to read.

 

[poppopfox]

You are correct! I think of them like I do sports fans. I think it comes down to a "bad" football team, a "bad" coach and some very dedicated hometown fans.

The key here is they've tasted victory once upon a time, so they're always motivated for a possible win again.

It doesn't matter what their coach does, or says, he's the coach!! They listen, and mimic. Their team can lose, and lose and lose but they're diehard fans regardless!

This is why it makes no sense, and they find themselves at the end of all his controversy, still supporting the man. They might just die doing it. They remember the good ole days when they were winners in high school.

Nice analogy.

 

[Fletch]

As human beings, it feels great when we can be proud of ourselves for something. A promotion at work, a compliment from a friend, a well-handled situation with family, or a successful DIY project can all reward us with little dopamine hits for a job well done.

But on the other hand, as human beings we’re not perfect. We all have certain limitations and inadequacies in our lives that we’re not proud of. Maybe we’re not as smart, attractive, or strong as we wish we were. Maybe we can’t handle certain situations as well as we’d like. Maybe we haven’t achieved the level of financial success and/or career prestige that we wish we had or think we deserve. When we think about these shortcomings in our lives, it can leave us feeling anxiety and stress. How we deal with that stress varies from person to person.

Donald Trump has shown people one way to do it: Be a legend in your own mind. Be a hero who is always right and good, never wrong or bad. Reject the version of reality that makes you feel inferior, and substitute your own that makes you feel special. Either your inadequacies and imperfections don’t exist, or they’re someone else’s fault, not yours. If a fact is good for you or bad for your rival, it’s true, but if it’s bad for you or good for your rival, it’s false. If words sound positive, they’re about you. If they sound negative, they’re about your rival. Heads I win, tails you lose, and if you don’t like that, tails I win, heads you lose. This way you’re guaranteed to always feel great about yourself. Just pretend to win and you can feel like a winner without actually having to win.

Thinking like this is addictive. Not only are you free from all the stress and anxiety of being less than perfect, but more significantly, you enjoy a constant stream of dopamine from feeling good about yourself. For being a hero who is always right, never wrong. It’s like being addicted to a drug.

MAGA is little more than a mass addiction to playing hero. Trump, by inventing a reality for himself where he is the ultimate blameless hero, has addicted his followers to feeling eternally heroic in support of him. It’s not just that he could shoot somebody on 5th Avenue and not lose a single vote, it’s that even if he did, he would still pose as the absolute moral authority. It can’t possibly be wrong or bad, because he’s the hero and the hero is always right and good. So if the hero did it, then by definition it must have been right and good.

This is how cults are. This is what cults do.

MAGA members will probably reply to this with some variation of “TDS”. That will give them a little dopamine hit for playing hero by defending the ultimate hero. And if we reply with any sort of factual and rational response, it just gives them another chance to defend Trump, facts and truth be damned, and get another little dopamine hit for playing hero by defending the ultimate hero.

Credit to and inspired by this guy.

No need to attribute to TDS what can be better classified as leftist sanctimony and pseudo psychology

 

[poppopfox]

No need to attribute to TDS what can be better classified as leftist sanctimony and pseudo psychology

Rules 11-15 describe exactly what one can expect when confronting a troll:
11. All your carefully picked arguments can easily be ignored.

 

[Peacenik]

Maga is kind of like the hopeless TV fans of soap operas. They would watch programs and then talk about the characters as if they were real people. Particularly the daytime soaps. You couldn't tell those people it wasn't real. And it is the same way with maga. You can't tell them that the things Donald makes up are not real. Many of them were fans of his 'reality' show - which was actually scripted.

Interestingly enough, when Donald made his incendiary remarks about Mexican people after beginning his presidential campaign, NBC responded by firing him - for real. Donald no longer appeared on The Apprentice after that.

 

[Hello My Son]

I admit my bias here, but what kinds of violence and cultism has been showed by the left? Not saying you're wrong, just looking for an example. I would point to January 6th as dangerous extremism from the right. What do you believe is an equivalent from the left?

As far as cultist behavior goes, any collective that engages in groupthink is engaging in cultish behavior. The best litmus test for gauging cultism in a person is to ask them to list serious criticisms of their own preferred party/leadership. Someone who is engaged in the faith-based/emotionally-committed mindset that is common in cultism will be unable to do so, as they can only allow themselves to engage in idealization of their leaders. A non-cultist will be able to easily criticize their preferred leaders, as they are not engaged in a reasoned and rational-approach rather than a faith-based emotional-commitment.

So, in a nutshell, any party can have people who fit the profile of cultish thinking as well as those who do not, but you really need to look at it on an individual level to get an accurate idea of the percentages in each category.

 

[Donatello]

View attachment 67522845
View attachment 67522846
View attachment 67522847

As far as cultist behavior goes, any collective that engages in groupthink is engaging in cultish behavior. The best litmus test for gauging cultism in a person is to ask them to list serious criticisms of their own preferred party/leadership. Someone who is engaged in the faith-based/emotionally-committed mindset that is common in cultism will be unable to do so, as they can only allow themselves to engage in idealization of their leaders. A non-cultist will be able to easily criticize their preferred leaders, as they are not engaged in a reasoned and rational-approach rather than a faith-based emotional-commitment.

So, in a nutshell, any party can have people who fit the profile of cultish thinking as well as those who do not, but you really need to look at it on an individual level to get an accurate idea of the percentages in each category.

You don't list a source or I'd look this up myself. Are they counting the Jan 6 violence as a single political violence datapoint as say, a Climate Change protester resisting arrest at a protest? If so, is that really a fair way to count them?

 

[Hello My Son]

Maybe not "huge" but certainly significant.
Not surprisingly, then, support for Trump correlates highly with a standard scale of modern racism (r= +.48; VanAssche& Pettigrew, 2016.)
Social Psychological Perspectives on Trump Supporters
(Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2017,Vol. 5(1), 107–116)

This one is easier to read.

This is mostly commentary with very minimal (and only correlative) data, with no control groups for comparison, making it the journal version of an op-ed.

Many people who are fervent supporters of any political movement demonstrate high rates of authoritarian traits, but without representative sampling, experimental groups, control groups, and multivariate analysis, the differences between political dogmas cannot be accurate compared and contrasted. Here's another study on the topic that took a more thorough and scientific approach instead of relying on conjecture:

We find that LWA, right-wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation reflect a shared constellation of personality traits, cognitive features, beliefs, and motivational values that might be considered the “heart” of authoritarianism. Relative to right-wing authoritarians, left-wing authoritarians were lower in dogmatism and cognitive rigidity, higher in negative emotionality, and expressed stronger support for a political system with substantial centralized state control. Our results also indicate that LWA powerfully predicts behavioral aggression and is strongly correlated with participation in political violence. We conclude that a movement away from exclusively right-wing conceptualizations of authoritarianism may be required to illuminate authoritarianism’s central features, conceptual breadth, and psychological appeal.

We need to recognize that similar unhealthy character traits can be applied in different ways and to different ideologies, just like any dysfunction of personality. For example, a narcissist pairs very well with other narcissists and this grouping will often even keep them on their best behavior because they care about the approval from other narcissists, but a narcissist paired with a dependent or avoidant personality will bring out their absolute worst behavior and they will become very abuse toward the other person because they do not see the dependent/avoidant as equal. Either way, they're still engaged in narcissistic behavior, albeit in very different ways, and each way is comparably maladaptive in spite of the different manifestations.

 

[Hello My Son]

You don't list a source or I'd look this up myself. Are they counting the Jan 6 violence as a single political violence datapoint as say, a Climate Change protester resisting arrest at a protest? If so, is that really a fair way to count them?

Whoops! I'm sorry--I meant to include the link. Here you go:

https://majorcitieschiefs.com/wp-co...port-on-the-2020-Protest-and-Civil-Unrest.pdf

The report differentiates between violent and non-violent criminal acts that transpired during the 7% of 2020 demonstrations that became riotous.

 

[Deuce]

It’s not stupidity. It’s malice.