“The purpose of an obvious lie is not to deceive, but to assert state power. To lie in this way is to say to the public, ‘We know you know that we are lying, but we do not care, because you have no control over this situation.’” — @sarahkendzior
As many writers know from painful personal experience, a book can take a long time to write. But maybe, just maybe, books don’t allow themselves to be written until the time is right.
It has taken me over seven years to write Disordered Minds: How Dangerous Personalities are Destroying Democracy. Now that it has just been published, and with Donald Trump’s chaotic presidency plunging the US and the world into greater danger with every passing week, the most frequent response I get when I tell people the title of my book is “perfect timing!”
But this timing is not something I can claim credit for. Since I began writing it, the world has changed in ways that make the messages in the book of enormous relevance today. But its origins lie in the distant past, in my attempts to understand my childhood growing up amidst the violence in Northern Ireland. As a scientist, and as a human being, I wanted to understand how it is that demonstrably dangerous individuals can so easily gain widespread followings and lead societies towards calamity.
Disordered Minds is based on research across a range of disciplines including history, psychology, politics and human nature. Over the course of my research, each of these disciplines yielded its own vital lesson.
The lesson from history is already well known, even if it was in danger of being forgotten. The lesson is that at times of social and economic crisis, strongman leaders preaching simple solutions to complex problems can readily rise to power. These demagogues typically exhibit a rigidly narcissistic belief in their own infallibility, a paranoid fear of enemies at home and abroad, and a psychopathic ruthlessness which they apply to crush opponents and reshape the world according to their own disordered logic.
The lesson that emerged for me from psychology is that these dangerous characteristics are not evenly distributed across the population but are instead concentrated in a relatively small proportion of the populace who suffer from certain disorders, namely psychopaths and those with narcissistic and paranoid personality disorders. Psychopaths suffer from an absence of conscience and a corresponding ability to treat others with casual brutality and disdain. Individuals with narcissistic personality disorder have distortions in perception and cognition which continually reinforce their belief in their own superiority. Anyone who dares challenge their superior status will immediately become the target of their unbridled narcissistic rage. Finally, people with paranoid personality disorder have a cognitive dysfunction that makes them believe, falsely, that others are always out to harm them.
Trump’s response to the midterms highlights two important pathologies in his decision-making calculus. First, he simply has no ability to process or respond to negative feedback. He simply chooses to ignore it if at all possible. Second, his perception of the actual strength of his bargaining position is usually wide of the mark.
This is a recipe for bad negotiating and more conflict on the global stage. Trump is like a gambler who keeps losing bluffs but is convinced that he’s just suckering his opponents into that big hand just around the corner. Actually, it’s worse than that, because Trump is the guy who thinks he is holding a flush because he’s just holding all red cards. This is a recipe for other international actors to stand their ground against Trump’s bluster, because they have a more accurate read of the balance of power.
Furthermore, astute foreign interlocutors could look at the midterm results and choose to wait Trump out, sensing that he may only be around for two more years. That will further stymie Trump, causing him to lash out at foreign partners just as much as Nancy Pelosi.
Haass is right: The Democrats controlling the House have little direct effect on American foreign policy. Trump’s reaction to this news, however, suggests why things there will be even more conflict to come in American foreign policy for the next two years.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.