How Donald Trump and Extremist Republicans Ride the Coattails of Nation’s Founding Fathers, Gaining Unwarranted Credibility through Association with Unconscious Archetypes about who is Capable of Leading
This is the third in a series of articles by Fannie LeFlore, MS, LPC, SAC, on the Traumatization of America due to Systemic Racism, Socioeconomic Disorder and Political Dysfunction. The central theme focuses on the psychology of racism. For links to the previous articles, click here: Part 1 / Part 2
The reality is that white males cannot be defined by simplistic stereotypes. They have both strengths and limitations, just as people from diverse backgrounds do. But white men, in general, are insufferable, in large part due to insistence on being regarded as leaders when the mentality of many renders them incapable of legitimate leadership. In fact, an objective look at current chaotic conditions within the United States reflect failures related to rampant dysfunction stemming from systemic racism, sexism, and socioeconomic disorder as a result of political decisions made by white men in power. This has been extensively documented, and these realities suggest that white males are often clueless or unconcerned about the needs of diverse demographic groups. Their obliviousness stems in part from false perceptions and inaccurate views about themselves and others. Given their disproportionate numbers in political positions, these characteristics do not bode well for people in official roles that mandate representing the interests of constituents. Yet, racial and gender stereotypes about who is most suitable for leadership, as well as unconscious archetypes that historically associate leadership credibility with the nation’s Founding Fathers, allow many contemporary white males to avoid scrutiny.
As a black professional woman, I get a sense of vicarious pride from the extensive accomplishments of Oprah Winfrey as a multi-media entrepreneur and cultural leader whose rise to riches journey is remarkable, given her humble beginning. But I also recognize Winfrey views herself as human, enough to not put herself on a pedestal in the same ways that white males have generally sought to obtain almost God-like status. The value of considering the role of unconscious factors -- historical and cultural archetypes – is clear due to how they influence human decisions. Motivations make a difference since many white males are socialized to accept a mentality that suggests they matter more than others. This realization impacts real lives, particularly when white male privilege allows them to be regarded as credible and competent without proof, and sometimes even when evidence exists to the contrary. Those in and aspiring to positions of power to shape allocation of resources and the direction of systems that govern our lives, need to be viewed realistically. Greater analysis is crucial when we consider potential long-term consequences of policies based on the political choices made by those in authority. Selecting people based on image alone – as reflected by tendencies toward surface indicators and shallow factors – is too great a risk now more than ever, with so much at stake.
Segments of modern white male leadership roles ride on the coattails of credibility established by the nation’s Founding Fathers as a result of unconscious affiliations taken for granted. The coattail effect is a political reference applied here to help assess the confusion of modern times, by using relevant insights about the psychology of racism not previously explored in mainstream media. The original definition involved the tendency for a popular political party leader to attract votes for other candidates of the same party in an election. Dissection of modern leadership is relevant due to public awareness of blatant indicators of diminished standards, extensive systemic corruption, and reduced integrity among increasingly more politicians. Many seek to enforce systemic racism, sexism and other forms of oppression that are abusive to diverse populations. The lack of ethical standards and the general public’s acceptance of limited consequences for those who refuse to represent the common good has resulted in structural breakdowns, wasted resources, socioeconomic disorder and political dysfunction, creating an overall chaotic environment. Shuts downs of government at various intervals have caused tremendous suffering to millions of citizens as a result of adults in authority indulging in unconscionable temper tantrums when they did not get their way.
An October 26 commentary by Jennifer Rubin about Donald Trump's supporters consisting of angry, white and abusive males, provides clarity about the lack of reason and levels of ignorance and intolerance. Many white men view equality for blacks and women as an infringement, creating an either/or dichotomy that implies support for the rights of diverse others somehow takes away rights from them. This and other examples reveal why superiority ideologies are, in a nutshell, based more on perception than reality. Those wanting their sense of superiority to go unchallenged, unrealistically expect others to view themselves as inherently inferior. It creates an impasse by imposing a no-win situation. Conflict is inevitable. Many that deem themselves leaders are incompetent but in positions of authority that allow them to set agendas and control most major resources beyond what is reasonable. Many make destructive decisions without sensible measures to hold them accountable. Many on the cultural fringes use threats against diverse populations in attempts to impose their will. They seek glory and power by resurrecting racial animosity and fears. They recycle untenable supremacy ideology as if it was valid.
Truth matters. That’s why the influence of archetypes that support assumptions that any white male can manage authority well requires closer scrutiny. The legitimacy of anyone whose identity depends on oppressing others, should be suspect. Their integrity should be questioned if their sense of security comes at the extreme expense of dignity for diverse humanity. Those lacking competencies but use their authority as a smokescreen often receive benefit of doubt they do not deserve. Some develop a sense of being untouchable from resting on laurels as a result of lengthy public service or experience in various institutional roles. We must go beyond face value, since not all career politicians are effective, and some have been downright destructive. Especially during modern times where resources are more plentiful, those who demand the deprivation of others to extents that threaten basic survival and whose lack of compassion make punitive approaches their default to keep others down, reveal themselves as inhumane and predatory.
When Perceptions Clash with Reality
Many people have gotten away with inflicting criminal levels of harm due to white male privilege. Certain contemporary segments compelled to believe they can fully define an agenda for what is legitimate for responding to the needs of diverse humanity, based on their own limited vision, are ill-equipped to represent and work well with others. Some justify harm caused to diverse populations. They are wayward by indulging their own capricious, wanton or depraved inclinations. They’ve been ungovernable in not following clear guidelines for human civility and shunning clear principles and laws, and they’ve been unpredictable by engaging in actions opposite what is desired for a civilized nation. The ongoing threats issued by white males who behave as if they have a right to decide who can live or die, have become routine despite being clearly abnormal behaviors by any objective standards.
Whether they be exceptions or the rule, some segments of the white male population may be beyond reach or redemption due to extreme self-centeredness, grandiosity and lack of empathy. The word pleonexia reflects the mentality of those whose corresponding greed, covetousness or avarice define an "insatiable desire to have what rightfully belongs to others," and who operate from "ruthless self-seeking and an arrogant assumption that others and things exist for one's own benefit." Extremist Republicans who gave rise to Donald Trump, one of the most destructive presidential candidates in modern history, epitomize problematic leadership. Their refusal to accept the validity of, or collaborate with, the nation’s first black/biracial president, Barack Obama, demonstrated a clear case of hubris through some of the most glaring abuses of power by white males, beyond all reason.
The two-term tenure of President Obama involved unprecedented obstruction by those who early on announced an agenda to make Obama fail, which included white backlash in various manifestations to challenge perceived black progress. Cody Cain wrote about how the Republican Party made the deliberate calculation to, instead of offering its best ideas for governing, focus instead on undermining the system by seeking to destroy its opponent. “This deplorable strategy from our political leaders is hardly the sort of conduct that our great democracy was designed to foster. Another component of the Republican strategy has been to publicly attack President Obama incessantly in the most vile of terms. Many Republicans have abandoned any and all vestiges of dignity, decorum and respect (as they) hurled attacks at Obama...The abandonment of any semblance of propriety has been utterly astounding."
We’ve witnessed major evidence of hostility toward women through extreme reactions regarding the prospect of Hillary Rodham Clinton becoming the first female president of the U.S., despite her credentials as one of the most qualified candidates in modern history. These and other examples speak volumes about the ways people distort reality based on ingrained biases. This is clear through interpretations by white men who refer to themselves as angry and consider themselves victims of the system. Many are detached enough to prevent forming a balanced view about struggles they and other people share. The fact is that blacks and women have had to endure white male presidents throughout American history. Reliance on perceptions and images that benefit only white males promote false narratives that do a disservice to our nation.
Yet, supporters of many white males in and seeking to maintain leadership roles, readily overlook how inappropriate and incompetent so many may be at national, regional, state and local levels. The fact that any white male authority figure will suffice reflects negatively on the professed Christianity of many white people who are clearly resistant to demographic changes as a more diverse America emerges. In a September 21, 2016 article, Brian D. McLaren wrote about his disengagement from “the conservative evangelical project,” saying that in families like the one he grew up in, conservative meant good and liberal meant evil. He said he prefers to associate with people who are respectful and treat others, even those considered opponents, with basic human decency and civility. “Today’s conservatives have been undermining voting rights for minorities, vilifying immigrants, scapegoating LGBTQ people, and resurrecting white privilege and white supremacy to maintain systemic injustice…Too many conservative leaders have become increasingly disrespectful to the point of being rude, crude and mean-spirited. It’s become impossible to ignore…I can’t support regressive thinking that longs for a time when life was worse for nearly everybody except people like me…We need actual policies that will help (people) build a better future, not vain promises about returning to the past.”
Various commentators suggest that many whites are motivated to cling to racial superiority ideology as a comfort zone now that so many people feel forgotten by their government. Many also support authoritarianism while overlooking the dangers of unscrupulous political candidates in exchange for promises of security. While denying or overlooking that minority groups have been historically attacked and marginalized by hostile sources, the sentimental positions of many white people are revealed through slogans to “Make America Great Again,” and buy-in for stereotypes stemming from the Southern Strategy that appeals to white racial allegiances and supports strategic moves to restrict voting and related rights for blacks.
In supporting racist and sexist politicians, many who consider themselves otherwise decent, become complicit in enforcing a rancid status quo. It brings to mind a widely-circulated comment from President Lyndon Johnson when asked why poor and middle-class white Republicans vote against their own interests: “If you can convince the lowest white man that he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t know you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him someone to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.” The point is not to imply that only white people vote against their best interests, but their motivations likely differ from reasons most black and brown people do so. As Angela Davis recently reminded us, both the Republican and Democratic parties are complicit in structures of capitalism that support racist and sexist practices and exert oppressive control over the masses, in different ways.
Facing the Flaws of Nation’s Founding Fathers
Despite the dignified words in the U.S. Constitution claiming liberty and the pursuit of happiness within reach for all, propaganda efforts have long suggested that those who struggle the most, who lack upward mobility and do not access the American Dream, are personally at fault due to personal failure. In reality, the system is rigged. It is designed to make allowances that support the likelihood of success for white men while creating disadvantages and imposing barriers on blacks and other people of color, and women. A great deal of suffering could have been avoided if equitable practices supported a level the playing field that did not artificially determine human outcomes. The contradictions created by racism and sexism compromise options for quality of life, distort perceptions of reality and cause major ignorance and confusion. This is a major reason many whites operate from fallacies of meritocracy and unrealistically view America as a country that belongs to them, despite the existing presence of Natives and historical role of blacks, women and other diverse people in building the nation.
Books issued to mainstream America often downplay the oppressive conditions suffered by marginalized groups or make little mention of their legitimate contributions in helping shape the nation. This makes the exclusion of diverse populations from many leadership positions, both in early American history and now, problematic. Consider the dynamics when white men make assessments that the Founding Fathers, if they were still around, would be able to offer the best guidance for handling certain modern problems. Deference to views espoused by significant historical figures may simply reflect interest in emulating those considered brilliant. But such explorations are often not relevant for current conditions. Despite seemingly innocent, such inquiries are inherently biased since the typical white male lacks exposure to, and operates from a dearth of information about, ground-breaking philosophies of black and brown people, and women due to traditional history books portraying white men as central and most effective problem-solving.
Those who talk incessantly about the brilliance of the Founding Fathers, tend to paint pictures that pretend perfection, near-perfection or above reproach. Despite all their accomplishments, the Founders were flawed men whose practices as slavemasters, and various policies and views they held, inflicted extensive harm. This points to the limitations of the historical formula that defined a white male mentality based primarily on warriors and conquerors, stemming from colonial conquests that extend into modern-day assumptions. Among those premises is the notion that compromising is considered weak and only white men possess all the answers, stemming from a superiority complex that demands discounting the value of others. This can create a foundation for toxic masculinity and the making of monsters, not reasonable men.
Cognitive dissonance is inevitable due to realizations of the unsavory histories associated with white men who collectively conspired to oppress, malign, stigmatize and hold others back. Various evidence – including a study published in June 2015 -- reveals that, despite stereotypes about Muslims and the profiling of black and brown males by law enforcement that consists of predominantly white and male officers, white Americans are biggest terror threat in the U.S. These and related blind spots seek to negate white male patterns of violence. Other trends of negative behaviors by whites in general have been treated as excusable, as if attempting to erase major parts of white history that are not admirable. This presents a problem since modern white males are more likely to gain greater benefit of doubt. The Founders’ legacy left an inadvertent image of inevitability -- as if the nation cannot survive or thrive without white men in most major leadership roles. It is part of extensive ideological foundations that promote many pretensions.
As Abraham Lateiner recently wrote: "As rich white men, we are always told, implicitly and explicitly, that we are the smartest, wisest, most objective, most creative, and worthiest people in America. Everyone who isn’t a rich white male knows this is bullshit." No doubt, white men played a major role in monumental accomplishments in a new nation whose growth required visionary principles and ground-breaking innovations. But modern white male leadership in America is increasingly a reflection of hypocrisy and pretenses more than substance. Like the Founders, current white leaders are flawed within reasonable parameters, like most people. But their double standards in dealing with diverse populations prevent foresight about often unintended consequences from upholding ideologies used to rank human worth based on skin color and gender. Accountability measures are necessary to bring balance and mitigate some struggles that impede emergence of new possibilities for diverse humanity to share power and co-exist as civilized citizens.
The belief that the agendas and interests of white men should be regarded above all others lays a foundation for ongoing chaos and conflict. Modern leaders can help break vicious cycles that make war seem a routine necessity, given historical lessons from early colonization about the slippery slope created by America’s policing the world and initiating attacks on foreign lands to cultivate resources from others. The option to promote peaceful negotiation and mutually-beneficial outcomes through compromise would reflect consciousness of the human costs from unjust wars waged in various places. Progressive leaders are willing to pause and reflect more deeply about the impact of current actions on future generations, including the threats posed by human activity in harming the planet.
Many white males do not reap the same socioeconomic benefits as those at the height of the hierarchy and are among those who attempt to reverse their cultural programming that directs them to shun communal concerns, be overly competitive and materialistic. They offer positive examples of those who recognize that it makes no sense to be hostile toward those who have done nothing to harm them. In fact, valid claims can be made that teaching children to hate others because they are different, should be considered a form of child abuse. Those who are irredeemably racist and sexist serve as reminders of what holds the nation back. As people grow in consciousness, they will be better positioned to challenge the cycles of socialization and historical patterns that have adverse influence.
It does not require diminishing the valid accomplishments of white men due to their human flaws, but closer scrutiny of unconscious archetypes will help expand considerations about who is capable of leading the nation. Moving forward with increased consciousness and compassion, we can support the collective empowerment of diverse citizens during this period of upheaval and transition in America’s political history. Modern life demands a variety of leaders with sufficient levels of awareness to embrace the realization and demonstrate acceptance that different people have a right to exist, basic rights and need access to resources to manage basic needs and opportunity to reach their potential. This would allow all who value common sense to play a role in reducing the impact of systemic oppression that holds the nation hostage.
The many issues plaguing the nation cannot be left solely to the discretion of white men if America is to progress. The urge to wax nostalgic is always tempting. But contemporary people still seeking perspectives primarily from dead white men, need to evolve. White men can become increasingly conscious by recognizing ways in which blacks and other people of color, and women, have proved qualified throughout history and continue to offer credible ideas to help society become more inclusive rather than deemed exclusive domain of the white male. The most legitimate sources of leadership are those with a broad base of thinking, with a range of qualifications and capabilities to make decisions based on needs in the present. The past is available to provide perspective, not to impose an impasse.