We seem to be bleeding out the positive energy that was sometimes the national style.
For many Americans this can seem like a season of despair. the constant din of alarming news on various platforms is wearing us out. Our politics now is fraught with controversy over the undoing of years of progress. Normal routes of trade and international cooperation have been undermined. And, as ever, gun violence continues at about 47,000 deaths a year: much higher than most other peer nations. All of this has been made worse by a president who has mostly abandoned the usual roll of ‘binding up the nation’s wounds’ with appeals to transcendent values. Instead, his ersatz rhetoric of hate punishes individuals and institutions unaccustomed to having to defend their usually laudable objectives. Add in the fact that that legacy television news is folding under the crush of MAGA and FCC threats. ABC, CBS and NBC have yielded enough to have imprints of the President’s shoelaces on their foreheads. How can a person escape this doom loop?
Most communities are safe, but the assurance of it is gone. No wonder people are looking to A.I. for prepackaged nostalgia for times that weren’t necessarily better, but seemed more civil.
Researchers like Harvard’s Stephen Pinker note that a look at a lot of hard data reveals our world is now safer and less violent than in previous years (The Better Angels of Our Nature, 2010). The difference is the expansion of the personal boundaries of the known made possible by news sites and social media that have penetrated and been absorbed by the culture. Clearly, Americans think they are less secure. Their perceptions of violence and disruption penetrate our mediated spaces: from school shootings to the collapse of the social or physical infrastructures of whole communities.
Through all of this it is worth remembering what “news” has become. It is now a 24/7 preoccupation for many of us. And we shift seamlessly from video news, social media, and various online sites devoted to updates and opinion. There is a transformation of attention to reporting from a one-shot glance at a newspaper or evening newscast into incessant doom scrolling throughout the day. All-news channels like CNN mostly attract an older audience and continuous viewership. This has been confirmed by research that includes the corollary that these viewers feel less safe even in their own communities.
What exacerbates the problem is the decline in the kinds of activities that generally made people feel better about themselves and others, such as attending live events, attending church services, or participating in clubs and service organizations.
If we remember that traditional news has usually included the worst things that happened on a given day, the pool of available encounters within a population of nearly 400 million is always substantial. Hence, we get Robert Putnam’s representative image of a person bowling alone to feed our sense of personal isolation. Our discomfort is also fed by the steady drone of crime as entertainment, such as the elaborately produced and popular Netflix documentaries about lethal family members.
Solutions
So if news is now ubiquitous and a heavy tax on the soul, what are the solutions? How do we become less sour and more productively engaged? Of course, expressing opposition to the authoritarian impulses of this administration is a must. But it may also make sense to follow neuroscientist and musician Daniel Levitin’s advice to seek the restorative power of music. Among other things, music can reinstate our faith in the ability of different people to come together in support of one single vision. The parts of any composition are complementary rather than competitive. It is also gateway to those parts of the brain that tap into positive feelings rather than harsher binaries of languages that ask us to pick sides. One can chose any musical form open to the non-discursive world of moods and feelings that are usually resolved in harmonic resolution. As Nietzsche noted, “Life without music would be a mistake.”
Baroque music usually lifts my spirit. It always reminds me what smart people working together can achieve. The lucky souls who have the talent to effectively enable this inventive world could be playing Bach. But they could also choose a modern classic like that selected by the Danish Girls Choir.
Some people find respite in putting digital media aside in favor of hiking, fishing, reading, or a simple game of cribbage. Modern media observers note that A.I. images of nostalgic scenes from the 90s or earlier on Instagram can do the trick. But anyone temped to find redemption through a richer experience of life can do better than find it on a cramped three-by-five device. Our politicians may be failing us. But there are still so many around us or nearby who are still on their game. Why commit to mediated experience through the filter of someone else’s political or ideological agenda?
[There is justified concern that the Trump Administration is descending into authoritarian rule. Without functioning constitutional guardrails he is able to exercise unfettered dominance and control. The current makeup of the Congress essentially means that only the courts can stop him from seizing illegitimate power. Few of us imagined we would one day descend to the perilous level of electing a rogue president.
We speak of Trump as an “authoritarian.” But the term applies equally to people looking for the psychological comfort of an “all the answers” leader. ]
German academic T. W. Adorno was the lead researcher of the first major analysis of social conditions that give rise to populations overly enamored with authority figures.1 The researchers, some of whom had escaped from Europe at the start of World War II, traced the origins of a multitude of personality traits, including anti-Semitism, “susceptibility to antidemocratic propaganda,” ethnocentrism (judging others by one’s own values), and predispositions toward fascism. The rise of the Nazi Party and its wide acceptance even among well-educated Germans was the puzzle they wanted to solve.
Their questions are still relevant. Are certain kinds of citizens susceptible to appeals based on authority, especially “official” sources? Are some types of audiences too willing to ignore the natural ambiguities of everyday life in favor of the rigid ideological certainties of a demagogue? And what psychological needs are satisfied by cult-like allegiance is given to a leader? Think of any leader who sees their position as allowing the extra-legal extension of laws or institutions to punish perceived enemies. In this view, one can ignore constitutional mandates that would limit powers. The perceived need to purge alleged enemies is greater.
The original concept of authoritarianism focused equally on followers who are predisposed to submissive attitudes that mesh well with a dominating leader. A paper and pencil questionnaire called the F-Scale inventory probing for signs of “authoritarian submission” and “uncritical attitudes toward idealized moral authorities.” It consisted of claims, such as the ones listed below, to which a respondent would agree or disagree. Agreement gave a person a high F (Fascism) score.
“Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn.”
“Every person should have complete faith in some supernatural power whose decisions will be obeyed without question.”
“What this country needs most, more than laws and political programs, are a few courageous, tireless, devoted leaders in whom the people can put their faith.”
The researchers found that anti-Semitism, rigidity, ethnocentrism, and undue respect for power tended to cluster within many of the same people. They theorized that the clustering was tied to styles of family life. They also learned that authoritarianism can be identified in segments of almost any population. Some people may be psychologically hardwired to seek a “place” in a clearly defined social order led by a dominating leader. In Congress, for example, many GOP members seem happy to relinquish their constitutional responsibilities in favor of the President. Right now, few committees led by Republican chairpersons are engaged in what is usually the routine work of oversight of executive actions.
As a researcher on the psychology of identification, it seems evident that–with exceptions–authoritarians tend to have a diminished capacity for social intelligence. Low social intelligence typically includes low levels of empathy for others, lower self-esteem, low self-monitoring (an inability to notice how one’s own presence effects others), attraction to charismatic individuals, and an aversion to social complexity and pluralism.
Our quickly atomizing culture unfortunately feeds some of these traits. Recent election results are a reminder that many among us want simple and magical answers to entrenched problems: all the better if the explanations include scapegoating others. We have lived through a seemingly endless number of false alternate narratives told and retold about stolen elections, pedophile Washington elites, dead voters who managed to cast ballots, or Social Security cheats. Presently the political right finds receptive citizens with similar fears. Low-knowledge voters–and there are many–don’t have enough solid information to quell their imaginations. As a nation we need to get a whole lot smarter about weighing the claims of leaders who are willing to trade the complexities of modern life for dubious certainties.
1The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper and Row, 1950.