Trojan horse – Engaging Peace

Donald Trump
Image by Gage Skidmore and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

“When the Syrian refugees are going to start pouring into this country, we don’t know if they’re ISIS, we don’t know if it’s a Trojan horse….it could be the great Trojan horse of all times

Question 1: what can a politician gain when he makes a comment like this?

Your answer (Select all that apply.)

a sense of power from successfully manipulating people’s emotions.
actual power through gaining votes by portraying themselves as tough on crime and terrorism.
delight in the media attention and the endless money and fame it can generate.
a quiet sense of satisfaction from recognizing that they are doing everything possible to promote peace and human rights.
recognition that they may be nominated for the next Nobel Peace Prize.

Question 2: What would a politician’s followers gain from accepting such messages and using them to guide their behavior?

Your answer (Select all that apply.)

the comfort that comes from finding a strong leader who will take on troublemakers and knock them out of action.
pleasure in finding a leader who confirms your beliefs concerning what is right and what is wrong.
confirmation that there are real and present threats to the American way of life that have been too long neglected by weak Presidents.
reassurance that good people from all walks of life can work together to achieve solutions that make the world better for everyone.
the ability to see themselves as good people who live by the Golden Rule.

Question 3: What could a politician’s followers lose or escape from by accepting such messages and using them to guide their behavior?

anxiety related to not knowing whom they can blame for any current dissatisfactions or fears in their lives.
unease related to the feeling that there isn’t anyone around who is tough enough to put a stop to the threats to the American way of life.
the sense that they are increasingly powerless in a country where the government cannot be trusted to represent their interests.
a sense of pride in knowing that they have reached out to people with different backgrounds and different experiences before making a decision regarding their future and the future of their country.
recognition from leaders of the human rights and environmental movements concerning their sense of morality and concern for others and the planet.

Final Questions:

Who gains the most when politicians make statements like the one above? The politicians? Their followers? The American people? People around the world? Terrorists? Victims of terrorism?

Who has the most to lose when the message above is adopted by advocates of the message? The politician? The politician’s advocates? The American people? People around the world? Terrorists? Victims of terrorism?

What do YOU have to lose?

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

“In Self-Defense”. 1876 editorial cartoon by A. B. Frost. Depicts a caricatured former Confederates in the U.S. South with a knife and smoking gun in his hands standing over the corpse of an African-American toddler.
Image is in the public domain.

Moral disengagement involves a set of unconscious psychological processes allowing individuals to engage in or support or tolerate inhumane treatment of others while still thinking of themselves as good people. Common examples include using euphemistic language to make bad things sound less bad (“collateral damage”), pseudo-moral justifications (“the war to end all wars”), displacement or diffusion of responsibility (“I was just following orders”), advantageous comparison (“killing a couple of terrorists is a lot better than letting them kill thousands”), and attribution of blame/dehumanization (“axis of evil threatening the peace of the world”).

Unscrupulous power-hungry political leaders throughout history have often successfully promoted moral disengagement in those whom they want to dominate for their own purposes. Unfortunately, in regard to the burgeoning global refugee crisis, expressions of moral disengagement in the home of the “tired and the poor” are rife.

Consider the following comments. What forms of moral disengagement, as listed above, do you see?

“When the Syrian refugees are going to start pouring into this country, we don’t know if they’re ISIS, we don’t know if it’s a Trojan horse….it could be the great Trojan horse of all time…”
“some people are going to be upset about it, but I think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule. And certain things will be done that we never thought would happen in this country in terms of information and learning about the enemy….things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago.”
“One of the problems that we have and one of the reasons we’re so ineffective is they [terrorists] are using them (civilians, family members) as shields….It’s a horrible thing, but we’re fighting a very politically correct war.”
“I think waterboarding is peanuts compared to what they do to us….They don’t use waterboarding over there….They use chopping off people’s heads.”
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems… they’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

What do you have to lose?

Clever devils: getting good people to act bad