by Roy Eidelson
Note from Kathie MM: Our series on hope and other superpowers, inspired by John Pavlovitz, brings you insights for the new year from Roy Eidelson, a psychologist who illustrates well the kind of superpowers Pavlovitz urges us all to unleash on behalf of peace and social justice.
For many, the calendar’s turning is a traditional time for reflecting and for resolving to act with greater decency and compassion in the new year ahead. But if history is any guide, we shouldn’t expect anything of the sort from one highly influential group: those members of the so-called 1% who’ve long cared far more about their extraordinary wealth and power than about the common good.
These representatives of America’s plutocracy—some high-profile politicians and billionaire businessmen immediately come to mind—won’t change their stripes when January arrives. They’ll persist in pursuing an agenda that advances their own interests while ignoring the needs and desires of the rest of us. And in doing so, they’ll continue to rely on what I call “political mind games” to confuse, to deceive, and to divide—for as long as they can get away with it.
In my research as a psychologist, I’ve found that manipulative appeals from the 1% are often designed to target issues of vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness. That’s because these are the core concerns that govern the way we make sense of the world around us. Indeed, each is associated with a basic question we ask in our daily lives: Are we safe? Are we treated fairly? Who should we trust? Are we good enough? Can we control what happens to us? By offering disingenuous answers to these questions, self-serving one-percenters aim to shape our understanding of what’s happening, what’s right, and what’s possible to their own advantage.
As a guide, then, in this and the next engaging peace post, I will describe twenty mind games to watch out for and resist in the year(s) ahead.
Vulnerability
“It’s a Dangerous World.” From unwarranted military aggression to draconian austerity measures, one-percenters will falsely argue that their actions are driven by a desire to keep us safe. They know our support for any policy is strongly influenced by whether we think it will protect us from harm. They also realize that we’re quick to imagine the worst. This can make us easy prey for warnings that urge us to fall in line and follow all instructions, whatever they may be.
“Change Is Dangerous.” Whether they’re maligning Medicare-for-All or blocking cuts to our bloated defense budget, members of the 1% will warn of dire consequences whenever other initiatives clash with their ambitions. Regardless of the evidence, they’ll insist that such reform efforts will place everyone in grave jeopardy. Their fear-mongering is designed to preserve a status quo that benefits the few instead of the many.
“It’s a False Alarm.” From rejecting climate science to placing corporate profits over public safety, today’s plutocrats will defend misguided and destructive policies by insisting that our worries about adverse effects are overblown. Too often, we mistakenly take comfort in unfounded assurances offered from on high. When that happens, we fail to mobilize to protect the common good from those whose foremost concern is simply preserving their own extraordinary wealth and power.
“We’ll Make You Sorry.” Whether they’re bullying protesters or pressuring non-establishment candidates to step aside, one-percenters will turn to coercive threats and outright retaliation. They command a range of resources that can be put to use in punishing those who step out of line. These risks of painful and potentially life-changing reprisals alter the stakes for both individual acts of civil disobedience and sustained collective action.
Injustice
“We’re Fighting Injustice.” From voter suppression to corporate school reform, representatives of the 1% will argue that their self-serving efforts are necessary to correct the unjust actions of others. But they’re little different from wolves in sheep’s clothing. Their appeals aim to misappropriate and misdirect the outrage we naturally feel upon recognizing the injustices in our midst.
“No Injustice Here.” Whether they’re criminalizing poverty or locking up asylum-seekers at the border, today’s plutocrats will deny they’ve done anything wrong. Instead, they’ll portray these outcomes as appropriate consequences for the victims’ own poor decisions, thereby discouraging collective action by defusing the passion linked to the righting of wrongs.
“Change Is Unjust.” From defending mass incarceration to opposing minimum wage hikes, one-percenters will warn that changes to the status quo will lead to grave injustices. They’ll try to sideline reformers by falsely arguing that efforts to help the disadvantaged will have adverse and unjust ramifications far worse than current conditions. Planting these seeds of doubt can be enough to obstruct the formation of coalitions committed to challenging their agenda.
“We’re the Victims.” Whether it’s complaints that they’re over-taxed or that their purported generosity goes unappreciated, the 1% will paint themselves as suffering from mistreatment and unfair criticism. With such portrayals, they’ll hope to encourage our uncertainty over issues of right and wrong and victim and perpetrator. The collective pursuit of greater justice and equality is too often stymied by such manipulative misrepresentations.
Resisting the 1%’s Mind Games
Any effective strategy for turning the tide on the 1% in 2019 depends upon countering and neutralizing these mind games. To be clear, concerns about vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness deserve to be important guides in policy debates and in efforts to advance the general welfare. But today’s plutocrats cunningly exploit these concerns solely for their own benefit, disregarding the harmful consequences that befall everyone else.
What, then, can we do? First, we should understand that the 1%’s mind games are much like a rampant virus that can infect unsuspecting people with false and democracy-endangering beliefs. Second, we should take the steps necessary to psychologically inoculate ourselves. That’s best accomplished by learning to recognize these flawed, manipulative appeals wherever they appear—in the media or in our neighborhoods—and by preparing forceful counter-arguments to them. And third, having become skilled “first responders,” we should organize others in our communities to do the same. The mission starts now.
Roy Eidelson, PhD, is a past president of Psychologists for Social Responsibility, a member of the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology, and the author of the new book POLITICAL MIND GAMES: How the 1% Manipulate Our Understanding of What’s Happening, What’s Right, and What’s Possible. His website is www.royeidelson.com and he’s on Twitter at @royeidelson.
