This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/opinion/campaign-stops/trump-clinton-edsall-psychology-anti-pc-vote.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| The Anti-P.C. Vote | The Anti-P.C. Vote |
| (about 7 hours later) | |
| We know that resentment is driving much of Donald Trump’s success — resentment of elites, of the political class, of illegal immigrants, of protesters, of the media — and perhaps most particularly of changes in the demographic makeup of the country that Trump and his followers find unwelcome. | We know that resentment is driving much of Donald Trump’s success — resentment of elites, of the political class, of illegal immigrants, of protesters, of the media — and perhaps most particularly of changes in the demographic makeup of the country that Trump and his followers find unwelcome. |
| Part of the explanation for the triumph of resentment is political and economic, but one question has nagged at me. What is the psychological mechanism underpinning this resentment? | Part of the explanation for the triumph of resentment is political and economic, but one question has nagged at me. What is the psychological mechanism underpinning this resentment? |
| Six months ago, I wrote that Donald Trump’s “presidential campaign was following the path of right-wing working class parties in Europe.” In the United States since then, Democratic politicians and the media have struggled to enter the minds of Trump voters, who are evidently enraged by the imposition of norms of political correctness that they see as enforced by “Stalinist orthodoxy.” | Six months ago, I wrote that Donald Trump’s “presidential campaign was following the path of right-wing working class parties in Europe.” In the United States since then, Democratic politicians and the media have struggled to enter the minds of Trump voters, who are evidently enraged by the imposition of norms of political correctness that they see as enforced by “Stalinist orthodoxy.” |
| Trump has capitalized on the visceral belief of many white voters that government-enforced diversity and other related regulations are designed “to bring Americans to submission” by silencing their opposition to immigration — legal and illegal — to judicial orders putting low-income housing in the suburbs, and to government-mandated school integration, to name just a few of their least favorite things. | |
| Trump’s supporters, judging from the venom with which they refer to “political correctness,” perceive the network of state, local and federal anti-discrimination laws and directives as censorious and coercive. | Trump’s supporters, judging from the venom with which they refer to “political correctness,” perceive the network of state, local and federal anti-discrimination laws and directives as censorious and coercive. |
| The furor over political correctness has been brewing for a half century, since the broad rights revolution of the 1960s, which included the passage of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act on the heels of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The 1965 legislation and subsequent measures shifted United States policy to raise the total number of immigrants from Asia, Africa and Latin America and to sharply reduce the proportion of European whites. | |
| The result was unanticipated by the sponsors of the original act, according to the nonpartisan website History.com, which reports that in the 1950s, more than 50 percent of immigrants were from Europe, and just 6 percent from Asia. By the 1990s, Europeans had fallen to 16 percent of the total and Asians had grown to 31 percent. | The result was unanticipated by the sponsors of the original act, according to the nonpartisan website History.com, which reports that in the 1950s, more than 50 percent of immigrants were from Europe, and just 6 percent from Asia. By the 1990s, Europeans had fallen to 16 percent of the total and Asians had grown to 31 percent. |
| More to the point: | More to the point: |
| The African immigrant population in the United States grew from 80,000 in 1970 to 1.8 million in 2013, according to Pew. The immigrant population from Middle Eastern countries grew from 235,000 in 1980 to 1.02 million in 2013, according to the census. | |
| Opposition to the surge of non-European, nonwhite immigration is a bedrock of the Trump campaign, a crucial element of his attack on political correctness and a key component of the loyalty he elicits from noncollege, middle- and lower-income voters opposed to liberalized immigration — voters who believe they have been dispossessed. | |
| Trump’s successful deployment of the issue of immigration to mobilize voters raises this question: Why is his opposition to immigrants and Mexicans in particular so resonant when immigration liberalization ostensibly has majority support in most polls? | Trump’s successful deployment of the issue of immigration to mobilize voters raises this question: Why is his opposition to immigrants and Mexicans in particular so resonant when immigration liberalization ostensibly has majority support in most polls? |
| Research conducted by Lefteris Jason Anastasopoulos, a lecturer and data science fellow at Berkeley’s School of Information, provides one answer: Support for immigration “may be greatly overestimated.” | |
| In an email, Anastasopoulos writes that | In an email, Anastasopoulos writes that |
| The result is | The result is |
| The refusal of Democrats and the American left to hear — or to grant some legitimacy to — the grievances of white America as it loses power and stature to ascendant minorities and to waves of immigrants from across the globe undergirds the Trump movement. In the zero sum world of immigration politics, it has proved impossible so far to convincingly affirm the validity of the claims of both sides. | The refusal of Democrats and the American left to hear — or to grant some legitimacy to — the grievances of white America as it loses power and stature to ascendant minorities and to waves of immigrants from across the globe undergirds the Trump movement. In the zero sum world of immigration politics, it has proved impossible so far to convincingly affirm the validity of the claims of both sides. |
| The quest by American liberals and progressives for support, or at least tolerance, of diversity, inclusiveness and multiculturalism is likely to prevail — particularly if the compulsory dimension of compliance is curtailed. | The quest by American liberals and progressives for support, or at least tolerance, of diversity, inclusiveness and multiculturalism is likely to prevail — particularly if the compulsory dimension of compliance is curtailed. |
| Jonathan Haidt, a professor at N.Y.U., suggested to me that one way to better understand the intensity of Trump’s appeal is by looking at something called “psychological reactance.” Haidt describes reactance as | Jonathan Haidt, a professor at N.Y.U., suggested to me that one way to better understand the intensity of Trump’s appeal is by looking at something called “psychological reactance.” Haidt describes reactance as |
| The theory, first developed in 1966 by Jack W. Brehm in “A Theory of Psychological Reactance,” is directly relevant to the 2016 election, according to Haidt. Here is Brehm’s original language: | The theory, first developed in 1966 by Jack W. Brehm in “A Theory of Psychological Reactance,” is directly relevant to the 2016 election, according to Haidt. Here is Brehm’s original language: |
| Haidt applies this to the 2016 election: | Haidt applies this to the 2016 election: |
| In both the workplace and academia, Haidt argues, | In both the workplace and academia, Haidt argues, |
| In this atmosphere, according to Haidt, | In this atmosphere, according to Haidt, |
| Trump’s anger at being policed or fenced in apparently speaks to the resentment of many American men and their resistance to being instructed, particularly by a female candidate, on how they should think, speak or behave. | Trump’s anger at being policed or fenced in apparently speaks to the resentment of many American men and their resistance to being instructed, particularly by a female candidate, on how they should think, speak or behave. |
| On April 26, Trump wheeled out a spectacularly offensive attack on Clinton, perhaps designed to provoke the response it got. He accused her of playing “the women’s card” when “she has got nothing else going. Frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she would get five percent of the vote.” | On April 26, Trump wheeled out a spectacularly offensive attack on Clinton, perhaps designed to provoke the response it got. He accused her of playing “the women’s card” when “she has got nothing else going. Frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she would get five percent of the vote.” |
| Hillary rose to the bait. Three days later, appearing on Jake Tapper’s CNN show The Lead, she countered: | Hillary rose to the bait. Three days later, appearing on Jake Tapper’s CNN show The Lead, she countered: |
| Trump responded on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show on May 2. What Clinton said “was a very derogatory statement to men,” Trump declared. “It was almost as though she’s going to tell us what to do, tell men what to do.” He continued, “It was a real put-down.” | Trump responded on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show on May 2. What Clinton said “was a very derogatory statement to men,” Trump declared. “It was almost as though she’s going to tell us what to do, tell men what to do.” He continued, “It was a real put-down.” |
| The kind of messages that provoke reactance and a defiant or oppositional response, according to one study, include “imperatives, such as ‘must’ or ‘need;’ absolute allegations, such as ‘cannot deny that…’ and ‘any reasonable person would agree’.” | The kind of messages that provoke reactance and a defiant or oppositional response, according to one study, include “imperatives, such as ‘must’ or ‘need;’ absolute allegations, such as ‘cannot deny that…’ and ‘any reasonable person would agree’.” |
| In this context, and to understand the negative reaction of Trump supporters to Clinton, take a look at some of Clinton’s recent comments on Twitter, which could be construed, by those so inclined, as admonitory: | In this context, and to understand the negative reaction of Trump supporters to Clinton, take a look at some of Clinton’s recent comments on Twitter, which could be construed, by those so inclined, as admonitory: |
| “I don’t think a nation can be great that turns its back on the poor and the unfortunate.” | “I don’t think a nation can be great that turns its back on the poor and the unfortunate.” |
| “We’ve got to do more to raise families’ incomes. We can start by raising the federal minimum wage.” | “We’ve got to do more to raise families’ incomes. We can start by raising the federal minimum wage.” |
| “We’re stronger together. When we embrace immigrants, not denigrate them. When we build bridges, not walls.” | “We’re stronger together. When we embrace immigrants, not denigrate them. When we build bridges, not walls.” |
| Trump has made Clinton his foil of choice. | Trump has made Clinton his foil of choice. |
| On Dec. 21, 2015, Trump told an audience in Grand Rapids: | On Dec. 21, 2015, Trump told an audience in Grand Rapids: |
| Two days later, on Dec. 23, Clinton counterattacked in an interview in Fairfield, Iowa with The Des Moines Register: | Two days later, on Dec. 23, Clinton counterattacked in an interview in Fairfield, Iowa with The Des Moines Register: |
| When Trump escalated his attacks on Clinton more recently, she took a different approach: “I have nothing to say about him and how he’s running his campaign.” When pressed further, she sought the high ground: | When Trump escalated his attacks on Clinton more recently, she took a different approach: “I have nothing to say about him and how he’s running his campaign.” When pressed further, she sought the high ground: |
| Jesse Graham, a professor of psychology at the University of Southern California, suggested that the fact that Clinton is a woman plays a role in this dynamic, noting that many Trump followers respond to Clinton in a fashion similar to that of | Jesse Graham, a professor of psychology at the University of Southern California, suggested that the fact that Clinton is a woman plays a role in this dynamic, noting that many Trump followers respond to Clinton in a fashion similar to that of |
| Simon Hedlin, a public policy researcher, noted that | Simon Hedlin, a public policy researcher, noted that |
| Perhaps more significantly, Hedlin noted that he and Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor and former top aide in the Obama administration, conducted research that shows that some people will reject a policy or action that is to their advantage when they feel pushed or forced into making the “correct” decision. | Perhaps more significantly, Hedlin noted that he and Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor and former top aide in the Obama administration, conducted research that shows that some people will reject a policy or action that is to their advantage when they feel pushed or forced into making the “correct” decision. |
| In other words, reactance can foster a totalizing loyalty that does not respond to reasoned fault finding. This might help explain Trump’s seeming immunity to criticism from his adversaries. His followers feel that they have experienced a “diminution of freedom” and believe that Trump can “restore their autonomy.” | In other words, reactance can foster a totalizing loyalty that does not respond to reasoned fault finding. This might help explain Trump’s seeming immunity to criticism from his adversaries. His followers feel that they have experienced a “diminution of freedom” and believe that Trump can “restore their autonomy.” |
| He has won a unique admixture of support, based in part on what might be called an anti-rational or irrational loyalty but also in part on his recognition of legitimate grievances among his adherents that many other politicians belittle or deny. This loyalty, as Republican candidates found during the primaries, is far wider and deeper than anyone not sharing it expected. | He has won a unique admixture of support, based in part on what might be called an anti-rational or irrational loyalty but also in part on his recognition of legitimate grievances among his adherents that many other politicians belittle or deny. This loyalty, as Republican candidates found during the primaries, is far wider and deeper than anyone not sharing it expected. |
| The general election will determine how far this loyalty has spread through the populace. Trump has not yet faced the inevitable disclosure, as his opponents muster facts and figures, that he cannot deliver all that he has promised: water in California, the elimination of the national debt, lifting the economy’s annual growth rate to 6 percent, bringing back the coal industry and the complete obliteration of ISIS. | The general election will determine how far this loyalty has spread through the populace. Trump has not yet faced the inevitable disclosure, as his opponents muster facts and figures, that he cannot deliver all that he has promised: water in California, the elimination of the national debt, lifting the economy’s annual growth rate to 6 percent, bringing back the coal industry and the complete obliteration of ISIS. |
| Clinton remains the favorite, but she faces five months of treading water in a shark tank. She has yet to discover a compelling rebuttal to Trump on political correctness, and it will be difficult for her to placate opponents of immigration while holding her advantage with her base. Nonetheless, although her bite is not as lethal as Trump’s, she will soon have almost the entire Democratic Party in her corner, including a cadre of operatives whose specialty is drawing blood. | Clinton remains the favorite, but she faces five months of treading water in a shark tank. She has yet to discover a compelling rebuttal to Trump on political correctness, and it will be difficult for her to placate opponents of immigration while holding her advantage with her base. Nonetheless, although her bite is not as lethal as Trump’s, she will soon have almost the entire Democratic Party in her corner, including a cadre of operatives whose specialty is drawing blood. |