The impressive polling results both of these candidates have been able to amass have caught many political "professionals" by surprise. One of the questions being asked is whether this support reflects populist anger and frustration at the inability of representatives in Washington to get their act together, thus animating the White House race, or whether it represents a more fundamental shift in what type of candidate voters want to lead the country. Whichever it is, and the upcoming primaries should give us more clarity, we might dig a little deeper into the political identities of boith candidates, a socialist and a (media proclaimed) narcissist. Both of these candidates developed public identities that resulted in a significant following. However, what gave them prominence might ultimately become part of their undoing.
Many potential voters believe that Senator Sanders shot himself in the foot when he identified himself as a socialist, and more recently as a social democrat or a democratic socialist. Ever since the early 20th Century Americans have rejected Socialism as an ideology. In effect, most Americans do not distinguish between Socialism and Communism, intellectually or politically not recognizing the differences. According to some nothing is more feared and hated in America. "The word alone sends shivers down the spine of the American people." In "Ten Reasons to Reject Socialism," published by The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property, this organization produces a litany of reasons stipulating that "Socialism and Communism are the same ideology." They morph into cautionary comments about freedom, human nature, personal property, traditional marriage, etc, ending with: "May God protect America from Socialism." Politicians in bothe parties have used the concept for their own purposes, more or less deliberately erasing the distinction between the two economic ideologies, and warning people that Socialism means centralized control over private industry and property.
So, why would any viable candidate for the office of the presidency label himself a socialist? Senator Sanders softened his identity, and adopted "Social Democrat" to describe his ideological affiliation, suggesting that there is a difference. Frank Llewellyn, former National Director of the Democratic Socialists of America, defines his new label as follows: "Contemporary democratic socialists want to mitigate the many adverse impacts that unregulated capitalist markets have on the lives of ordinary people by supporting intelligent democratic regulations of the economy and by using progressive taxation to finance high quality public goods that can satisfy all citizens' basic needs for healthcare, education, unemployment insurance and job training." Bernie Sanders hopes that voters will recognize that we already have adopted many "socialist" measures, like Social Security, Medicare, and the like. His support group appears to have bought into the concept, not seeing alternative candidates who carry their banner.
Although he teeters on the left fringe of the American political spectrum, Bernie Sanders is philosophically relatively consistent and concise. Donald Trump on the other hand has exhibited a more or less freewheeling method of communicating a much less consistent set of ideas, principles, and policy suggestions with his politcal following. However, his approach has proven to be just as, if not more, effective than the one used by the Senator from Vermont. Trump aptly recognized and corralled the intensity of anger and frustration within the Republican Party, and made it his mission to organize his base into a powerful voting bloc. His personality, bluster, attacks on the status quo, and un-political style has resulted in frustration among his competitors, genuine concern among party regulars, and identification as a narcissist by much of the media.
The term "narcissism" was introduced by Sigmund Freud when referring to a person who is pathologically self-absorbed. The word comes from the Greek story of Narcissus, who fell in love with his own reflection. To be fair, a diagnosis of "narcissistic personality disorder" requires a clinical evaluation, and nobody asserts that that has taken place. However, political observers react to exhibited symptoms. Signs of narcissism include: an exaggerated sense of self-importance, a need for constant attention and validation, a lack of empathy for others, a pre-occupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, and a sense of entitlement. It is not entirely unclear why a number of the attributes displayed by Donald Trump during this campaign thus far would lead observers to the conclusion that he possesses narcissistic qualities.
None of this takes away from potentially desirable traits driving Mr. Trump's pursuit. While discussing leadership, Amy Brunell, psychologist at Ohio State University in Newark, observes: "Narcissists have an inflated view of their talents and abilities and are all about themselves. It is not surprising that narcissists become leaders. They like power, they are egotistical, and they are usually charming and extroverted. But the problem is, they don't necessarily make better leaders." Having said all this, a few psychologists agree that narcissism is not all bad. The condition denotes a specific mix of attributes. Whether it is useful to have these, and at what level, depends on the context. David Ley, Ph.D., sums it up as follows: "It takes an incredible degree of self-confidence, assuredness and arrogance to look at the world, and think you know how to run it better. But isn't that why we elect politicians? We've created an electoral system where every candidate must assert that they, and they alone, have the answers. We want someone to fix things, things that seem broken. We want a voice, and yes, we want one that will change things for the better."
Both candidates are out on the ledge. Their ideology and methodology have proven successful in developing a following by highlighting their "positives." However, politics being politics, their competitors are sure to take them apart and identify why they should not be allowed to succeed, We can expect an exciting few months to follow.
