Political Psychology

85 readers
3 users here now

A place to discuss or share anything related to political psychology. That could be historical examples or modern day, fictional examples, even general psychological concepts you notice might overlap with an event.

Rules:

Be respectful

No abusive language

No bigotry

No ads

No porn

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
1
2
 
 

Despite its softer connotations, empathy is hard, requiring strategists to confront misperceptions and false assumptions, and overcome individual egos and national hubris.

3
 
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/62613937

Companies' in-house lawyers are also nervous. They want to make sure their outside counsel is willing to fight the government if necessary. One lawyer working in a company's general counsel office told Business Insider that her company's advisors at a law firm that made a deal with Trump said it was necessary to hold onto influence with regulators.

"It just feels very cynical," said the in-house lawyer, who wants to redirect work to other firms. "I don't feel comfortable, if you're going to cave in front of the government, that you're going to represent me in front of the government."

Even if you're used to getting fucked over, why roll over? Fight back!

4
 
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/62591065

President Donald Trump has a long history of treating women like property.

From 1996 to 2015, he was the owner of the Miss Universe Organization. Many of the contestants complained about his inappropriate behavior towards them, such as entering the dressing rooms while they were naked. Tasha Dixon (Miss Arizona 2001) reported, “He just came strolling right in. … Some girls were topless. Other girls were naked.” Many of them were teenagers. In an interview with Howard Stern, Trump defended this behavior saying, “I’m allowed to go in because I’m the owner of the pageant.”

Since the 1970’s, no fewer than 26 women have accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, ranging from harassment to sexual assault and rape. In a conversation with television host Billy Bush in 2005, Trump infamously stated that his celebrity status entitled him to do anything he wants to women without consent: “I just start kissing them,” he said, “I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. … Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.” He was subsequently convicted of sexual assault against E. Jean Carroll and directed to pay over $86 million in damages for assault and defamation.

Now, as Trump enters his second term in office, his rapaciousness seems to have found a new outlet of expression on the global stage. In an interview with Fox News, he stated that Ukraine should not have fought back against Russia when they invaded because Russia was “much bigger, much more powerful.” The following month, in a White House press conference with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump said that Ukraine “never should have started it”—as if they were somehow responsible for having caused themselves to be invaded.

Feminist writers have long argued that there is an intrinsic relationship between patriarchy, rape and colonialism. The seizure of land by force is comparable to the seizure of a woman’s body—and historically rape and war have often gone hand-in-hand.

In order to get a better understanding of how Trump’s attitudes towards women might be related to his foreign policy, I reached out to Dr. Judith Herman, a world-renowned expert in trauma studies. Herman is a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, director of training at the Victims of Violence Program at Cambridge Hospital (Massachusetts), and a lifelong feminist activist. Her pathbreaking 1992 book Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence from Domestic Abuse to Political Terror has been described as “almost singularly responsible for the legitimization of rape trauma in the psychiatric field.”

5
 
 

They said it was for the children. For the families. For the soul of America.

But Prohibition wasn’t a war on alcohol—it was a war on the people.

It wasn’t about virtue. It wasn’t about safety.

It was never about saving anyone.

It was about power. About profit. And about punishing the very people it claimed to protect.


Just released my first Special Edition eBook:

Prohibition and the Profit Motive – How the U.S. Sold Control as Virtue

This $5 eBook version helps me keep going.

It funds the next piece.

It keeps the lights on—literally.

Can’t swing $5?

Even a $1 tip makes a bigger difference than you think.

Can’t support at all? Please share this with someone who needs to know.

Thank you for being here.

Every view, every read, every repost—

you’re helping me fight back with facts.


This is a radical 9-page microhistory that exposes:

  • How Prohibition was used to criminalize poverty, independence, and rebellion
  • How women’s pain was exploited to justify surveillance
  • How the government knowingly poisoned its own people—and got away with it
  • And how all of it echoes in today’s drug war, overdose crisis, and profiteering off pain

Included in the Special Edition:

  • Letter from the Author
  • Full design and printable formatting
  • A haunting “Then vs Now” historical photo spread
  • Extended commentary not included in the free version

Free version here (education should be accessible): Prohibition and the Profit Motive: How the US Sold Control as Virtue Standard PDF

Special Edition ($5+, supports the work): Prohibition and the Profit Motive – eBook Special Edition

This was written, researched, designed, and formatted by one person—no team, no budget, just rage, tabs, and truth. If you believe in history that hits back, this is for you.

—The Mad Philosopher

_Subject Index: 

Origins of the Temperance Movement, Feminist advocacy and state betrayal, Racialized and class-based enforcement of Prohibition, Government-sanctioned poisoning, Surveillance and control policies, Economic exploitation of addiction, The War on Drugs as a legacy system, Pharmaceutical profiteering and opioid crisis, The commodification of pain, Resistance, rebellion, and reclaiming history_

6
7
 
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/27720691

8
 
 

These shared character traits stem from a cognitive and emotional developmental arrest in both childhood and adolescence resulting in fixed, life-long, concrete thinking patterns. They fail to attain the last stage of mental and emotional development, that of abstract thinking, which is necessary for critical reasoning that allows one to consider the broader significance of ideas and information rather than depend on concrete details and impulses alone. These autocratic leaders have limited capacity for empathy, love, guilt, or anxiety that become developmentally permanent and guide everyday decision making. Character or personality traits that perpetuate the lives of autocratic leaders are further distinguished by sociopathic and narcissistic behaviors that self-serve to cover their constant fear of insecurity and the insatiable need for power.

9
10
11
12
13