Truthdig
From Bill Maher to Sigmund Freud: A Very Unfunny Look at the Enduring
Politics of Hate
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/bill_maher_sigmund_freud_unfunny_look_at
_enduring_politics_of_hate_20170508/
Posted on May 8, 2017
By Bill Blum
A Donald Trump opponent in Seattle. (Ted S. Warren / AP
(http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Election-Protests-Washington/6e30e18
4c0424add938e39b8820a5199/4/0) )
I dont always agree with Bill Maher (witness his views on Islam
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher) and the death penalty), but the
comedian was at his best on the April 28 installment of Real Time, his
Friday night HBO talk show. In both his opening interview with Massachusetts
Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren and his closing New Rules monologue,
Maher admonished liberals
(http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/bill-mahers-stop-trying-to-win-over-trump-v
oters-with-facts-youre-wasting-your-breath/) to stop trying to win over
Trump voters, especially his white working-class backers, with facts.
Youre wasting your breath, Maher quipped. Trump supporters arent
changing their minds because the problem isnt in the mind. Its lower. Its
emotional. He could have Ann Franks skeleton in his closet. Theyd all vote
for him again.
True to Mahers observations, notwithstanding Trumps buffoonish ineptitude
on the job and the many ways he has already undermined the objective
interests of his working-class supportersappointing a cabinet stocked with
right-wing billionaires and zealots committed to destroying public education
and environmental protections; promoting a tax plan that is a shameful
giveaway to the wealthy; pushing an Obamacare replacement bill that will
strip millions of health insurance; backing proposed legislation that will
end overtime pay, to cite just four initiativesthe presidents GOP base
hasnt deserted him. To the contrary, despite an overall approval rating
that hovers at historic lows just above 40 percent, only 2 percent of those
who voted for Trump in November say they now regret doing so, according to a
Washington Post/ABC poll released
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nearing-100-days-trumps-approval-at
-record-lows-but-his-base-is-holding/2017/04/22/a513a466-26b4-11e7-b503-9d61
6bd5a305_story.html?utm_term=.c729220f2f0a) on April 23.
If anything, in focusing on emotions, Maher touched only the surface of a
complex and critically important dynamic that to date has left activists and
pundits flummoxed, stunned and appalled. The question thus arises: If the
key to understanding Trumps core support lies in grasping its emotional
underpinnings, what kind of emotions or attitudes are at work?
Is the thrust of Trumps allure based on racism? Is it a derivative of
misogyny? Is it related to the fear of changing demographics, and the
frustrations and anger engendered by the economic losses inflicted by
globalization and neoliberalism?
Clearly, all of these attitudes are very much in play across the land. Ive
written before
(http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/is_john_roberts_coming_for_your_vote_20
120905/a%20href=) in this column of the widespread appeal on the right of
racial and gender-based nostalgiathe longing for a mythologized past
that harkens back to the pre-civil rights era following World War II.
Trumps Make America Great Again campaign slogan masterfully channeled
this mythology. At the heart of Trumps presidential run was a
hyper-nationalist vision of America drawn from distorted allusions to the
wisdom of the founding fathers, the infantile narcissism and individualism
of Ayn Rand and, on a more mundane level, patriarchal 1950s sitcoms like
Father Knows Best. In the vision, America prevails über alles
internationally, while white Christian men hold all positions of authority
at home, and women and racial minorities happily accept their second-class
citizenship.
But in the wake of Trumps first three months in office and prompted by
Mahers musings, Ive come to think theres something far deeper going on at
an emotional level among Trump voters.
What is that something? Bluntly put, its this: Trumps base has given him
unwavering support because he professes to hate the same people,
institutions and values they hate.
Im talking about hatred of immigrants and Muslims (the all-purpose
sociological others, who can be easily scapegoated as the source of our
collective miseries); distrust of the press and the fake media; rejection
of science and the disquieting truths it pursues; distain for judges and the
rule of law, and the repudiation of civil rights. Many Trump voters also
loathe the super-rich, having been flimflammed into believing Trump, one of
the gaudiest and most predacious men on the planet, isnt part and parcel of
the despised global elite.
Hate is central to Trumps power, and for good reason: Hate is a primal
passion. Hate is part of our inherent makeup. Were hard-wired for it and
can never entirely free ourselves from its grip.
No one understood this better than the founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund
Freud. According to Freud, as elaborated especially in his later textsand I
apologize for simplifying an extraordinarily intricate body of work and
bypassing the contributions of later analysts who amended and critiqued
Freuds ideashuman beings are driven by two basic instincts: the life
impulse (Eros, from the Greek god of love) and its opposite, the death
impulse (dubbed by later disciples, though not by Freud himself, as
Thanatos, the winged Greek demon of death).
Eros in this conception is directed at self-preservation and the quest to
prolong life, both individually and socially. It embraces
(http://www.whomakesthenazis.com/2010/11/freud-fascism-and-death-instinct.ht
ml?m=1 ) not only sexual gratification, but also life-affirming impulses
and behaviors associated with communal engagement, harmony, collaboration
and cooperation.
Hate is an expression of Thanatos, as are the impulses to destruction,
sadism and masochism, envy, fear, violence, and above all, war. Freuds
genius was his recognition
(http://study.com/academy/lesson/eros-life-instinct-definition-lesson-quiz.h
tml) that the life and death instincts dont exist in isolation. Rather,
they overlap and interpenetrate, forming an inseparable duality, forever
clashing and vying for dominance.
Freud laid out his instinct theory most concisely in a relatively unknown
and underappreciated batch of letters
(http://www.public.asu.edu/~jmlynch/273/documents/FreudEinstein.pdf)
exchanged with Albert Einstein in 1931-32. Although the correspondence
between the great thinkers took place in the brutal aftermath of the First
World War and during the uneasy quiet before World War II, it remains
vitally relevant to Trumps America.
Einstein and Freud met only once
(http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jul/19/entertainment/et-book19) in person
in 1927 and didnt have further contact until 1931, when the Institute for
Intellectual Cooperation, an advisory group to the League of Nations,
invited Einstein
(https://www.brainpickings.org/2013/05/06/why-war-einstein-freud/ ;) to
undertake a cross-disciplinary dialogue on war and peace with a scholar of
his choosing.
Einstein selected Freud, to whom he wrote
(http://www.public.asu.edu/~jmlynch/273/documents/FreudEinstein.pdf ;) in
April, 1931. He asked Freud to reflect on the evils of war in light of his
theory of how inseparably the aggressive and destructive instincts are
bound up in the human psyche with those of love and the lust for life. In a
subsequent letter written in July, 1932, he asked directly if there was any
way of delivering mankind from the menace of war once and for all, and if
hate could ever be erased from society.
Freuds response was less than sanguine. All my life, he told a League of
Nations official about Einsteins effort to reach out to him, I have had
to tell people truths that were difficult to swallow. Now that I am old [he
died in 1939 at age 83], I certainly do not want to fool them. Still, he
promised to answer Einsteins query.
In September, he penned a lengthy and wide-ranging reply. Conflicts of
interest between man and man, he explained, are resolved, in principle, by
the recourse to violence. After summarizing his dark view of the instincts,
he added, The upshot of these observations
is that there is no likelihood
of our being able to suppress humanitys aggressive tendencies.
It is all
too clear that the nationalistic ideas, paramount today in every country,
operate in quite a contrary direction.
But all was not lost, Freud cautioned. Although war and aggression could
never be completely eliminated, mitigating measures could be taken,
emphasizing reason, culture, empathy and community. From our mythology of
the instincts, he wrote, we may easily deduce a formula for an indirect
method of eliminating war. If the propensity for war be due to the
destructive instinct, we have always its counter-agent, Eros, to our hand.
All that produces ties of sentiment between man and man must serve us as
wars antidote.
All that brings out the significant resemblances between
men calls into play this feeling of community, identification, whereon is
founded, in large measure, the whole edifice of human society.
Becoming more concrete, Freud cited the satisfaction of material needs and
enforcing the equality between man and man as additional components of
tempering aggressiongoals, he added, the Bolsheviks had pursued in vain. He
also endorsed the League of Nations as an international arbiter of justice.
The exchange between Einstein and Freud was published in pamphlet form in
1933. The rise of Hitler, however, limited the press run to 2,000 copies,
causing the correspondence to fall into obscurity.
There are at three basic takeaways to be drawn from the correspondence to
burnish our efforts to combat and counter Trumpism:
First, to return to Maher, there is a pressing need to appreciate the full
gravity of the hatred Trump represents. Attitudes of hate among Trumps base
cannot be assessed simply as a regrettable but rational response to the
depredations of Wall Street and globalization, as Elizabeth Warren and even
Bernie Sanders have argued. They are decidedly more than that.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), in the spring issue of its quarterly
Intelligence Report, warns
(https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2017/year-hate-
and-extremism) that After half a century of being increasingly relegated
to the margins of society, the radical right entered the political
mainstream last year in a way that had seemed virtually unimaginable since
George Wallace ran for president in 1968.
The SPLC estimates there were at least 917 hate organizations active
throughout the U.S. in 2016, to go along with another 623 extreme
anti-government groups. They are but the most obvious manifestation of a
much larger phenomenon.
Second, while progressives may never convert the KKK, skinheads, the Oath
Keepers and other entrenched extremists, larger segments of Trumps base can
be reached, and turned around. The lies behind Trumps faux populism can be
exposedand in this essential enterprise, facts, faithfully and accurately
presented, still matter.
The hate Trump has directed against immigrants, constitutional rights and
egalitarian values can be turned against him through clear expositions of
his hypocrisies, conflicts of interest and his obscene quest to gut the
social safety net for the purpose of enriching himself, his family and his
cronies. Although the progress made on this front has been uneven, elements
of both the mainstream and alternative mediafrom The New York Times and the
Washington Post to The Intercept and Truthdighave accomplished a good deal,
publishing articles and analyses that have helped to arouse and fortify
resistance movements the across the country. Those efforts must redouble.
Finally, and most important of all, in the spirit of Freuds Eros, the left
will have to fashion and promote a positive, life-affirming vision of the
future to rival and displace the death instinct behind Trumps Make America
Great Again mantra.
Every major movement of social and political transformation, in addition to
championing specific short-term reforms, has been animated by higher
principles promising both solidarity and liberation. The American Revolution
was moved by the demand for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The French version was driven by the ideals of liberté, égalité,
fraternité. The civil rights movement was propelled by Martin Luther King
Jr.s dream of racial harmony and justice. Even Obamas 2008 presidential
run was keyed by a single word of inspiration: Hope.
What, then, in this critical hour is our shared vision of the future? I
dont pretend to have the answers, except to say that in the broadest terms
it will be communitarian, diverse, inclusive, respectful of democratic
institutions and the environment, and welcoming toward individual freedoms.
It will not, if it is to succeed, call for a restoration of the hierarchical
neoliberalism of the recent past. Try as Hillary Clinton might to convince
us that she, too, is part of the resistance
(http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/hillary_clinton_does_not_belong_in_the_
anti-trump_resistance_20170504) and perhaps worthy of another bid for high
office, she isnt. Period. Full stop.
In the meantime, Donald Trump remains the leader of the most powerful nation
on earth. We remain mired in the politics of hate. And that, as Bill Maher
has already told us, is anything but funny.
Forbidden Questions: 24 Key Issues Ignored by the Washington Elite and the
Media
Earth Could Break Through a Major Climate Threshold in the Next 15 Years,
Scientists Warn
Sen. Bernie Sanders Criticized for Signing Pro-Israel Senate Letter
Official Washington Has Turned Michael Flynn Into Road Kill
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
© 2017 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
Signup for Truthdig's newsletter
gumgum-verify
Sponsored Content
Facts Every Nurse's Kid Knows
From graphic dinner conversations to never being able to fake a sick day,
here are 11 truths all kids of nurses know to be true.
[www.HealtheCareers.com]
Learn More
ExelateData
