Contents
Some people experience real pain at the mere thought that their homeland will never be appreciated. Such attitudes are dangerous. So, for example, the resentment of voters for their country made them vote for Trump not at the call of the soul, but in retaliation. This phenomenon can be called collective narcissism.
The picture in the newspaper is paradoxical: it depicts a human eye, from which a tear flows, turning into a fist. This, according to the American psychologist Agnieszka Golek de Zavala, is an excellent illustration or metaphor for the state of those Trump voters, whom she called «collective narcissists.» Their resentment led to revenge.
When Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, the psychologist had a hunch. She believed that Trump had two campaign promises to play on: “make America a great power again” and “put her interests first.” How true is this hypothesis?
In 2018, Agnieszka Golek de Zawala conducted a survey of 1730 US respondents who voted for Trump. The researcher wanted to find out which beliefs played a major role in their choice. As expected, voter characteristics such as gender, skin color, attitudes toward racism, and socioeconomic status were critical. But that’s not all: many were driven by resentment. Trump voters were hurt that the US reputation as a great power around the world was badly damaged.
What do football and Brexit have in common?
Golek de Zavala calls the people who attach such importance to their country’s reputation collective narcissists. The psychologist found collective narcissism not only among Trump supporters, but also among other respondents in Poland, Mexico, Hungary and the UK — for example, among Brexit supporters who rejected the European Union because it «does not recognize the special position of the UK and has a harmful effect on British politics «. In addition, they saw migrants as a threat to the integrity of the country.
The researcher was able to detect collective narcissism even among football fans and members of a religious community, which means that, apparently, it is not only about the nation, but also about the method of identification with any group. This phenomenon has long been familiar to social psychologists.
What is offensive to a narcissist is not offensive to a nationalist
Golek de Zavala’s discovery, in her opinion, is not a personality trait, but rather a rigid belief: collective narcissists consider their group to be something completely exceptional, which deserves special treatment and constant appreciation. Inextricably linked to this is the second part of the beliefs: their group is allegedly systematically underestimated, ignored and unjustifiably criticized by others — regardless of what the country or community actually looks like.
Anything can make a country, a football team, a religious community special to collective narcissists: military power, economic power, democracy, religiosity, success. From the point of view of collective narcissists, it is imperative that this exclusivity is not unfairly criticized, because it is perceived as a personal insult — the group is regarded as part of one’s own identity.
Unlike patriots or nationalists, such people suffer from long-term resentment for their country or group. Nationalists and patriots, also considering their country or group to be the best, are not offended if someone expresses disrespect for it.
According to Golek de Zavala, collective narcissists suffer from prolonged pain for the country: they not only react painfully to criticism or see ignorance where there is none, but also try to ignore the actual “wrongdoings” of their country or the community to which they belong.
Achilles’ heel of the offended voter
Feelings of resentment entail unpleasant consequences: the desire to defend oneself and take revenge. Therefore, collective narcissists often support politicians who are willing to resort to military means to defend a supposedly undervalued country and promise to make life difficult for perceived adversaries in their country, such as migrants.
In addition, collective narcissists have a very narrow idea of who is considered a «real» citizen of the country. Paradoxically, many of them do not feel personally connected at all to the community they idealize. It seems that belonging and idealization are mutually exclusive. Populists in politics can very easily initiate and take advantage of these feelings of resentment.
The researcher emphasizes the importance of people feeling comfortable in their communities or teams, feeling that they belong to a single and large circle of people, and also being able to do something for other members of the group.
If we consider the phenomenon of collective narcissism more broadly, we can come to the conclusion that wherever there is a group of people united by one space, experience or idea, all its participants must be involved in communication and a common cause.