reviews of neither left nor right
"Spot on. Insightful, brilliantly researched and written, a book that anyone who loves this nation needs to read."
-former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft
"A book that all Americans worried about the fate of this nation should read before it is too late."
-Dennis Miller
"A must read for all who value freedom."
-Penny Nance, Concerned Women for America
reviews of neither left nor right
"Spot on. Insightful, brilliantly researched and written, a book that anyone who loves this nation needs to read."
-former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft
"A book that all Americans worried about the fate of this nation should read before it is too late."
-Dennis Miller
"A must read for all who value freedom."
-Penny Nance, Concerned Women for America

Understanding Trump’s Strategy for 2016

From a socio-political standpoint, Trump is a conservative character who is also a populist. To have a sense of Trump’s strategy for the presidency requires an understanding of socio-political characterology and the antiauthoritarian transformation of Western society.

In the past authoritarian era, there were roughly equal numbers of liberals and conservatives in both political parties. This is how the two party system worked to maintain a balance of power between the opposing ideological forces of the left and right.

With the anti-authoritarian transformation that started in America around 1960, the Democratic Party began it’s shift to the extreme political left and the Republican Party soon followed and moved leftward. The significance of this so-called socio-political red-shift was that there was no longer any ideological difference between the two parties. Politicians in the Democratic Party continued to peddle their outworn socialist programs and like-minded politicians in the Republican Party tried to play “catch up” by promoting their own version of leftist-oriented policies.

People who were fed up with the old system of “politics as usual” began wanting something new from their politicians. They looked to outsiders like Donald Trump as someone who seemed to not buy into what was being offered by traditional party politicians.

But, the result of the anti-authoritarian transformation of society was that the two party system became a thing of the past and people are more clueless than ever about it’s demise.

By contrast, what Trump intuitively understood in this new environment was that in order to make contact and win over the electorate people must be realigned not according to conventional political parties but, on a deeper, more inclusive level according to their individual, pre-existing socio-political character structure.

This is where an understanding of socio-political characterology is essential. Based on people’s socio-political character structure, liberals and conservatives have diametrically opposed ways of viewing the world. The liberal relates to his environment primarily from his intellect. He is a collectivist and, in the past authoritarian era, had a mechanistic view of the world. The conservative relates to his environment primarily from his emotions. He has a selective attitude toward others and a mystical view of the world.

In order to win, Trump must convince characterologic conservatives, like himself, that he is one of them. This is where his anti-intellectual, emotional, shooting-from-the-hip manner and his strong pro-American bias are a plus. However, from a bio-psychiatric perspective, Trump is either an oral unsatisfied, phallic narcissistic character or a manic depressive character. Regarding his diagnosis, the important questions are these: Is he capable of controlling the destructiveness to his political reputation as a leader resulting from his shooting-off at the mouth? Is he capable to hear the ideas of others? These questions go directly to the heart of his capacity for the good judgement that is a requirement for the job.

Another unknown factor is that liberals no longer adhere only to the mechanistic view of the world. They have embraced mysticism as part of their leftist armamentarium in the “save the world,” “green” environmental movements. With the decline of traditional, religious mysticism, the political left has gained a silent but powerful force in the ideology of secular mysticism that Trump with all his usual contentiousness must contend with.

The 2016 Presidential Campaign

No matter how deafening the background noise is about the 2016 presidential campaign, the undercurrent that must be heard loud and clear through all the distractive clamor are the emotionally charged issues of morality. There is a deeper and more powerful political motive force behind all the political clap trap that is currently being presented on the social surface by the politicians, the pundits and the media.
Whether they know it or not, the presumptive candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, are already lined up according to whether they believe in the old absolute morality of the past authoritarian world or in the new politically correct, relative morality of the current anti-authoritarian era.
These two moralities are entirely different ways of viewing and dealing with the world. They generate the ideological divide that unconsciously pits the political left and right against each other. Casting America into two irreconcilable, opposing groups, this social force from the human depths is the ultimate governor of people’s ideas and behavior. It must be consciously recognized, understood and resolved before social conditions can improve.

Apropos of Donald Trump

Individual and socio-political character are the primary determinants of an individual’s, including politician’s, thinking and behavior. For example, is presidential candidate, Donald Trump simply a shrewd, controlling bully in full charge of himself regarding his bid for the presidency or is he just a loose cannon and a blowhard? This distinction depends on whether he is simply a phallic narcissistic character with an oral unsatisfied block, a manic depressive (“bi-polar”) character or a sociopathic character.

In the first case his judgment would be intact and would not detrimentally affect his job as president. In the second and third cases he would be a disaster. We need to know more about his decision making process and his past history in order to determine his capacity for good judgement.

  • Email Subscription

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 44 other subscribers