Have you considered the reverse of your idea? That perhaps the problem with politics is simply narcissism and mental illness?
Most people if they lost a race or couldn’t get into an event aren’t humiliated. Often they are depressed or disappointed, but humiliation is something you feel when you are treated as a lesser human, like the victims of Abu Ghraib or rape, not someone who loses a race or can’t have something they want.
And many, many celebrities are roasted. It is a sign of celebrity. But they don’t respond by sociopathically immiserating others.
People who are narcissists think this way. And yes, Obama is not a healthy mind. Charming undoubtedly, but not healthy. No healthy mind could survive mirdering innocents at his level and remain glib and chatty.
The problem isn’t the humiliation, it is the profoundly fragile psych of our leaders. When you play the humiliation card, you make it our fault, when it is not. It is either their fault or the fault of the adult in their lives who humiliated them as children.
I think the point you raised about homicide is important. There’s a sense in which getting revenge on your political opponent by making a comeback and beating him is a substitute for just trying to kill him, which for most of human history was probably the norm, and in some places still is. I totally agree our motivations are complicated, but feeling the need to take revenge due to being wronged or publicly humiliated has got to be one of the most powerful motivators of all.
Re: norms against humiliation, I think the Talmud almost equates the act of humiliating others with murder.
This story about Obama and Trump at that dinner has come up many times in my mind. I wonder. I would not dismiss that a public humiliation played a role but add to that racism and I think it makes a lot more sense. That and fragile masculinity. Your examples of a reaction to humiliation by the humiliated person are all males.
100%. I was going to say a different kind of person would have been able to laugh at being roasted, but when men with fragile egos are even jokingly called out (for their own bad behavior, mind you), they seek revenge because they can't just let an insult go. Wars have been started over less. It's embarrassing and dangerous.
Are men with fragile egos different from fighters, men who are willing to scrap at the drop of a hat? They are highly prized in sport. And believe me they are not fragile.
Humiliation can be a powerful tool for establishing and maintaining societal norms if the motivation and execution are appropriately aligned. Still, the challenge is finding the right reason and degree to humiliate someone. Also, does the target have a personality that will cause them to lash out, or to be appropriately chastened? Are we trying to humiliate them for an action they took or a particular behavior that we want to change or are we targeting them for some immutable characteristic or their own perceived identity?
Properly deployed, humiliating someone can be a genuine public service, but how often does it happen that way?
“…we aren’t altogether monsters”…some are more than others. There are those that stay up nights thinking about their cruelty toward others and there are those who revel in it. I recall my first great humiliation. It was junior high (of course) and I was a skinny, knobby kneed lass which didn’t go unnoticed by our class bully. He gathered a large junior high mob to torment me at recess with a “knobby knees” song for what seemed like weeks but was probably days. The pain, anger and humiliation I felt still seems like yesterday. It must have worked because I became a leader, athlete and academic honors student. I shared this adolescent angst story with my students throughout my life. I digress; humiliation stays with us. I too recall Obama’s roast; it felt so good to witness it and felt it was greatly deserved. I’m an Obama fan but the price for that small moment of torment has greatly exceeded its value.
It feels like there's a little selection bias at play with the "don't humiliate people" advice. You will tend to notice the cases where it spectacularly backfires, but it's hard to count the cases where it works. How many needless political battles, wars, or interpersonal spats have been avoided by the deterrent effect of potential humiliation?
The first example that came to my mind after reading the first paragraph isn't from politics but from sports: Michael Jordan. It seems he internalized every perceived slight and used them to become the greatest basketball player of all time.
My initial completely uninformed guess is that the type of person that has the ambition and obsessiveness to rise to the top of his or her field is often hyperaware of status and may be quick to feel humiliation. In this framework, there will always be some source of humiliation that can be woven into the person's rise. And even if that specific event hadn't happened, there would be some other event that the person experienced as equally humiliating that would become their origin story.
One of my favorite anecdotes is that a young Abe Lincoln, armed with a God-given clever wit, would frequently humiliate people with quips, poems, and rejoinders. This backfired spectacularly when one victim of his humiliation made a credible threat against Lincoln's life. How differently history would have gone had he made good on his threat? As is, Lincoln learned a lesson that it is better to use a sharp tongue to build up good people and tear down bad ideas.
A good observation in what forces us to change. It takes an inciting event and being publically humiliated functions as an inciting event. It doesn't mean it is a good change.
Can I revise your assertion? Never ever humiliate a narcissist or a sociopath because they will absolutely come back to seek revenge…most people actually do move on, eventually…many Asian cultures practice highly effective public humiliation in that the order is protected from the behavior of the perpetrator. In individualist societies, shame has no effect long term and so all you are doing is poking a potential narcissist which is what Trump is.
Great piece, thank you for sharing. I think you touched on something genuine.
>>>I think a pretty obvious conclusion from all this is to stop humiliating people.<<<
I think, to some degree, you are right. The internet has made humiliation possible at a scale and timeframe never before possible. That breakdancing lady deserves to be humiliated, but she does not deserve for her recent mistakes to follow her for the rest of the life and subsequently define her. In a pre-information-age society, it would fade with time and perhaps survive only as a funny story her family teases her with.
With that said, I don't see how you can stop humiliating people at all. Isn't humiliation just a sudden drop of status? Should someone's status not drop if it is suddenly revealed that they have lied about something important or have acted in an unacceptable manner? Should it not be humiliating for a politician to be corrupt or for a journalist to be misinformed? I think, for the most part, we mostly humiliate those who deserve to be humiliated.
I remember reading about a study that showed that air rage incidents happen more frequently on flights where coach passengers must walk through the first and business class cabins and are less frequent on flights where there is a separate door that opens directly to coach.
Have you considered the reverse of your idea? That perhaps the problem with politics is simply narcissism and mental illness?
Most people if they lost a race or couldn’t get into an event aren’t humiliated. Often they are depressed or disappointed, but humiliation is something you feel when you are treated as a lesser human, like the victims of Abu Ghraib or rape, not someone who loses a race or can’t have something they want.
And many, many celebrities are roasted. It is a sign of celebrity. But they don’t respond by sociopathically immiserating others.
People who are narcissists think this way. And yes, Obama is not a healthy mind. Charming undoubtedly, but not healthy. No healthy mind could survive mirdering innocents at his level and remain glib and chatty.
The problem isn’t the humiliation, it is the profoundly fragile psych of our leaders. When you play the humiliation card, you make it our fault, when it is not. It is either their fault or the fault of the adult in their lives who humiliated them as children.
I think the point you raised about homicide is important. There’s a sense in which getting revenge on your political opponent by making a comeback and beating him is a substitute for just trying to kill him, which for most of human history was probably the norm, and in some places still is. I totally agree our motivations are complicated, but feeling the need to take revenge due to being wronged or publicly humiliated has got to be one of the most powerful motivators of all.
Re: norms against humiliation, I think the Talmud almost equates the act of humiliating others with murder.
This story about Obama and Trump at that dinner has come up many times in my mind. I wonder. I would not dismiss that a public humiliation played a role but add to that racism and I think it makes a lot more sense. That and fragile masculinity. Your examples of a reaction to humiliation by the humiliated person are all males.
100%. I was going to say a different kind of person would have been able to laugh at being roasted, but when men with fragile egos are even jokingly called out (for their own bad behavior, mind you), they seek revenge because they can't just let an insult go. Wars have been started over less. It's embarrassing and dangerous.
Are men with fragile egos different from fighters, men who are willing to scrap at the drop of a hat? They are highly prized in sport. And believe me they are not fragile.
Humiliation can be a powerful tool for establishing and maintaining societal norms if the motivation and execution are appropriately aligned. Still, the challenge is finding the right reason and degree to humiliate someone. Also, does the target have a personality that will cause them to lash out, or to be appropriately chastened? Are we trying to humiliate them for an action they took or a particular behavior that we want to change or are we targeting them for some immutable characteristic or their own perceived identity?
Properly deployed, humiliating someone can be a genuine public service, but how often does it happen that way?
“…we aren’t altogether monsters”…some are more than others. There are those that stay up nights thinking about their cruelty toward others and there are those who revel in it. I recall my first great humiliation. It was junior high (of course) and I was a skinny, knobby kneed lass which didn’t go unnoticed by our class bully. He gathered a large junior high mob to torment me at recess with a “knobby knees” song for what seemed like weeks but was probably days. The pain, anger and humiliation I felt still seems like yesterday. It must have worked because I became a leader, athlete and academic honors student. I shared this adolescent angst story with my students throughout my life. I digress; humiliation stays with us. I too recall Obama’s roast; it felt so good to witness it and felt it was greatly deserved. I’m an Obama fan but the price for that small moment of torment has greatly exceeded its value.
It feels like there's a little selection bias at play with the "don't humiliate people" advice. You will tend to notice the cases where it spectacularly backfires, but it's hard to count the cases where it works. How many needless political battles, wars, or interpersonal spats have been avoided by the deterrent effect of potential humiliation?
The first example that came to my mind after reading the first paragraph isn't from politics but from sports: Michael Jordan. It seems he internalized every perceived slight and used them to become the greatest basketball player of all time.
My initial completely uninformed guess is that the type of person that has the ambition and obsessiveness to rise to the top of his or her field is often hyperaware of status and may be quick to feel humiliation. In this framework, there will always be some source of humiliation that can be woven into the person's rise. And even if that specific event hadn't happened, there would be some other event that the person experienced as equally humiliating that would become their origin story.
Magnificent, Paul! Forced me to check out for the umpteenth time Xpeare's Sonnet 129, on the importance of not wasting ones shame. 🗿
One of my favorite anecdotes is that a young Abe Lincoln, armed with a God-given clever wit, would frequently humiliate people with quips, poems, and rejoinders. This backfired spectacularly when one victim of his humiliation made a credible threat against Lincoln's life. How differently history would have gone had he made good on his threat? As is, Lincoln learned a lesson that it is better to use a sharp tongue to build up good people and tear down bad ideas.
A good observation in what forces us to change. It takes an inciting event and being publically humiliated functions as an inciting event. It doesn't mean it is a good change.
Can I revise your assertion? Never ever humiliate a narcissist or a sociopath because they will absolutely come back to seek revenge…most people actually do move on, eventually…many Asian cultures practice highly effective public humiliation in that the order is protected from the behavior of the perpetrator. In individualist societies, shame has no effect long term and so all you are doing is poking a potential narcissist which is what Trump is.
I wonder if social media acts as a pressure release valve for humiliation or if it tends to make things worse…
Sociologist Tom Scheff (with Suzanne Retzinger) wrote a few books about the role of shame and humiliation in generating violence. Well worth a read.
The ancient world had laws against hubris for a reason.
Great piece, thank you for sharing. I think you touched on something genuine.
>>>I think a pretty obvious conclusion from all this is to stop humiliating people.<<<
I think, to some degree, you are right. The internet has made humiliation possible at a scale and timeframe never before possible. That breakdancing lady deserves to be humiliated, but she does not deserve for her recent mistakes to follow her for the rest of the life and subsequently define her. In a pre-information-age society, it would fade with time and perhaps survive only as a funny story her family teases her with.
With that said, I don't see how you can stop humiliating people at all. Isn't humiliation just a sudden drop of status? Should someone's status not drop if it is suddenly revealed that they have lied about something important or have acted in an unacceptable manner? Should it not be humiliating for a politician to be corrupt or for a journalist to be misinformed? I think, for the most part, we mostly humiliate those who deserve to be humiliated.
I remember reading about a study that showed that air rage incidents happen more frequently on flights where coach passengers must walk through the first and business class cabins and are less frequent on flights where there is a separate door that opens directly to coach.
Fucking babies.