Brilliant as always Alex, thank you 🙏 Curious to hear how you think about Larger Us’ role in ‘Winning Ugly’? And other roles you see for organisations and individuals in this scenario!
Thanks so much Genevieve. We’re thinking about that! We’re wondering about adapting the Larger Us Programme to make it more place-based so that it works with local leaders on I / We / World level change, and talking to some potential partners about that… watch this space :-)
But more broadly, super interested in what other people and orgs are thinking in this space! It feels like community organising will be where a *lot* of the action is (see Micah Sifry’s Substack this morning for great stuff on that). What are you seeing / thinking?
I agree. It’s interesting living somewhere with fairly low social trust (post Salazar). Calls for quite a different approach I think. In my work as a coach I’m supporting people 1:1 to lead systemic change. I’ve been working on my methodology/approach this year and one of the five big themes is called ‘embracing interdependence’, helping people to be agents of change by working with and through others, seeing their work as part of an ecology of change rather than an individualistic pursuit. Next year looking to work more alongside/with partners so that I can walk the walk!
Ooh this sounds really interesting. Experimenting with some local friends here in Portugal on this at the moment and would love to hear more when you’re ready. Lots of interesting challenges in this context and also so much potential to do good. We’re finding the role of convening really quite difficult so the support would be very helpful.
“Jules argues that part of the answer is that mainstream liberal culture, dominated as it is by the highly educated, progressive left, has “a tendency to promote victim narratives” rather than offering practical self-help.” — wondering if your brother has read Ted Kaczynski because he makes the argument surrounding victim narrative, The Manifesto. I’m no fan of Kaczynski as he was a terrorist and murderer. And he did predict some of the current sociopolitical developments.
I do agree to some extent because, to me, the dynamics reminds me of Karpman’s triangle.
It is connected not only to early attachment issues and trauma, but also by social and cultural reinforcement.
This drama has played itself out in the political sphere. People are either named a victim, oppressor or a rescuer. If you are assigned the role as oppressor — it’s very difficult to overcome that labeling. Who wants to play the role of the oppressor? And, furthermore, if you see yourself as a ‘victim’ — and that message is reinforced and rewarded by the people around you, a person has little incentive to change their perception of themselves. This is a common stumbling block among survivors who get caught up in victimhood. There’s no way to empower oneself with that mindset. In this sense, the progressive agenda that played out in liberal cities failed — big time. Young people are given message that there are no expectations, no consequences or accountability. That’s permissive and neglectful as a parenting strategy or as a social reform policy. At the same time, they aren’t offered much hope either. GenZ is known as most cynical generation ever. They also commit much more sociopathic, violent crimes as they show a complete disregard for their victims or remorse for the crimes that they commit. They often see privilege which they resent, and often rightfully so, because they cannot see a path outside of poverty. They see no viable path forward with the cost of living and low wage jobs. Even a college degree is no guarantee.
Social media and hashtag identity culture has not helped matters. Be somebody else you’re nobody. Better be someone who stands out with #ADHD or #bipolar or #genderfluid or #gayvisibility than someone who is less identifiable. Most young people struggle with identity and fitting in. As we know, social media has us all addicted for acceptance, appreciation and love. However, social media cannot substitute for the role of teachers, parents and religious and community leaders. (Bruce Perry, Gabor Mate, Dan Siegel have all written about it.) Epidemic suicide rates because young men and women feel a sense of despair and hopelessness.
I think it would be a mistake to blame the left, though, as I don’t believe in the United States that we have an adequate safety net. We don’t have sufficient mental health services. Schools and communities often lack the resources to provide programs that would provide intervention for youth. America is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. However, public educational system is poor. Sports, competition and leisure activities are more important than academics for most families. Crime in major cities is getting worse because, frankly, many children do not have proper role models. As I used to be a middle school teacher, I know many kids committing crimes such as carjacking, theft and acts of violence are most likely grandchildren of children I taught. These kids were called crack babies in the 1980s and 1990s. Many of the children I taught in the inner city ended up in jail. Some of them were probably killed or died of drug abuse. If parents end up in prison, if you drop out of school, join a gang, what happens to their children?
We have a whole generation of young people who have been abandoned and thrown away in large numbers. Might not be your kid, but if we’re not looking out for the rest of the community, what kind of world are we going to experience in another twenty or thirty years?
Hi Alex, very much in tune with your grassroots approach. Wondered if you had come across sustainable food places: https://www.sustainablefoodplaces.org/# as a model. Food seems to be a point for creating commonality.
This is all great advice. I hope we can see it happen! One tiny thing I pledged to start working on the day after the election is my tendency to speak in a way that assumes everyone around me is a Democrat..or at least is against Trump. (I live in a very liberal and educated city, so it's a logical assumption.) Statements like, "Ugh...rough week huh, how are you holding up?" to people with whom I've never explicitly discussed politics, but who I know well enough to safely (I think) assume they voted for Harris. It seems harmful in part because it reinforces that leftist victim mentality you talked about, but also because it shuts down any actual curiosity. It's indirect in-group/out-group signalling that reinforces my own sense of self-righteousness and fails to ask any meaningful questions.
I guess this way of talking is fine if you have already talked politics with someone and KNOW where they stand. But I see so many coffee shops, nonprofits etc. using this sort of language on their social media since the election. It's bad to use in one on one conversation - it seems exponentially worse to use in mass communication.
Thanks Lara these are great points and so agree about the in group / out groups signalling. 100% with you about the need for curious conversations, too
There was harm done by the election of Trump because women like myself felt a sense of betrayal and injustice by people who didn’t seem to care about Trump’s past behavior.
They chose to turn a blind eye to his past misdeeds, transgressions and illegal behavior.
That’s morally reprehensible.
That has never happened since the time of my birth. It happened with Richard Nixon. But, he actually resigned from office when he was caught. It’s unprecedented.
This has nothing to do with victim mentality. There is such a concept as ‘victim of crime’. His cabinet appointments hasn’t helped matters.
I don’t go around attacking Trump supporters. Nor do I choose to engage with them on Substack in political debate. When the great emancipator becomes their oppressor (when he denies people *their* civil liberties, when it impacts them, personally) maybe they’ll get it. He curtailed freedom of the press last time. What’s going to change?
As Stephen Hassan has reported, there was a great deal of Trump supporters were true victims of brainwashing techniques. He wrote a book, The Cult of Trump, that explains how this happened. Trump may be described as a cult leader with significant cult following. You can’t reasonably engage with cult member unless they are a) deprogrammed or b) something happens to cause them to rethink their world view.
I believe in being curious about other people and their perspectives. However, when you’re talking to someone who has been brainwashed by FoxNews or NewsMax, don’t expect some rational, finer nuanced conversation. It’s a waste of time. You don’t reason with cult followers or a Silicon Valley investor who is only looking to enhance wealth and privilege or someone who wants to blame immigrants for all the ills of society.
What do you think would be meaningful questions?
My first meaningful question would be: why did you vote for a man that supported insurrectionists who stormed the capitol, wounded and killed a police officer, damaged property and threatened to destabilize and undermine the democractic process?
Second question, why did you vote for a man that believes it’s okay to grab women’s pussies as well as brag about it?
While I’m curious as to how they would respond, there’s no legitimate explanation any Trump voter could offer me. There’s no moral high ground for voting for a criminal or for a man that is disrespectful and unethical. That man should have been prosecuted.
Why do I need to censor myself so a Trump voter feels comfortable?
As far as whatever sort of ‘bad’ language is being used on social media — we have this concept of freedom of speech in this country. While I don’t identify with the far left or far right, censorship is generally a bad idea when you live in a democracy. It’s a sign of health that people feel free to express their views. Once the right to free speech gets taken away (which is a distinct possibility under a totalitarian or authoritarian government) you might rethink your stance about suggesting people are using ‘bad’ language ‘one on one’ or in mass communication.
We need to keep conversations going. But, let’s not be unrealistic in our expectations.
Brilliant as always Alex, thank you 🙏 Curious to hear how you think about Larger Us’ role in ‘Winning Ugly’? And other roles you see for organisations and individuals in this scenario!
Thanks so much Genevieve. We’re thinking about that! We’re wondering about adapting the Larger Us Programme to make it more place-based so that it works with local leaders on I / We / World level change, and talking to some potential partners about that… watch this space :-)
But more broadly, super interested in what other people and orgs are thinking in this space! It feels like community organising will be where a *lot* of the action is (see Micah Sifry’s Substack this morning for great stuff on that). What are you seeing / thinking?
I agree. It’s interesting living somewhere with fairly low social trust (post Salazar). Calls for quite a different approach I think. In my work as a coach I’m supporting people 1:1 to lead systemic change. I’ve been working on my methodology/approach this year and one of the five big themes is called ‘embracing interdependence’, helping people to be agents of change by working with and through others, seeing their work as part of an ecology of change rather than an individualistic pursuit. Next year looking to work more alongside/with partners so that I can walk the walk!
Ooh this sounds really interesting. Experimenting with some local friends here in Portugal on this at the moment and would love to hear more when you’re ready. Lots of interesting challenges in this context and also so much potential to do good. We’re finding the role of convening really quite difficult so the support would be very helpful.
“Jules argues that part of the answer is that mainstream liberal culture, dominated as it is by the highly educated, progressive left, has “a tendency to promote victim narratives” rather than offering practical self-help.” — wondering if your brother has read Ted Kaczynski because he makes the argument surrounding victim narrative, The Manifesto. I’m no fan of Kaczynski as he was a terrorist and murderer. And he did predict some of the current sociopolitical developments.
I do agree to some extent because, to me, the dynamics reminds me of Karpman’s triangle.
https://www.attachmentproject.com/psychology/drama-triangle/
It is connected not only to early attachment issues and trauma, but also by social and cultural reinforcement.
This drama has played itself out in the political sphere. People are either named a victim, oppressor or a rescuer. If you are assigned the role as oppressor — it’s very difficult to overcome that labeling. Who wants to play the role of the oppressor? And, furthermore, if you see yourself as a ‘victim’ — and that message is reinforced and rewarded by the people around you, a person has little incentive to change their perception of themselves. This is a common stumbling block among survivors who get caught up in victimhood. There’s no way to empower oneself with that mindset. In this sense, the progressive agenda that played out in liberal cities failed — big time. Young people are given message that there are no expectations, no consequences or accountability. That’s permissive and neglectful as a parenting strategy or as a social reform policy. At the same time, they aren’t offered much hope either. GenZ is known as most cynical generation ever. They also commit much more sociopathic, violent crimes as they show a complete disregard for their victims or remorse for the crimes that they commit. They often see privilege which they resent, and often rightfully so, because they cannot see a path outside of poverty. They see no viable path forward with the cost of living and low wage jobs. Even a college degree is no guarantee.
Social media and hashtag identity culture has not helped matters. Be somebody else you’re nobody. Better be someone who stands out with #ADHD or #bipolar or #genderfluid or #gayvisibility than someone who is less identifiable. Most young people struggle with identity and fitting in. As we know, social media has us all addicted for acceptance, appreciation and love. However, social media cannot substitute for the role of teachers, parents and religious and community leaders. (Bruce Perry, Gabor Mate, Dan Siegel have all written about it.) Epidemic suicide rates because young men and women feel a sense of despair and hopelessness.
I think it would be a mistake to blame the left, though, as I don’t believe in the United States that we have an adequate safety net. We don’t have sufficient mental health services. Schools and communities often lack the resources to provide programs that would provide intervention for youth. America is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. However, public educational system is poor. Sports, competition and leisure activities are more important than academics for most families. Crime in major cities is getting worse because, frankly, many children do not have proper role models. As I used to be a middle school teacher, I know many kids committing crimes such as carjacking, theft and acts of violence are most likely grandchildren of children I taught. These kids were called crack babies in the 1980s and 1990s. Many of the children I taught in the inner city ended up in jail. Some of them were probably killed or died of drug abuse. If parents end up in prison, if you drop out of school, join a gang, what happens to their children?
We have a whole generation of young people who have been abandoned and thrown away in large numbers. Might not be your kid, but if we’re not looking out for the rest of the community, what kind of world are we going to experience in another twenty or thirty years?
Hi Alex, very much in tune with your grassroots approach. Wondered if you had come across sustainable food places: https://www.sustainablefoodplaces.org/# as a model. Food seems to be a point for creating commonality.
And another interesting example I think: https://middleton.coop
This is all great advice. I hope we can see it happen! One tiny thing I pledged to start working on the day after the election is my tendency to speak in a way that assumes everyone around me is a Democrat..or at least is against Trump. (I live in a very liberal and educated city, so it's a logical assumption.) Statements like, "Ugh...rough week huh, how are you holding up?" to people with whom I've never explicitly discussed politics, but who I know well enough to safely (I think) assume they voted for Harris. It seems harmful in part because it reinforces that leftist victim mentality you talked about, but also because it shuts down any actual curiosity. It's indirect in-group/out-group signalling that reinforces my own sense of self-righteousness and fails to ask any meaningful questions.
I guess this way of talking is fine if you have already talked politics with someone and KNOW where they stand. But I see so many coffee shops, nonprofits etc. using this sort of language on their social media since the election. It's bad to use in one on one conversation - it seems exponentially worse to use in mass communication.
Thanks Lara these are great points and so agree about the in group / out groups signalling. 100% with you about the need for curious conversations, too
There was harm done by the election of Trump because women like myself felt a sense of betrayal and injustice by people who didn’t seem to care about Trump’s past behavior.
They chose to turn a blind eye to his past misdeeds, transgressions and illegal behavior.
That’s morally reprehensible.
That has never happened since the time of my birth. It happened with Richard Nixon. But, he actually resigned from office when he was caught. It’s unprecedented.
This has nothing to do with victim mentality. There is such a concept as ‘victim of crime’. His cabinet appointments hasn’t helped matters.
I don’t go around attacking Trump supporters. Nor do I choose to engage with them on Substack in political debate. When the great emancipator becomes their oppressor (when he denies people *their* civil liberties, when it impacts them, personally) maybe they’ll get it. He curtailed freedom of the press last time. What’s going to change?
As Stephen Hassan has reported, there was a great deal of Trump supporters were true victims of brainwashing techniques. He wrote a book, The Cult of Trump, that explains how this happened. Trump may be described as a cult leader with significant cult following. You can’t reasonably engage with cult member unless they are a) deprogrammed or b) something happens to cause them to rethink their world view.
https://substack.com/@stevenhassan/p-149727760
I believe in being curious about other people and their perspectives. However, when you’re talking to someone who has been brainwashed by FoxNews or NewsMax, don’t expect some rational, finer nuanced conversation. It’s a waste of time. You don’t reason with cult followers or a Silicon Valley investor who is only looking to enhance wealth and privilege or someone who wants to blame immigrants for all the ills of society.
What do you think would be meaningful questions?
My first meaningful question would be: why did you vote for a man that supported insurrectionists who stormed the capitol, wounded and killed a police officer, damaged property and threatened to destabilize and undermine the democractic process?
Second question, why did you vote for a man that believes it’s okay to grab women’s pussies as well as brag about it?
While I’m curious as to how they would respond, there’s no legitimate explanation any Trump voter could offer me. There’s no moral high ground for voting for a criminal or for a man that is disrespectful and unethical. That man should have been prosecuted.
Why do I need to censor myself so a Trump voter feels comfortable?
As far as whatever sort of ‘bad’ language is being used on social media — we have this concept of freedom of speech in this country. While I don’t identify with the far left or far right, censorship is generally a bad idea when you live in a democracy. It’s a sign of health that people feel free to express their views. Once the right to free speech gets taken away (which is a distinct possibility under a totalitarian or authoritarian government) you might rethink your stance about suggesting people are using ‘bad’ language ‘one on one’ or in mass communication.
We need to keep conversations going. But, let’s not be unrealistic in our expectations.