Several of my well-meaning Republican friends are not moved by images of bleeding babies or dying mothers. They recognize that something terrible is happening, yet they believe their only option is to turn a blind eye to Trump’s actions and hope that the ends justify the destructive means. While they feel for those harmed, they are more invested in dismantling what they see as an entrenched leftist establishment. They cast their votes like rolling dice, placing their faith in the hope that something better will emerge.
Like a compulsive gambler, they continue throwing the dice, convinced that the next roll will bring a favorable outcome. This behavior is not just political—it’s psychological. Intermittent reinforcement, a well-documented principle in behavioral psychology, explains why people persist in behaviors despite repeated failures or harm.
In experiments, mice trained to press a lever or jump onto a platform to receive a reward will continue the behavior even when the rewards become unpredictable. When rewards are given inconsistently—only sometimes after the action—the mice persist far longer than when rewarded consistently or not at all. The unpredictability strengthens their motivation, driving them to keep trying in the hope that the next attempt will succeed.
This phenomenon extends beyond animal behavior to human psychology. The randomness of rewards fosters attachment and persistence, even in the face of negative consequences. It explains why some remain steadfast in their political choices despite mounting evidence of harm. The hope for a better outcome—however improbable—keeps them locked in a cycle of expectation and disappointment.
The principles of intermittent reinforcement are widely recognized in psychology and apply across species.
Thanks for this -- as you'd expect, I'm very open to this analysis, since it's the intersection of politics and the human mind that is the focus of this Substack. Empirically, though, even charismatic leaders and demagogues do falter sometimes, and their fans do get alienated. Agreed, that won't happen in the context of Trump's human rights abuses -- but TBD if it happens when none of his promises come to pass. To put it another way, I wouldn't expect many Trump supporters to flee because they oppose the "Gulf of America" or the Gaza plan -- but think some would flee because those are not the issues they care about, and inflation, jobs, etc is. He's wasting a lot of time on things they don't care about.
I think DJT is throwing a big net. Not everything will matter to everyone. But everyone will find something they agree with and ignore the things that don't matter to them. Also, the failures will be explained away as failures caused by Dem resistence. (e.g., "It would have worked if the Dems hadn't stopped it.") or by things out of DJT control. The group I am keeping an eye on are farmers, especially those in California. Most voted for DJT. When they can't water their crops in the spring because DJT spilled millions of gallons toward (but not reaching) the LA fires, it is going to hit home. But it doesn't mean they will hold DJT accountable. ANother good commentator on these matters is Dan Ariely.
Jess Piper goes to local meetings and asks questions. At a recent one where the very young, new representative was explaining why Missouri didn't need an income tax, a hair stylist asked a question about taxes on her services. After another bizarre word salad that made no sense, she said, 'well, you're lawmakers, you must know what you're talking about.'
As Jess Piper For Missouri says,
"But, that’s the problem — they don’t know what they are doing. They receive their legislation from organizations like The Heritage Foundation. They cut and paste bills from lobbyists and ALEC and Project Blitz. They can’t explain their positions because they can’t waver from the script and it isn’t truly their legislation.
And this is why I always push back. It’s why I show up where I am not invited."
Totally. It's one reason why Reagan, Bush Jr, and Trump have worked so well. None of them understand the nuts and bolts of policy. They know the words to say about the policy. That makes them more effective, because the actual policies are trash but they can say the right words because they are ignorant of that.
I agree. I've been thinking the same thing. I'll be substacking about a few ideas on this subject soon. Sadly, we'll have too many real-life examples to reference.
Jay, I really appreciate your perspectives, and I agree that there is nothing like personal stories to bring home the real cost of policies. I have made this newsletter one of the subscriptions that I recommend when people subscribe to mine, which so far has generated 7 new subscriptions for you!
I don't recall ever calling a previous R President a fascist......as much as I may have disliked them. This one hits you in the forehead. And I am amused you think of the current folks would remember and hold that against us a crying wolf! I know we have been called Communists since at least the 50's.
Thanks, Jay. I am interested in your Dharma talk next week on the 17th. Do I just click the link when it starts? Right now all that is available is the flyer with the date and time. Will the link be live at the time of the talk? I'm reading Evolving Dharma now too and am looking forward to learning more.
Every time I hear someone worried about the "dawn of fascism" now that we got Trump, I have to wonder: were they born yesterday? Where have you been for the last, I don't know, 60 years? The United States was toppled in a coup d' etat, at least that long ago. Oh you could say it happened when the Federal Reserve was created, or when the CIA came over and opened the floodgates for Nazi war criminals to patriate in the US, or, my favorite, when the beloved president Kennedy was shot in the face in broad daylight, and the media, using sophisticated, weaponized psychology got a lot of people to believe he was shot from the back by a incompetent marksman through the trees. The fascist media introduced the term "conspiracy theorist" to try and dissuade any further discussion, and it worked. I won't even get into 9/11. Eisenhower warned that unless we woke up we'd lose our form of government, and we did. Trump is just the most odious president in a long line of puppets. Those that think HE is the problem are so far behind it is ludicrous.
I follow several historians, noteably Heather Cox Richardson and Daniele Bolelli. The latter's episode Mini-Episode 26: How We Got Here does a great job of explaining the current state of cynicism. To quote Dr. Bolelli's opening remarks: "We live at a time when cynicism toward institutions reigns supreme. Conspiracy theories abound. Trust in government is the punchline of a joke. And there is no agreement on which, if any, media outlets can offer accurate news. Normally, I keep History on Fire away from anything having to do with the present, and I’ll hold to this in this case as well. Today, I’ll explore a whole bunch of historical events from the past 70 years or so, which may help us understand how we got where we are."
Thank you. Sounds interesting. I'll check them out. I was a little boy, 10 years old in 1966, when the stream that was my Eden became polluted and died. I soon realized that was our fate unless we woke up to the peril of rapacious, unenlightened, capitalism. First I studied political science, then sociology and psychology, then religion when i came to realize that this was a spiritual crisis, an opportunity to really wake up. Psychedelics at first seemed to hold great promise so I helped to instigate this psychedelic renaissance. Until soon i realized that psychedelics were deployed, and mostly ARE being deployed, by the rapacious capitalists in what i call a Brave New World project, causing people to spiritually bypass and evade political, ethical requirements for a healthy society, so only the "elite," seem to thrive. So i've kinda returned to my Theravadin Buddhist roots. Left the US. This is a realm of pain and deception and an opportunity to help. We don't change the world. It will always be dukkha. But we can practice the art and joy of liberation... And still i have to wonder what does a person really mean when they say "conspiracy theories abound"? Are they using that term to denigrate analysis of complex conspiracies that counter the mainstream, official narratives of historical events? Or are they congratulating people with the courage and intelligence and skills necessary to understand our history. The Vietnam War? We know that was designed in secret conspiracies. The Drug War? Also. Even 9/11, whether you fall for the completely absurd version asserted by the beneficiaries of that atrocity, or the logical theory offered by say, the acclaimed philosopher of science and religion, David Ray Griffin--both are conspiracy theories...
I had a stream in my childhood Eden, sociologist/philosopher by training, once Catholic, now Buddhist, still hold out hope for therapeutic use of psychedelics for certain mental health conditions, don't care what people mean when they say "conspiracy theories". Fan of philsophy of science, history and religion. Favorite sociological remark from Randall Collins: Three things underpin all of human actions: Men are often but not always larger than women. Many but not all people like sex. And nobody likes to be told what to do.
Several of my well-meaning Republican friends are not moved by images of bleeding babies or dying mothers. They recognize that something terrible is happening, yet they believe their only option is to turn a blind eye to Trump’s actions and hope that the ends justify the destructive means. While they feel for those harmed, they are more invested in dismantling what they see as an entrenched leftist establishment. They cast their votes like rolling dice, placing their faith in the hope that something better will emerge.
Like a compulsive gambler, they continue throwing the dice, convinced that the next roll will bring a favorable outcome. This behavior is not just political—it’s psychological. Intermittent reinforcement, a well-documented principle in behavioral psychology, explains why people persist in behaviors despite repeated failures or harm.
In experiments, mice trained to press a lever or jump onto a platform to receive a reward will continue the behavior even when the rewards become unpredictable. When rewards are given inconsistently—only sometimes after the action—the mice persist far longer than when rewarded consistently or not at all. The unpredictability strengthens their motivation, driving them to keep trying in the hope that the next attempt will succeed.
This phenomenon extends beyond animal behavior to human psychology. The randomness of rewards fosters attachment and persistence, even in the face of negative consequences. It explains why some remain steadfast in their political choices despite mounting evidence of harm. The hope for a better outcome—however improbable—keeps them locked in a cycle of expectation and disappointment.
The principles of intermittent reinforcement are widely recognized in psychology and apply across species.
🔗 TEALSWAN.COM
Thanks for this -- as you'd expect, I'm very open to this analysis, since it's the intersection of politics and the human mind that is the focus of this Substack. Empirically, though, even charismatic leaders and demagogues do falter sometimes, and their fans do get alienated. Agreed, that won't happen in the context of Trump's human rights abuses -- but TBD if it happens when none of his promises come to pass. To put it another way, I wouldn't expect many Trump supporters to flee because they oppose the "Gulf of America" or the Gaza plan -- but think some would flee because those are not the issues they care about, and inflation, jobs, etc is. He's wasting a lot of time on things they don't care about.
I think DJT is throwing a big net. Not everything will matter to everyone. But everyone will find something they agree with and ignore the things that don't matter to them. Also, the failures will be explained away as failures caused by Dem resistence. (e.g., "It would have worked if the Dems hadn't stopped it.") or by things out of DJT control. The group I am keeping an eye on are farmers, especially those in California. Most voted for DJT. When they can't water their crops in the spring because DJT spilled millions of gallons toward (but not reaching) the LA fires, it is going to hit home. But it doesn't mean they will hold DJT accountable. ANother good commentator on these matters is Dan Ariely.
Jess Piper goes to local meetings and asks questions. At a recent one where the very young, new representative was explaining why Missouri didn't need an income tax, a hair stylist asked a question about taxes on her services. After another bizarre word salad that made no sense, she said, 'well, you're lawmakers, you must know what you're talking about.'
As Jess Piper For Missouri says,
"But, that’s the problem — they don’t know what they are doing. They receive their legislation from organizations like The Heritage Foundation. They cut and paste bills from lobbyists and ALEC and Project Blitz. They can’t explain their positions because they can’t waver from the script and it isn’t truly their legislation.
And this is why I always push back. It’s why I show up where I am not invited."
https://open.substack.com/pub/jesspiper/p/show-up-where-you-arent-wanted?r=b5dvd&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Totally. It's one reason why Reagan, Bush Jr, and Trump have worked so well. None of them understand the nuts and bolts of policy. They know the words to say about the policy. That makes them more effective, because the actual policies are trash but they can say the right words because they are ignorant of that.
I agree. I've been thinking the same thing. I'll be substacking about a few ideas on this subject soon. Sadly, we'll have too many real-life examples to reference.
Jay, I really appreciate your perspectives, and I agree that there is nothing like personal stories to bring home the real cost of policies. I have made this newsletter one of the subscriptions that I recommend when people subscribe to mine, which so far has generated 7 new subscriptions for you!
Thank you!!
I don't recall ever calling a previous R President a fascist......as much as I may have disliked them. This one hits you in the forehead. And I am amused you think of the current folks would remember and hold that against us a crying wolf! I know we have been called Communists since at least the 50's.
Fair point. I remember people calling GWBush a fascist and Reagan a fascist (especially in the ACT-UP days).
Thanks, Jay. I am interested in your Dharma talk next week on the 17th. Do I just click the link when it starts? Right now all that is available is the flyer with the date and time. Will the link be live at the time of the talk? I'm reading Evolving Dharma now too and am looking forward to learning more.
Sorry, there was an error. Here's the link: https://courses.ruzuku.com/courses/lecture-and-dialog-series-session-two--73d15ef1-27c9-407f-bd08-88c8adef69aa/salespage
Thanks, Jay. I really enjoyed the conversation last night. And I am enjoying Evolving Dharma (slowly working through it).
Every time I hear someone worried about the "dawn of fascism" now that we got Trump, I have to wonder: were they born yesterday? Where have you been for the last, I don't know, 60 years? The United States was toppled in a coup d' etat, at least that long ago. Oh you could say it happened when the Federal Reserve was created, or when the CIA came over and opened the floodgates for Nazi war criminals to patriate in the US, or, my favorite, when the beloved president Kennedy was shot in the face in broad daylight, and the media, using sophisticated, weaponized psychology got a lot of people to believe he was shot from the back by a incompetent marksman through the trees. The fascist media introduced the term "conspiracy theorist" to try and dissuade any further discussion, and it worked. I won't even get into 9/11. Eisenhower warned that unless we woke up we'd lose our form of government, and we did. Trump is just the most odious president in a long line of puppets. Those that think HE is the problem are so far behind it is ludicrous.
And your solution is?
First, Let's tell the Truth about where we are and how we got here. You don't cure cancer by picking at a scab.
I follow several historians, noteably Heather Cox Richardson and Daniele Bolelli. The latter's episode Mini-Episode 26: How We Got Here does a great job of explaining the current state of cynicism. To quote Dr. Bolelli's opening remarks: "We live at a time when cynicism toward institutions reigns supreme. Conspiracy theories abound. Trust in government is the punchline of a joke. And there is no agreement on which, if any, media outlets can offer accurate news. Normally, I keep History on Fire away from anything having to do with the present, and I’ll hold to this in this case as well. Today, I’ll explore a whole bunch of historical events from the past 70 years or so, which may help us understand how we got where we are."
Thank you. Sounds interesting. I'll check them out. I was a little boy, 10 years old in 1966, when the stream that was my Eden became polluted and died. I soon realized that was our fate unless we woke up to the peril of rapacious, unenlightened, capitalism. First I studied political science, then sociology and psychology, then religion when i came to realize that this was a spiritual crisis, an opportunity to really wake up. Psychedelics at first seemed to hold great promise so I helped to instigate this psychedelic renaissance. Until soon i realized that psychedelics were deployed, and mostly ARE being deployed, by the rapacious capitalists in what i call a Brave New World project, causing people to spiritually bypass and evade political, ethical requirements for a healthy society, so only the "elite," seem to thrive. So i've kinda returned to my Theravadin Buddhist roots. Left the US. This is a realm of pain and deception and an opportunity to help. We don't change the world. It will always be dukkha. But we can practice the art and joy of liberation... And still i have to wonder what does a person really mean when they say "conspiracy theories abound"? Are they using that term to denigrate analysis of complex conspiracies that counter the mainstream, official narratives of historical events? Or are they congratulating people with the courage and intelligence and skills necessary to understand our history. The Vietnam War? We know that was designed in secret conspiracies. The Drug War? Also. Even 9/11, whether you fall for the completely absurd version asserted by the beneficiaries of that atrocity, or the logical theory offered by say, the acclaimed philosopher of science and religion, David Ray Griffin--both are conspiracy theories...
I had a stream in my childhood Eden, sociologist/philosopher by training, once Catholic, now Buddhist, still hold out hope for therapeutic use of psychedelics for certain mental health conditions, don't care what people mean when they say "conspiracy theories". Fan of philsophy of science, history and religion. Favorite sociological remark from Randall Collins: Three things underpin all of human actions: Men are often but not always larger than women. Many but not all people like sex. And nobody likes to be told what to do.