Obama, Narcissism, and the Triumph of Emotion

We begin with what formet British PM David Cameron thought of Obama’s Narcissism and its real-world consequences:

Steve Hilton, one of Cameron’s closest advisers before the pair fell out over immigration and Brexit last year, made the comments during the latest instalment of his show, The Next Revolution, on Fox News.

Discussing Michael Wolff’s new book, Fire and Fury, Hilton said any claims by elitists and the establishment that Donald Trump was mentally unfit for the presidency came second to Trump’s promotion of a pro-worker, populist agenda on immigration, infrastructure, trade and the fight against China.

He went on to emphasise the shortcomings of Trump’s predecessors, adding: “My old boss, former British prime minister David Cameron, thought Obama was one of the most narcissistic, self-absorbed people he’d ever dealt with.

“Obama never listened to anyone, always thought he was smarter than every expert in the room, and treated every meeting as an opportunity to lecture everyone else. This led to real-world disasters, like Syria and the rise of Isis.”

But the real world did not matter to the elites, Hilton said. “For them, it’s all about style and tone, not substance and results. Donald Trump offends the elites aesthetically, like a piece of art that’s not to their taste.

Speaking of elitism and the values by which they judge others, there’s this OpEd in the American Interest: “An Emotional America”

Americans on average have been paying more attention to emotions as a guide for their judgments, and the result has been to make the national discourse even more fraught with complexity. Admittedly, at one level, to speak of an excess of emotionality might seem like a no-brainer, as we note the easily derided emotional sensitivities of the “snowflakes” on the Left or the intriguing mixture of fear and anger in Trumpland. But the issue deserves more careful attention. We need to sort out the trends with greater precision, and to note some revealing selectivity in the emotions most commonly indulged.5

My overall contention here is this: that growing individualism, with its increasing focus on self-expression, is facilitating the expression of a widening array of emotions, creating a sense that emotional construction is becoming a genuine reality in its own right; and that this impulse is affecting both sides of the political spectrum. Other developments have shaped this trend as well—from increasingly emotional newscasts to a growing acceptance of the language of therapy in everyday discourse.

The Left is largely defined by emotion and prioritizes feelings above truth. Style and tone are everything to a Lefty. In Lefty discourse it is enough to tug the heartstrings and leave substance and results and foundational principles unspoken. Emotion is the root of Obama’s narcissism and of Oprah’s “your truth” over “the truth” relativism. The Left’s love of emotion is behind their inability to contemplate ideas that do not comport with, nor satisfy their emotional needs.

It’s amazing to me the number of highly educated people (think of college professors) whose reasoning is stupidified by emotion. As I’ve said many times, education has nothing to do with wisdom – something Aristotle understood.

But there is a lesson to be learned and that lesson is exactly this: To persuade a Leftist of the moral value of your policy, simply broadcast a meme on Facebook showing starving Sudanese babies or shivering puppies to make the claim that those who oppose your policy support the images portrayed in the picture.



This entry was posted in Leftism, Philosophy, Political. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *