Donald Trump: Master Marketer or Malignant Manipulative Masochist? (article)

The myth of Narcissus existed long before the Oedipus myth, yet Sigmund Freud gave greater emphasis to the latter rather than the former. When he did refer to the myth of Narcissus (in “Zur Einführung des Narzißmus” [“On Narcissism”], 1914), he did so as a symbolized portrayal of characteristics of someone who was extremely self-absorbed, practically to the exclusion of others, where others either do not exist as separate entities or solely exist for the use and benefit of the narcissistic individual. Along the same lines, Jean Laplanche and Jean-Bertrand Pontalis referred to narcissists as individuals who almost obsessively love an image of themselves more than anything or anybody else.

Coincidentally, both the Oedipal and Narcissus myths coincide on a singular point of incestuous desire and incest prohibition. If Jacques Lacan is correct, then incestuous desire need not necessarily have to do with the literal act of sleeping with one’s mother, but rather the quest for oneness or completeness derived by total connection with another. Following this line of reasoning, those who would impede the wish for reunification with the mother would have to be scorned.

Page 61

In brief, the classic interpretation of the myth of Narcissus has it that Narcissus looks at his image in the water and instantly falls in love with it, so much so that he dives into the water—presumably to unite with his one “true love” (himself)—and drowns. Let us look at this in greater detail. As we know from psychoanalytic writings, in the language of the unconscious, opposites lie side by side in terms of equivalence. Thus, an alternate explanation of this myth is that Narcissus is in love with his image, which he mistakes for the real self; but in actuality, he is in hate with and must destroy the real self.

For several years now, the pundits have been commenting on Donald Trump’s actions, often describing them as irrational and frequently wondering why he does what he does: insult Mexicans, the handicapped, Muslims, Gold star parents, Blacks, women, and peaceful demonstrators, while he sticks up for murderers like Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un. It was assumed that his outlandish provocative statements were designed to show that he is his own man, not afraid to speak his mind and willing to fearlessly stand up to anyone. But whom, in reality, is he really standing up to—a crowd of peaceful demonstrators? Certainly not strongmen like Putin, Kim Jong-un, or Victor Orban.

It has also been assumed that his provocative statements were carefully calculated, purposeful tactics, designed to achieve positive outcomes (e.g., win reelection by appealing to his base). Initially, some even thought that there was a “method to his madness.” Others have reduced his behavior to various diagnostic labels. Of late, the most common one was “malignant narcissism.”

To date, no one has considered the possibility that Trump’s overt, in-your-face expressions of hatred, were not only projections (as Nancy Pelosi opined), but also externalizations of self-hate, whose actual purpose was to disavow, evacuate, and dissociate his latent painful feelings of self-loathing. While it is true on the surface that he sadistically attacks, humiliates, and embarrasses others, underneath, he is merely a very little boy. His niece, Mary Trump, claims was treated sadistically by his father, and he had no choice but to tolerate such treatment at the hands of a much more powerful figure in his life. Thus he was placed in a helpless, masochistic position. In other words, what we are seeing is a return of the oppressed in which the sadism that he presumably introjected returned with a vengeance. Because this happened to him, Trump feels compelled to inflict it on others. It is probably no accident that he

Page 62

does not sleep at night, but tweets out the inner wrath he likely has consumed over the years.

While his behavior looks unpredictable and seemingly does not have any rhyme or reason, I believe what we are seeing is a form of masochistic self-destruction. His good looks, overt charm, and charisma have produced an image of beauty that he himself was taken in by and fell in love with. But no manner of denial could possibly be sufficient to fill the gigantic hole that was his real sense of self. He cannot consume enough praise, sycophantic followers, or food for that matter, to ever fill what seems to be his bottomless sense of emptiness. It is no wonder he has gained so much weight.

More recently, articles in both The Washington Post and The New York Times suggested that the President’s aides were worried that he does not seem to really want to win this election and appears to be going out of his way to infuriate a great many people, save his base. But, I ask you, is this terribly different than what he did when he ran in 2016? Perhaps the difference this time is the fact that we see with our own eyes that people are dying due to COVID-19 and this could have been avoided—or at least mitigated against to a much greater degree than what has occurred. An immediate, urgent call could have gone out to industry to manufacture face masks, protective equipment, ventilator systems, to instantly shut down the country, and so on. Instead, there have been tremendous delays, which continue to this day in developing a reasonable response to COVID-19. Had he done well, Trump might have been hailed as the great man he would like us to see him as. There were many countries from whom he could have learned (Germany, South Korea, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Taiwan, etc.), who strongly responded to COVID-19 (i.e., requiring masks, physical distancing, immediate prioritization for manufacturing ventilators, and stressing testing and tracing), all of which resulted in the significant curtailment of the virus. Instead, Trump convinced his followers (and of even greater importance, himself) that it would all go away very soon. Until recently, he even refused to wear a mask.

I do not believe it was helpful to his development of reality testing when others rescued him from failing. For one thing, it did not seem to lessen his unconscious self-hatred or his corresponding externalization of those feelings, which we have witnessed in his vicious attacks on others. For another, it maintained his system of reliance on “magical solutions,” being fake, or bullying, rather than

Page 63

learning to develop a realistic sense of self-efficacy based on genuine competencies and accomplishments.

Although he provides the “appearance” of great accomplishments, the truth is that he has failed in most endeavors in which he has been involved, producing the illusion of success where he has excelled. For example, in most cases, he failed as a businessman, supposedly his strong suit, specifically failing as a builder, casino owner, shuttle operator, university developer, and owner of a professional football team (the New Jersey Generals). It is thus understandable on so many levels why he would not want his taxes to be seen.

Donald Trump has been called a malignant narcissist. Understanding the mechanisms intrinsic to the self-destructive dynamics of narcissism affords us the possibility of avoiding its violent and suicidal makeup. Still, I wish to give him his due. He did not get this far totally without having some skill. I believe Donald Trump is a master marketer. In his book, Man for Himself: An Inquiry Into the Psychology of Ethics (1947), Erich Fromm describes the “Marketing Personality.” These are individuals who treat people as commodities and human interactions solely as transactions. He would fit in perfectly, and undoubtedly stand out in an advertising agency on Madison Avenue. However, the presidency of the United States of America requires more than being a promotional or publicity genius. A flim-flam artist or a snake-oil salesman does not meet the job description. We need a statesman—a real one, not a fake one.

Trump fails when his bottomless need for self-aggrandizement born of overcompensation for inner emptiness requires him to succeed in areas that are beyond his competence. His bravado is matched only by his brio, and as much as they convey confidence on the surface, this is a superficial flight from intense feelings of internalized scorn and self-loathing. In short, he is a man always on the brink of self-destruction. Sadly, his collapses are on such a grand scale that he has become too big to fail, otherwise the banks that originally backed him take the plunge too. Thus, he needs to be propped up continuously, or he and his supporters go down with the ship.

As Paul Elovitz points out to me, together with some evidence, Trump was raised by a very harsh, possibly cruel father, for whom only perfection was acceptable or else there would be severe

Page 64

repercussions. Mary L. Trump, his older brother’s daughter who is a clinical psychologist, calls the senior Trump “a high functioning sociopath” who destroyed his eldest son and emotionally damaged Donald (Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the Most Dangerous Man in the World, 2020). Donald Trump himself says, “My father was an unbelievable taskmaster” (Trump: The Art of the Deal, 1987, 75). Ordinarily, our hearts would be touched and we would want to reach out to someone who is clearly in considerable anguish. In this instance, I fear that were we to let our collective guards down, he would try to steal it out of our chest and claim it as his own.

I do not mind that he is self-destructive, and if he chose to go off the deep end, I would grieve for the loss of a human being. But that would be his choice. However, on the flip side of the same coin, I do mind if he grasps my hand as he jumps into the abyss of the great beyond.

Page 65