You mentioned this as an aside, but I believe that while domination is the end goal and the desired state, *sadism* is the fuel of that domination, and its continual means. It's why Trump is never really happy and content, even when he's proven his domination, but rather immediately begins to upset the balance and cause chaos again. And it's why Trump's hired the people he has: he seeks out those who enjoy being mean and abusive, who revel in their victims' pain. As Adam Serwer famously wrote, 'The cruelty is the point.'
Good point. I don't know the differences between sadism and the lust for domination, at least psychoanalytically. I do, however, see Trump as someone whose ego can be stroked by fawning praise and subservience without him having to inflict gratuitous cruelty. If you start, off the bat, sucking up to him, he sees no need to be cruel, since you already know your place. You might even garner his praise thanks to your recognition of his dominance and your proper place below him on the hierarchy. He will absolutely hold grudges against those who don't acknowledge his dominance, and he'll humiliate them at a minimum, which is cruel, until they submit, but then he may receive them (Rubio, Cruz, Vance, others).
Failing to mention the phenomenal Serwer is a definite flub on my part, and I miss The Atlantic entirely because I seldom get to read him (just as I miss the NYT because I don't get to see Jamelle Bouie beyond a skeet or two).
But I think the actual sadism lies in those around him. I think Trump himself would be "happy" just being waited on and fawned over, with parades in his honor and envoys bearing tribute as signifiers that he's finally become the Big Man--after having destroyed all all his enemies or forced them to grovel for his mercy, of course.
Chauncey DeVega has a piece at Salon talking about all the chaos serving Trump's ends; Matt Sitman in conversation with Ganz and Sam Adler-Bell on Know Your Enemies pod observes that Trump simply loves deal-making, the one-upmanship, the display of dominance, which isn't quite the same as cruelty, but does involve always coming out on top. I mean, a dominant animal can push others around without engaging in either battle or outright cruelty, so long as the deferential hierarchy is observed. I see Trump that way.
To GET there, however, the people around him are gloves off, and a lot of them certainly do seem like sadists, though I don't know how to distinguish between something like "true sadism" and "an identity built on ideological grievance." I do very much worry about the composition of ICE and Homeland Security forces in terms of sadism. Police forces may be more vulnerable to individual conscience here and there, but large metro forces worry the hell out of me, basically anywhere there's a strong internal culture of Us vs. Them.
I agree that Trump himself is perhaps a bit more complex, more akin to a mob boss than a direct sadist.
I think the sadism is more obvious in his hirelings if you look at their reactions — whether physical or verbal. Apologies for the crudeness, but are they simply happy with the results, or are they literally *getting off* on their actions? It's nearly psychosexual.
A few examples:
- Stephen Miller — obviously, but particularly look at his circa-Trump 45 'glee' at family separations
- Russel Vought (OMB/Heritage) — "We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected [...] We want to put them in trauma."
- Noem (DHS) — her performative hot-Maga domination stunt at CECOT the other day; see also: her admitted dog-killing in her autobiog
- The White House — producing "ASMR: Illegal Alien Deportation Flight" video
Miller strikes me as pure racist white nationalist, driven by hate, so sadism can be a part of that. Vought comes off as an ideologue, so I'm back to trying to parse where sadism and cruelty leave off and an ideological identity of grievance and perceived persecution begin. Noem struck me as auditioning for a part, and she got one, by demonstrating the cruelty the base craves. (As for gendered weirdness re. Noem, In Bed With The Right has an episode on Republican Hair [and cosmetic surgery] that's a goldmine of deep disorders.)
I think cruelty stirs the MAGA faithful, and they need a steady feeding of red meat, so we have many sadistic cast members in Donald's production. But Donald? I think he just loves running the show, knowing he can choose whom to favor--the Bannon populists or the Musk tech-bros, for example.
I'd have to think on it some more, but apart from the tariffs, most of Trump’s ire seems to have been aimed at anyone daring to oppose him. A lot of that dates back to his time in exile, his beefs about Biden, what themes he took up during the campaign. Even his tariff fixation fantasies may date from grievances over Japan back in the day. How many scores he'll have to settle, how far back they date, I can't say, but I think they go to his quest for domination more than just inflicting suffering.
As a performer, however, I think he's well aware of what his audience wants, so he'll always make room for the sadists to ply their trade and lean into it for the cheers.
We haven't even considered the sociopath here. A separate category? Overlapping? My Venn Diagrams are starting to look like a plate of spaghetti.
You mentioned this as an aside, but I believe that while domination is the end goal and the desired state, *sadism* is the fuel of that domination, and its continual means. It's why Trump is never really happy and content, even when he's proven his domination, but rather immediately begins to upset the balance and cause chaos again. And it's why Trump's hired the people he has: he seeks out those who enjoy being mean and abusive, who revel in their victims' pain. As Adam Serwer famously wrote, 'The cruelty is the point.'
Good point. I don't know the differences between sadism and the lust for domination, at least psychoanalytically. I do, however, see Trump as someone whose ego can be stroked by fawning praise and subservience without him having to inflict gratuitous cruelty. If you start, off the bat, sucking up to him, he sees no need to be cruel, since you already know your place. You might even garner his praise thanks to your recognition of his dominance and your proper place below him on the hierarchy. He will absolutely hold grudges against those who don't acknowledge his dominance, and he'll humiliate them at a minimum, which is cruel, until they submit, but then he may receive them (Rubio, Cruz, Vance, others).
Failing to mention the phenomenal Serwer is a definite flub on my part, and I miss The Atlantic entirely because I seldom get to read him (just as I miss the NYT because I don't get to see Jamelle Bouie beyond a skeet or two).
But I think the actual sadism lies in those around him. I think Trump himself would be "happy" just being waited on and fawned over, with parades in his honor and envoys bearing tribute as signifiers that he's finally become the Big Man--after having destroyed all all his enemies or forced them to grovel for his mercy, of course.
Chauncey DeVega has a piece at Salon talking about all the chaos serving Trump's ends; Matt Sitman in conversation with Ganz and Sam Adler-Bell on Know Your Enemies pod observes that Trump simply loves deal-making, the one-upmanship, the display of dominance, which isn't quite the same as cruelty, but does involve always coming out on top. I mean, a dominant animal can push others around without engaging in either battle or outright cruelty, so long as the deferential hierarchy is observed. I see Trump that way.
To GET there, however, the people around him are gloves off, and a lot of them certainly do seem like sadists, though I don't know how to distinguish between something like "true sadism" and "an identity built on ideological grievance." I do very much worry about the composition of ICE and Homeland Security forces in terms of sadism. Police forces may be more vulnerable to individual conscience here and there, but large metro forces worry the hell out of me, basically anywhere there's a strong internal culture of Us vs. Them.
I agree that Trump himself is perhaps a bit more complex, more akin to a mob boss than a direct sadist.
I think the sadism is more obvious in his hirelings if you look at their reactions — whether physical or verbal. Apologies for the crudeness, but are they simply happy with the results, or are they literally *getting off* on their actions? It's nearly psychosexual.
A few examples:
- Stephen Miller — obviously, but particularly look at his circa-Trump 45 'glee' at family separations
- Russel Vought (OMB/Heritage) — "We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected [...] We want to put them in trauma."
- Noem (DHS) — her performative hot-Maga domination stunt at CECOT the other day; see also: her admitted dog-killing in her autobiog
- The White House — producing "ASMR: Illegal Alien Deportation Flight" video
Jeff Sharlet has covered the last two well at his blog: https://slowcivilwar.substack.com/p/tingles
Miller strikes me as pure racist white nationalist, driven by hate, so sadism can be a part of that. Vought comes off as an ideologue, so I'm back to trying to parse where sadism and cruelty leave off and an ideological identity of grievance and perceived persecution begin. Noem struck me as auditioning for a part, and she got one, by demonstrating the cruelty the base craves. (As for gendered weirdness re. Noem, In Bed With The Right has an episode on Republican Hair [and cosmetic surgery] that's a goldmine of deep disorders.)
I think cruelty stirs the MAGA faithful, and they need a steady feeding of red meat, so we have many sadistic cast members in Donald's production. But Donald? I think he just loves running the show, knowing he can choose whom to favor--the Bannon populists or the Musk tech-bros, for example.
I'd have to think on it some more, but apart from the tariffs, most of Trump’s ire seems to have been aimed at anyone daring to oppose him. A lot of that dates back to his time in exile, his beefs about Biden, what themes he took up during the campaign. Even his tariff fixation fantasies may date from grievances over Japan back in the day. How many scores he'll have to settle, how far back they date, I can't say, but I think they go to his quest for domination more than just inflicting suffering.
As a performer, however, I think he's well aware of what his audience wants, so he'll always make room for the sadists to ply their trade and lean into it for the cheers.
We haven't even considered the sociopath here. A separate category? Overlapping? My Venn Diagrams are starting to look like a plate of spaghetti.