Responding Tuesday to the Boulder, Colo. mass shooting, Amanda Marcotte brought to mind George Lakoff’s theory of Moral Accounting. Marcotte writes:
Pollster Frank Luntz recently held a focus group of vaccine-hesitant Republicans, and one of the justifications offered for refusing to get the vaccine was chilling precisely because the defiance was conveyed so matter-of-factly: “We are not all in this together.”
The comment really cut to the heart of the cultivated stance of sociopathy that has fueled the GOP for decades now. There is much that conservatives think is owed to them, like the icons of their childhood such as Mr. Potato Head or Dr. Seuss to never change with the times, or for Ghostbusters to never be female, or to never have to press 1 for English nor ever see a Black athlete kneel instead of stand during the national anthem.
But when it comes to what they owe others, their answer is all too often less than nothing.
In Lakoff’s scheme, conservatives (more than liberals) keep unconscious balance sheets: what they are owed, what they owe others. And not owe in the literal sense of money but the “I’m in your debt” sense. Ideally, these “books” should balance. Lakoff’s moral accounting is built on two basic principles:
The sociopathic version is that owing nothing to anyone places conservatives in a superior position, morally speaking. American “rugged individualism” rests upon that foundation. (“And a rock feels no pain | And an island never cries.“) Preserving one’s moral dominance against any erosion becomes a kind of prime directive.
But Lakoff says when it comes to exacting retribution the two principles above conflict:
No matter what you do, you violate one of the two principles. You have to make a choice. You have to give priority to one of the principles. Such a choice gives two different versions of moral accounting: The Morality of Absolute Goodness puts the first principle first. The Morality of Retribution puts the second principle first. As might be expected, different people and different subcultures have different solutions to this dilemma, some preferring retribution, others preferring absolute goodness.
The conservative cult of victimhood, that “cultivated stance of sociopathy,” maintains a sense of moral superiority while demanding payback-plus for past wrongs real or imagined. They are owed. They owe others nothing.
I don’t need to spell out which one the last president prioritizes. Getting “even” is not his goal. Winning this accounting game is, whatever it takes. “If someone screws you, screw them back 10 times harder,” Trump told a meeting of business leaders in Colorado in 2005, and again in Sydney, Australia in 2011. He keeps a mental list of those what done him wrong.
Donald J. Trump is not Patient Zero in this pandemic of sociopathy. He is an avatar. His ascension to the White House validated the Morality of Retribution to which his most ardent followers were already inclined. He gave them permission.
Thus, Marcotte concludes regarding a nation awash in weapons:
Indeed, all we hear is that it’s an assault on their alleged “freedom” to allow their neighbors the ability to go about simple tasks of life without fear of being gunned down by some idiot who is still mad that Becky the cheerleader didn’t want to go to the homecoming dance with him.
Rejection of civic duty, of common courtesy even, and personal arsenals maintained against the glorious Day of Retribution (or Second Civil War) is how the self-styled downtrodden convince themselves they are moral accounting’s victors. Clutching black rifles they can taunt the fallen Foreign Menace from the top ropes — so long as he is not Russian. In a pinch, the Domestic Menace will do.