Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jack A's avatar

I don't disagree with the overall point necessarily, but I think in many of these examples you don't follow through with a clear connection between the figure's childhood experiences and their actual political posture. For Ben Shapiro, your first example, you don't actually mention how the trauma of being a loser nerd kid might affect his positions, and you should have, because its easy to rationalize it both ways. We can easily imagine that two people with his experience might change in opposite directions - one might try to remake himself to be popular and make himself not a target of his bullies, another might become reclusive, to stay safe by removing himself physically from those situations. Its hard to believe Shapiro took either of those paths - if he took the former, he would likely take more people-pleasing, consistently MAGA-aligned positions instead of sometimes having contrarian positions, and if he took the later path he likely would not have become a leader of a large media company. Shapiro himself seems to have probably not changed much, and just remained an archetypal dork.

Expand full comment
Sotiris Rex's avatar

Excellent post, and very much in line with a lot of my work. Some things are psychodynamic. Ignoring the influence of childhood trauma ensures that it will forever remain unsolved. We are defined by trauma, even though we can still strive to manage it. Trauma is no excuse for bad behavior, but it is an explanation. We aim not to absolve but to identify causation, and to thus avoid repetition.

Expand full comment
49 more comments...

No posts