Gerrymander to Gerrymaster

Republicans set a trap for themselves.

NOTE: Within this text, wherever gender is not key to the explanation, I am using the Elverson ey/em construction of the Spivak Pronouns.

In John Dean’s very personal analysis of the Republican transformation after Nixon, Conservatives Without a Conscience, the basic problem is expertly illuminated. He begins the book by almost apologizing for the fact that it is not the book he originally intended. The original plan was to provide a general review of the corruption of the Republican Party complete with analysis and anecdotes from his own direct experience. When he undertook a serious analysis, though, it became clear to him that his plan for the book had to change.

His research was disciplined enough to identify something he saw as a common feature which may actually identify a root cause. Now, root cause is a term of art in engineering. In order to solve a problem properly, the engineer must identify the root cause of the exposed problem. Understanding the symptom is fine but its root cause is critical. If one understands the root cause, one may then craft a solution. Hmm, a solution to the corrupted Republican Party — could such a thing exist?

Root Cause Analysis

Dean, in his research, found a common element that transformed his entire project. As he reviewed the characteristics that he was describing in Richard Nixon, John Mitchell, Jeb McGruder, G. Gordon Liddy and others, he recognized that their personality traits corresponded fairly consistently to those of the authoritarian type introduced into scholarly psychology in 1950 and extensively studied by such researchers as Alan Wolfe and Bob Altemeyer. He demonstrated that the Republican Party was transforming into something nefarious and repressive. His prescient book predicted the right-wing fascist Republican Organization that we see today.

The earliest description I have found of the authoritarian type is in Erich Fromm’s book Escape from Freedom. The essay you are reading is influenced by both Dean and Fromm but I think the best summary is to be found in The Authoritarian Personality, a study sponsored by the University of California, Berkeley which describes authoritarians as:

… people with seemingly conflicting elements in their persona, since they are often both enlightened yet superstitious, and proud to be individualists but live in constant fear of not being like others, whose independence they are jealous of because they themselves are inclined to submit blindly to power and authority.

The interesting part is that for every batch of authoritarians, eager to submit to authority, there is a single authoritarian who is serving as that ultimate authority (the leader). It is in Fromm (who finds similarities between the authoritarian follower and the masochist and between the authoritarian leader and the sadist) that we explore most thoroughly those different faces of the authoritarian and find that authoritarianism is strangely complex and yet, in some aspects, surprisingly simple.

The Authoritarian World

The Republican Organization, its supporters and the vile pustule erupting from its fleshy face known as MAGA, is a textbook case of an authoritarian movement. The authoritarian is mesmerized by power and only power. Authoritarian followers have failed at wielding their own power and so seek to follow one who embodies it. The authoritarian leader seeks to claim power from followers through whom he (rarely a she) may affirm his belief that he is something of ultimate importance. The authoritarian is bound tight to the right wing and those who are right wing believe that humans are not qualified to govern themselves but instead require a powerful leader to guide them.

Authoritarian followers accept that they are helpless sheep who must be led. Their leader, also piteous and helpless, claims that he too is led by some ultimate power like a deity or Destiny or Nature. Everyone in an authoritarian economy is ruled (but some are ruled more than others). The authoritarian leader glories in expressing his power. It is always merely a pretense of power; but, that pretense, combined with forceful oratory and animal charisma, will draw in the authoritarian follower who will hang on every complaint and non-sequitur and follow instructions without question.

This relationship defines, within the authoritarian mind, a corrupt representation of the world. The objects are the same but the relationships and meanings are different. Neither the leader nor the followers are curious or compassionate or concerned about the future. The sole focus of the follower is the satisfaction of the leader’s needs. The sole focus of the leader is the action needed to retain his following. For this reason, no trove of real facts will influence the behavior of an authoritarian follower because those facts are not part of the follower’s world. No reasoning based upon those real facts will change the follower’s behavior since the reasoning did not come from the leader. Any attempt to reason based upon facts in the follower’s world will inevitably point back to the ultimate perfection and supremacy of the leader because that is the purpose of every fact in the authoritarian world.

So this is the problem to be addressed: About a third of the U.S. population occupies a completely different world, immune to the facts and arguments of the real world, and intent upon manipulating the objects of the real world based upon the twisted objects of their authoritarian world. When the authoritarian follower with a gun shoots the “pedophile”, a good teacher in our world falls. When the authoritarian follower drives a truck into a “mob of armed assailants”, innocent protesters in our world fall. Reasoning does not work because the successful argument must change all of the relationships and meanings in a complex world view in which no relationship corresponds to any relationship in the world of the argument. Nonetheless, we must find a way to stop the advancement of authoritarian violence and corruption.

A Confederacy of Supplicants

The fascinating interaction here is that both the follower and the leader are wretched supplicants. Each both desire and repudiate the other. Without the followers, the leader is nothing. Without the leader, the followers are nothing. In Arlie Russell Hochschild’s definitive biography of authoritarian victims, Strangers in Their Own Land, we see how workers in the Louisiana bayou willingly work, slave, suffer injury and die in order to fulfill the desires of their corporate masters. This is a microcosm of the MAGA world and the Republican ultimate aspiration: a population of willing workers living at the stark limit of poverty and yet devoted unquestioningly to the glory of the designated leader.

The Republican Organization has gone to great lengths to assure that the American people are so frightened and emotionally charged that the concept of self-governance is not conceivable. The Republican adherent is either seeking to lead through fraud and subterfuge or seeking a father-figure to provide security and guidance. In other words, any Republican true believer is either a conspirator or a dupe. The notion that any Republican is open to discussion and reason is the liberal fantasy that dooms our hope for a survivable future.

The Republican Organization is, by every reasonable definition, a crime family. It provides no services that one may expect from a political party. It has worked for years with the use of AM talk radio, Fox “News”, regressive think tanks, curated fascist judges and Calvinball senate rulings to assure a definitively right-biased political field. The Republican Organization has promoted sociopathy to a cultural practice. Its only goal is to win. The good of the constituents is irrelevant because the authoritarian constituent will always vote as directed. The good of the wealthy is supreme since that wealth is fuel for the ongoing organized assault on the liberties of the average person.

The untenable idea that the sociopathic right in the U.S. is open to persuasion or new ideas or facts is a repeatedly demonstrated dead end. The Democratic handbook has no entry for “benevolent leader”. The Republican handbook opens with that chapter. The shepherd does not guide through reason; but only by sending dogs into the flock and calling repeatedly in a familiar voice. The Republican will proudly see emself as the shepherd, the shepherd’s dog or the sheep. There are no other roles.

A Useful Sheep/Shepherd Model

Any person who is dedicated to understanding the world as it truly is in hopes of making a better future, cannot comprehend a society wherein people are mere followers or leaders. The rational frame assumes that people are independent agents working together to bring about positive change. Anything else is an anomaly; but, when the anomaly becomes one third of the populace, that model of the world must be abandoned. Any functional model must constructively address that population of sheep and their malevolent shepherd.

The authoritarian mind includes no conception of an active self. The self is either absorbed into the authoritarian mob or desperately seeks the next mob. This is why you cannot change an authoritarian’s mind — no mind is present to change. Any argument will simply be processed through that person’s understanding of the leader and the response will be a rote recitation of the shepherd’s familiar voice.

So, what are our options. Reason and persuasion will not work. The Democratic Party has put forward well-reasoned campaigns for decades and from Reagan Democrats to the Contract with America to the Tea Party Movement to MAGA to the next Republican performance piece, the total number of right wing authoritarian cult members has stayed pretty steady at around 1/3 of the population. The process of deprogramming a cult member requires months of one-on-one therapeutic intervention and there are no resources to undertake such a massive operation. Authoritarians are now taking up arms and following their leader’s instructions, doing violence to those who oppose them. Jail time is not a deterrent. Witnessing the deaths of the master’s servants is not a deterrent. In fact, adversity in service of the leader merely reinforces the beliefs of the authoritarian follower. What then is to be done when only the shepherd may guide the flock?

Gerrymastering

There is, I believe, a fascinating benefit to the action I am about to propose. It makes gerrymandered Republican districts irrelevant. The Republican Organization has isolated liberals and progressives into specialized voting districts so that they may select only a small number of house seats and have a limited effect on the electoral college. They did that to assure a permanent one party system wherein the Republican Organization may win a majority of seats with a minority of votes. Really clever, eh? Yet, we now see that the root cause of the problem is that their constituents have been conditioned to react irrationally. Let’s resolve that root cause.

The Republican Organization has isolated a large number of authoritarian majority districts and the interesting thing about authoritarians is that they can be won over with nothing more than bluster and promises. Authoritarianism carries with it its own vulnerabilities. The authoritarian is, by definition, easily led. The new authoritarian leader needs only to demonstrate the weakness or duplicity of the opponent. A gerrymandered authoritarian district is not claimed by a specific ideology; it is claimed by the person prepared to project unassailable power. Given this fact, the authoritarian movement must be addressed as a mass movement. A nationwide project must be enacted to provide better shepherds.

Imagine a progressive authoritarian (seems like a silly idea but stick with me for this paragraph). Imagine a progressive who presents emself as a confident and powerful leader. By proving that ey is more powerful than the Republican opponent, the followers will, with effort, give their allegiance to the new, more protective, progressive. That progressive could enter a gerrymandered guaranteed-Republican district, accuse the Republican of stealing from the people, of cowardice in the face of wealthy donors, of turning on the worthy workers of the district and, most importantly, making his followers look foolish (all probably true and provable). The progressive will win that district from Republican control.

The formula isn’t that complicated.

Of course, once the authoritarian progressive wins, that representative will advocate in Washington for workers and women’s rights, for taxing the rich, for impeaching corrupt federal judges. That person will advocate for many of the same things that Trump claimed; but, will then actually carry through on those promises. While Trump was the cruel shepherd who loves his flock and hates all others, the progressive authoritarian would be the benign shepherd who knows his sheep but welcomes others. That representative would advocate for the progressive (or reluctantly close enough) presidential candidate. Ey would present to eir sheep the good president as the shepherd’s faithful dog.

Note: Authoritarian leaders do have to present themselves as serving a higher authority (God, perhaps). Could the presidential candidate be presented as a higher authority over this congress-person? Perhaps, but I haven’t figured out a way to address presidential transitions in such a case.

Undermining the Self

I am not an expert in fascism or the authoritarian character per se. My research is into the more general concepts of the self, that part of the person that defines one as an independent agent of change in the world. Since the authoritarian personality is an affliction of the self, however, I have studied it peripherally.

The self will find expression. Parents, by restricting natural curiosity and exploration, may stunt its growth. Politicians or supervisors, through imposed rules and oppressive laws, may cause a developing self to regress. These desperate individuals will, depending on the vagaries of the disordered personality, either strive to bolster that self by seeking the worship of others or will seek out a powerful parent-figure.

We have witnessed Ron DeSantis’ failed attempt to take Trump’s mantle. He understood the basic idea early on when he wrote himself into the eighth day of the biblical creation myth. He presented himself as chosen by God. The campaign failed when he lost his nerve and offered obeisance to Trump. With that, he demonstrated that he was not powerful but was instead a supplicant like all the rest. After that fatal error, all of his other attempts to demonstrate his pretense of power just came off as an extension of Trump’s power. Republicans who like DeSantis, simply approve of the way he serves his master. They see him as the shepherd’s dog.

There are only three roles and there can be only one shepherd.

Any progressive authoritarian leader must exhibit at least seven key principles.

1. The leader acquires power from some ineffable source such as God, Nature or Fate. In the U.S., the most likely ideal source is God since protestant ministers have conspired with the Republican Organization to assure it is the source of the leader’s power. An alternative may be possible; but, it would require opposing fundamentalism.
2. The leader must be (or appear to be) wealthy because wealth represents unassailable bona fides. The authoritarian protestant dictum is clear: a rich man has been blessed by God and is virtuous by His hand.
3. The leader has no weaknesses. Anything that looks like an error or a failure is merely an expected idiosyncrasy of all great men. As Republicans throw accusations, the solution is not to resign the battle but accept the accusation as proof of power.
4. When accused of an infraction, the candidate will boldly state that his opponent is guilty of that very infraction (mirroring) and that that opponent is even more guilty since he is not powerful enough to pull it off expertly.
5. The followers must be constantly reminded that they are strong but under siege from all sides. That is the only reason that they themselves are not yet successful.
6. Any slight against the leader is a slight against his entire following.
7. The benign leader will have a special burden since, as dicey as this already is, the benign leader must not lie. The truth may be stretched a bit, but no more than would be expected for competent marketing.

Would that there were any practical way to promote a successful third party in the U.S.; but, as of 2023, there is not. There is no choice but to work with what we have. Our only practical foundation in such an endeavor is the Democratic Party. If the Democratic Party is to suppress the domestic terrorist force now under Republican orders, it must present a set of benevolent dictators to serve in Congress.

Upon hearing this, all rational Democrats will immediately object crying out, “This is not persuasion, this is oppression!” and they would be correct. Unfortunately, for those operating within the Republican frame, oppression is the only equivalent to persuasion. It is the only mechanism whereby behaviors may be altered; and, a key component of any strategy to restore a healthy U.S. society is for the behaviors of the authoritarian cult to be altered. Once this cult is redirected to the benevolent leader, we may then address the problem of restoring the humanity of its members — a difficult and resource-intensive process of therapy, deprogramming and education.

There are inevitable contradictions in this strategy. Can oppression be used as a precursor to freedom? Can skilled truthful marketing overcome fraud? Can an intermediate delusion mediate a path to reality? Despite this, we have all watched the authoritarian movement emerge beginning with the Reagan administration and progressing through Newt Gingrich, George W. Bush and Trump, each pushing the bounds of possibility just a little further into the unbelievable until armed violent insurrection is a live option. Numerous attempts to curb this movement have failed and the remaining proposals, including firm letters of reproach, seem laughably inadequate. Methadone has proved effective in weaning addicts away from heroine. What solution will be more effective than a benign leader to wean authoritarians away from total surrender of the self?

Confutatio

So let’s play a game from the ancient Romans. Let’s provide a confutatio where we consider the possible concerns and objections one by one.

1. Is the progressive authoritarian actually an authoritarian? — No. The progressive authoritarian, like most current Republican authoritarians, is acting. Witnesses have indicated that the Republican zealots tend to be fairly reasonable when the cameras are off. Everyone is acting when it comes to controlling authoritarian followers. For the Republican it is easier since lying is not a problem. For the progressive, lying must be avoided and so different strategies must be developed. The act must be maintained whenever cameras are present and yet that act is targeted at actually serving the constituents. It will require a special kind of person prepared to fake as much bluster as the Republicans but act in support of true virtue.
2. Fox “News” is fundamental to the authoritarian right. How does the progressive authoritarian get onto the right wing media channels? — The progressive authoritarian will not present as a liberal. The claims and promises will be populist (just like the Trump campaign). The biggest lie, from Fox “News”, is that they provide facts to the people. The persona of the progressive authoritarian will be bold, brash, insulting and pushy. It will be an expert impersonation of Donald Trump. Fox will eat this up. They don’t understand subtlety. They will believe that the Democrats are turning authoritarian; that the propaganda has won the day and turned all to the authoritarian mind set. This will not seem fishy to them. They will welcome the new populist for probing interviews and that progressive, using Republican tactics, will win over the impressionable audience.
3. What if our progressive authoritarian is caught in a scandal? How do we address that? — Like Republican scandals, we must mirror. The progressive responds by saying something like, “Oh, my opponent is playing the old game. He’s been caught in scandal after scandal and now he’s trying to make me look like the bad guy. He doesn’t want me to talk about the mistress he keeps in Bedford and so he accuses me. The Republicans are the most corrupt group of child molesting scum this country has ever known and I don’t take any of their accusations seriously. It’s entertaining to hear them whine about this sort of thing but it doesn’t provide any useful information.”
4. If we do it to Republican gerrymandered districts, they’ll just do it to Democratic gerrymandered districts. — Absolutely, and that’s no problem. In the gerrymandered Democratic district, those who respond best to reason predominate — that’s the point. The Republican will have to present emself as a true progressive or at least a liberal. Ey will have to make reasonable arguments, win debates against a reasonable Democrat and explain how eir plan works better for the electorate in that district. If the Republican candidate wins and doesn’t keep the promises, the next election will show a district with a serious distrust of any Republican making the same claims.
5. Is this unethical? — It will certainly distress Democrats who believe that they can reason with MAGA followers. Unfortunately, we must abandon such delusions. Authoritarianism is a disease and it must be addressed like a disease. If there is no direct and effective cure, it must be initially mediated and made less virulent. Once that is accomplished a long-term schedule of medication must then follow to provide an actual cure. I am describing the initial moderation which will be followed by expert psychological intervention in order to effect a cure.

Nationwide Pandemic

The authoritarian type is a pandemic. It is a disease of the self that may be transmitted to damaged personalities by unscrupulous authoritarian leaders craving supplicants. It may be cured one-on-one with a massive army of psychotherapists but that is not practical as a first step. How do we address a pandemic in a practical fashion, even if the initial dose is not entirely effective?

The flaw in the armor of the authoritarian right is that their followers are fickle. The authoritarian follower will follow without question the leader who presents the most public and effective power. We have seen this in Bernie Sanders, who spoke persuasively and directly supported Kentucky coal miners. I was one of the many who suspected that Bernie could have claimed Republican votes in Republican gerrymandered districts, if he had remained the Democratic candidate.

Do the Democrats have the feral guts to take on the Republicans using seized Republican weapons? Will the Democrats continue their campaign of failure by bringing reason to fights over who has the better daddy? Can Democrats challenge authoritarian tactics with benign yet skilled authoritarian actors? Will the Democratic leadership authorize a benign authoritarian inoculation of this fascist authoritarian disease; or, will we resign ourselves to forty years of fascist rule?

Julian S. Taylor is the author of Famine in the Bullpen a book about bringing innovation back to software engineering. Available at or orderable from your local bookstore. Rediscover real browsing at your local bookstore. Also available in ebook and audio formats at Sockwood Press.