Failure by Grandiosity
How to limit the success of a movement.
Grandiosity refers to an “exaggerated sense of one’s greatness, importance, or ability.” It can be a mild trait or in extreme forms part of a clinical delusion. It is a frequent symptom of narcissistic and antisocial personalities. Whatever the case, it may at first garner a lot of attention and support but eventually it is perceived as repulsive. People will catch on to that which is exaggerated, though it may take some time. This is admittedly difficult in the context of misinformation and polarization, but still true nonetheless.
Movements may begin with charismatic, energetic leaders or organizers but will also invariably include a cadre of grandiose extremists. This is true regardless of one’s position in the political circle. I call it a circle because those on the extreme ends, whether that is left or right for example, do similar things…such as attempting to control or coerce people to think, feel, speak, act, and believe in the “approved” or “righteous” way, as if they alone possess the truth. It’s just that they are facing in opposite directions. Extremists will make statements and demands that are grandiose, and these sow the seeds of a movement’s failure. Or at least its failure to thrive.
This observation does not mean that I or others do not support the essential intent of a movement. It does mean that its leaders must be effective in managing grandiose extremists and messaging if they hope to succeed for the long term. In many cases, they are not.
Studies have shown that narcissistic grandiosity predicts greater involvement in LGBTQ and gender activism. Another study has shown that participation in environmental activism can both appeal to and reinforce those with negative traits such as narcissism, psychopathy, and aggression, depending on the focus of activism. One writer has suggested that the left’s treatment of identity politics has resulted in a “…competitive grievance, weaponised victimhood, and a focus on ‘I’ not ‘us’.” There has been plenty written about the corollary effects of right wing movements so I will not repeat that here, except to say the effects are equally or more ineffective and offensive.
As to how unsavory these may be, it depends on whether you support the movement, or not. In my opinion this pattern of negative traits in movements is not restricted to the groups identified above. I have perceived it in national, state, and local efforts, political and otherwise, even when I agree with the core agenda of a movement. I hypothesize here that these dynamics are among the reasons why the 2024 American presidential election turned out the way it did, and also why any “winning” movement will eventually fail. Some have gone as far as identifying 45 terms of “woke” language that Democrats should remove from their messaging. The authors at this link go on to say that “Communicating in authentic ways that welcome rather than drive voters away would be a good start.” Grandiosity drives people away. Eventually.
Again, these critiques do not mean that I or anyone else does not in large part support a particular movement. They are more about emphasizing a pathway to be successful.
As for me I believe that all people should enjoy the same rights, freedoms, protections, and responsibilities, with specific attention paid to those for whom these blessings have been historically denied.
Grandiosity is the difference between zeal, or great energy for something, and zealot, which refers to a person who is fanatical and uncompromising. One of these can advance a movement in positive, effective ways. The other will not. People know the difference, and will “vote with their feet” accordingly.