Judging a book by its cover. Putting lipstick on a pig. A wolf in sheep’s clothing. The emperor has no clothes. The snake oil salesman. Whatever you want to call it, we as a society are guilty of valuing form over substance. Style over content. Perhaps social media is to blame. But a reckoning is in order because Judgment Day is less than a month away.
Management scholars developed theories of charismatic leadership several decades ago. They concluded that charismatic leaders inspire followers to enthusiastically give unquestioned obedience, loyalty, commitment and devotion to such leaders and the causes they represent. They also claim that charisma can cause emotional manipulation and lead followers to distort reality, thereby hindering sound judgment.
Speeches and debates offer cases in point. Martin Luther King motivated his followers to call for social change. Hitler motivated his followers to commit evil acts.
Remember the Kennedy/Nixon debate when Kennedy reportedly asked for the heat to be turned up on debate night because he knew Nixon was prone to sweat? In contrast, Kennedy came off cool as a cucumber.
And then there was the charm and charisma of Ronald Reagan in his debate against Mondale when he quipped, “I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth, and inexperience.”
Romney pummeled Obama in their first debate of that election cycle because it was clear that Obama assumed he could just show up and win the day. Romney was confident and self-assured and was declared the victor by all who watched the debate even though, with a closer look, it was clear that Romney spewed forth a pile of lies about inflation, the national debt, and more.
Many critics claim that Vance won last week’s debate against Walz because of his smooth and slick delivery. NPR fact-checked Vance’s statements and claimed that he lied about guns, healthcare, taxes, China, and immigration.
Donald Trump reportedly selected Mike Pence as his running mate because he thought he looked the part. He also likes the Lincolnesque looks of J.D. Vance. So, another part in this form-over-substance issue is optics.
Social scientists say our brains process emotions more quickly than thoughts or facts. We receive input and then attach an emotion to it before we actually think through the information.
In business, social science experts advise organizations to “avoid the charisma or optics trap.” Instead, they urge organizations to use unbiased assessment tools.
When judging candidates, the League of Women Voters stresses the importance of looking past the superficial optics or “form” and asks voters to do the challenging work of uncovering the facts. The League suggests that voters do a deep dive on the positions that candidates take. It encourages voters to use voter guides and sample ballots to learn as much as possible about the candidates. It suggests voters assess candidates’ takes on critical issues and then assess each candidate’s honesty, integrity, and intelligence. The League encourages voters to recognize distortion tactics such as name-calling, rumormongering, and loaded statements. It also asks voters to spot phony issues such as passing the blame and promising the sky. Finally, the League encourages voters to make democracy work and get involved in the process.
The political philosopher Edmund Burke once said, “Hypocrisy can afford to be magnificent in its promises, for never intending to go beyond promise, it costs nothing.” Something to think about.
Maria Grant was the principal-in-charge of the Federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, piano, and nature.
Wilson Dean says
What a perfect article for the times we live in. Yes, many of us (including myself) were initially inclined to give JD Vance the “victory” in the Vice President debate, as he confidently and slickly laid out his talking points. Upon further reflection, however, one realizes that these are often the same attributes displayed by the used car salesman trying to sell us a clunker or someone trying to get us to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
We as citizens need to start viewing all programs proposed in this election with a more critical eye. Even though I support her goals, I would like to see a deeper dive on Harris’ plans to finance her home buying and startup business tax benefits. On the other hand, the vast majority of the country’s economists have already debunked the absurdity of the Trump economic plans that include huge tariffs on other countries’ goods, deporting a large segment of the labor force, and Vance’s claims that immigrants are raising housing costs (they actually are easing housing prices because they represent such a large percentage of the construction workforce).
Yet Trump followers stand behind his proposals without a second (or even first) thought. It’s time we citizens start exercising our role of living in a democracy by challenging what our leaders are telling us. If voters are not up to that, then we are headed toward the autocracy Trump so desperately wants where his dreams of being a wannabe dictator come true.
Maria Grant says
Thanks so much for your comments and your call for all voters to be responsible citizens and seek truth.
Rick Skinner says
And here I thought debating was about each side marshaling logic and facts in such a manner as to demonstrate the superiority of one’s argument over the other side. Foolish of me. From what I can tell from pundits and commentators, making statements that are factually false but doing so in a glib fashion is superior debating. Mr. Vance made several completely false assertions and when given an opportunity to correct his running mate’s false assertion of a rigged 2020 presidential election simply deflected.
Yes, Mr. Walz found it difficult to explain why he claimed to be in Tianamen Square when not even in China at that time. He must be more careful. Still, I find myself on the side of those who like substance over style, facts over lies and a little exaggeration over craven cowardice.
Maria Grant says
Thank you for your comments. I agree wholeheartedly about preferring substance over style.
trudy wonder says
Thank you Maria – once again, you’ve touched on a critical issue for our country and our humanity. While it may sound like no more than a personal preference – one we come across for nearly everything we buy – the effects of this choice in an election can be much more insidious.
Your article reminded me of a Slate magazine piece I read called “How Hitler Conquered Germany (March 2017).”
Hitler’s great insight, which makes him unique among historical actors, was the recognition that violence and propaganda could and should be an integrated phenomenon.
There have been multiple reports over the years of Trump expressing a keen interest in, even admiration for, Hitler’s rule over Nazi Germany.
According to Joseph Goebbels, what was distinctive about the Nazis was “the ability to see into the soul of the people and to speak the language of the man in the street.”
In the past, Trump acknowledged owning a copy of Hitler’s memoir, Mein Kampf, as previously noted by Trump’s first wife, Ivana, in her book about their marriage. (Mein Kampf thas been called a “complete manual of propaganda”.)
More recently, he denies this. Trump’s denial came after he made a series of incendiary remarks referring to his political opponents as “vermin” and saying illegal immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country.It is said that Hitler held an intuitive understanding of how self-definition is achieved through ‘other’-rejection, seizing power through a serial creation of enemies. For even greater effect, he eventually merged all enemies into one super-enemy, the Jews .
A magician of illusion, Hitler used simplicity, repetition and strong illusory imagery to create a “truly religio-psychological phenomenon”. Hitler’s chief architect, Albert Speer, told the Nuremberg Tribunal that “what distinguished the Third Reich from all previous dictatorships was its use of all the means of communication to sustain itself and to deprive its objects of the power of independent thought.”
Thus, the Third Reich was the emanation of a collective as well as an individual’s imagination – a form of group narcissism, according to historian/psychologist Jay Y. Gonen: “In a world that is seen through a narcissistic tunnel vision, only oneself or one’s group has any rights.”
In historian Aristotle Kallis’ view, propaganda is a form of truth “reshaped through the lens of regime intentions.” In his view, the Nazis believed their lies were permissible since the end always justified the means.
Sound familiar? Just last week I heard JD Vance admit to an American journalist that he was lying about the Springfield, Ohio pet eating stories because, “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do.”
Another core part of Nazi grand theory was the dethronement of logic and reason and the celebration of emotion; the nature of its appeal was to feeling rather than thinking.
For this reason, propaganda had to be simple and primitive, appealing to what Hitler described as man’s inner Schweinehund (“pig dog,” a sort of deprecatory idiom for one’s inner self). In more modern brain science, we refer to this as the “lizard brain” – that portion (the amygdala) that appeals to the most primitive of our senses and emotions, devoid of rational thought to counter its conclusions or offer more viable, humane options.
Another core ‘rule’ Nazi grand theory is dramatic simplification. Framing the world as “either- or” .
Goebbels was also a proponent of the “repeated exposure effect” – aka sensory exhaustion. The citizen was not a target to be persuaded so much as a victim to be conquered. Use just a few powerful slogans and keep repeating them to the point of complete and total takeover of thought.
Nazi theorist and proponent of propaganda Walther Schulze-Wechsungen wrote:
“Many a one laughed at the propaganda of the NSDAP [National Socialist German Workers’ Party] in the past from a position of superiority. It is true that we had only one thing to say, and we yelled and screamed and propagandized it again and again with a stubbornness that drove the ‘wise’ to desperation. We proclaimed it with such simplicity that they thought it absurd and almost childish. They did not understand that repetition is the precursor to success and simplicity is the key to the emotional and mental world of the masses. We wanted to appeal to the intuitive world of the great masses, not the understanding of the intellectuals.”The psychology of the Third Reich was to conceive of a partnership in wishful thinking in which the masses were self-deluded as well as other-deluded. Persuasion in such cases offers an idea of solidarity and the target of that persuasion is more co-conspirator than victim, an invitation to share in the creation of a hyperbolic fiction.
That said, we have a choice in what and whom we believe. For now.
Maria Grant says
Trudy, I love reading your insightful comments. I wish more voters understood how important this election is and took it as seriously as you do.
Harvey Worthington says
Was Tim Waltz chosen as Kamala Harris’ running mate because of his form or his substance? Asking for a friend. -HR
Maria Grant says
Harvey, according to the articles I read, Harris selected Walz because she appreciated his accomplishments in Minnesota regarding reproductive rights, tax credits, paid leave and gun safety. She also liked him as a person.