Language

Sometimes our minds play tricks on us. They can convince us that untrue things are true, or vice versa.

Cognitive distortions are bad mental habits. They’re patterns of thinking that tend to be negatively slanted, inaccurate, and often repetitive.

These unhelpful ways of thinking can limit one’s ability to function and excel in the world. Cognitive distortions are linked to anxiety, depression, addiction, and eating disorders. They reinforce negative thinking loops, which tend to compound and worsen over time.

Irrational thinking

Cognitive distortions are systematic patterns of thought that can lead to inaccurate or irrational conclusions. These distortions often serve as mental traps, skewing our perception of reality and affecting our emotional well-being. Let’s delve into three common types: emotional reasoning, counterfactual thinking, and catastrophizing.

Mental traps, by Midjourney
  1. Emotional Reasoning: This distortion involves using one’s emotions as a barometer for truth. For example, if you feel anxious, you might conclude that something bad is going to happen, even if there’s no objective evidence to support that belief. Emotional reasoning can create a self-perpetuating cycle: your emotions validate your distorted thoughts, which in turn intensify your emotions.
  2. Counterfactual Thinking: This involves imagining alternative scenarios that could have occurred but didn’t. While this can be useful for problem-solving and learning, it becomes a cognitive distortion when it leads to excessive rumination and regret. For instance, thinking “If only I had done X, then Y wouldn’t have happened” can make you stuck in a loop of what-ifs, preventing you from moving forward.
  3. Catastrophizing: This is the tendency to imagine the worst possible outcome in any given situation. It’s like always expecting a minor stumble to turn into a catastrophic fall. This distortion can lead to heightened stress and anxiety, as you’re constantly bracing for disaster.

More cognitive distortions

Cognitive distortionExplanationExample
all-or-nothing thinkingviewing everything in absolute and extremely polarized terms"nothing good ever happens" or "I'm always behind"
blamingfocusing on other people as source of your negative feelings, & refusing to take responsibility for changing yourself; or conversely, blaming yourself harshly for things that were out of your control
catastrophizingbelief that disaster will strike no matter what, and that what will happen will be too awful to bear"What if tragedy strikes?" "What if it happens to me?"
counterfactual thinkingA kind of mental bargaining or longing to live in the alternate timeline where one had made a different decision"If only I could have done it differently..."
dichotomous thinkingviewing events or people in all-or-nothing terms
discounting positivesclaiming that positive things you or others do are trivial, or ignoring good things that have happened to you
emotional reasoningletting feelings guide interpretation of reality; a way of judging yourself or your circumstances based on your emotions"If I feel that way, it must be true"
filteringmentally "filters out" the positive aspects of a situation while magnifying the negative aspects
fortune-tellingpredicting the future negatively
framing effectstendency for decisions to be shaped by inconsequential features of choice problems
halo effectbelief that one's success in a domain automagically qualifies them to have skills and expertise in other areas
illusory correlationtendency to perceive a relationship between two variables when no relation existshttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation
inability to disconfirmreject any evidence or arguments that might contradict negative thoughts
intuitive heuristicstendency when faced with a difficult question of answering an easier question instead, typically without noticing the substitution
just-world hypothesisbelief that good things tend to happen to good people, while bad things tend to happen to bad people
labelingassigning global negative traits to self & others; making a judgment about yourself or someone else as a person, versus seeing the behavior as something they did that doesn't define them as an individual
ludic fallacyin assessing the potential amount of risk in a system or decision, mistaking the real randomness of life for the well-defined risk of casinos
magical thinkinga way of imagining you can wish reality into existence through the sheer force of your mind. Part of a child developmental phase that not everyone grows out of.http://doctorparadox.net/essays/magical-thinking/
magnificationexaggerating the importance of flaws and problems while minimizing the impact of desirable qualities and achievements
mind readingassuming what someone is thinking w/o sufficient evidence; jumping to conclusions
negative filteringfocusing exclusively on negatives & ignoring positives
nominal realismchild development phase where names of objects aren't just symbols but intrinsic parts of the objects. Sometimes called word realism, and related to magical thinking
overgeneralizingmaking a rule or predicting globally negative patterns on the basis of single incident
projectionattributing qualities to external actors or forces that one feels within and either a) wishes to promote and have echoed back to onself, or b) eradicate or squelch from oneself by believing that the quality exists elsewhere, in others, but not in oneself
provincialismthe tendency to see things only from the point of view of those in charge of our immediate in-groups
shouldsa list of ironclad rules one lives and punishes oneself by"I should exercise more" "I should eat better"
teleological fallacyillusion that you know exactly where you're going, knew exactly where you were going in the past, & that others have succeeded in the past by knowing where they were goingacademia especially is rife with this one
what if?keep asking series of ?s on prospective events & being unsatisfied with any answers

Read More:

30 Common psychological biases ↗

These systematic errors in our thinking and logic affect our everyday choices, behaviors, and evaluations of others.

Top Mental Models for Thinkers ↗

Model thinking is an excellent way of improving our cognition and decision making abilities.

24 Logical fallacies list ↗

Recognizing and avoiding logical fallacies is essential for critical thinking and effective communication.

Read more

Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that occur when arguments are constructed or evaluated. They are deceptive and misleading, often leading to false or weak conclusions. Recognizing and avoiding logical fallacies is essential for critical thinking and effective communication.

These flaws in rhetorical logic can be observed aplenty in modern political and civil discourse. They are among the easiest types of argument to dispel, because their basic type has been discredited and compiled together with other discarded forms of rational persuasion, to make sure that ensuing generations don’t fall for the same tired old unethical ideas.

By understanding and identifying these common logical fallacies, individuals can sharpen their critical thinking skills and engage in more productive, rational discussions. Recognizing fallacies also helps avoid being swayed by deceptive or unsound arguments — which abound in increasing volume thanks to the prevalence of misinformation, disinformation, and disingenuous forms of motivated reasoning.

Types of logical fallacies

There are several types of logical fallacies, each with its own pitfalls. Here are a few examples:

The Straw Man argument, illustrated
  1. Ad Hominem: This fallacy attacks the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. For instance, dismissing someone’s opinion on climate change because they’re not a scientist is an ad hominem fallacy.
  2. Straw Man: This involves misrepresenting an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. If someone argues for better healthcare and is accused of wanting “socialized medicine,” that’s a straw man.
  3. Appeal to Authority: This fallacy relies on the opinion of an “expert” who may not actually be qualified in the relevant field. Just because a celebrity endorses a product doesn’t mean it’s effective.
  4. False Dichotomy: This fallacy presents only two options when, in fact, more exist. For example, stating that “you’re either with us or against us” oversimplifies complex issues.
  5. Slippery Slope: This fallacy argues that a single action will inevitably lead to a series of negative events, without providing evidence for such a chain reaction.
  6. Circular Reasoning: In this fallacy, the conclusion is used as a premise, creating a loop that lacks substantive proof. Saying “I’m trustworthy because I say I am” is an example.
  7. Hasty Generalization: This involves making a broad claim based on insufficient evidence. For instance, meeting two rude people from a city and concluding that everyone from that city is rude is a hasty generalization.

Understanding logical fallacies equips you to dissect arguments critically, making you a more informed participant in discussions. It’s a skill that’s invaluable in both professional and personal settings. Arm yourself with knowledge about this list of logical fallacies:

Logical fallacyExplanationExample / Notes
ad hominem attackattacking something about the character of the opposing side, instead of engaging with the argument or offering a critique
ambiguityusing double meanings and language ambiguity to mislead
anecdotalappeal to a personal, individual observation as relates to the topic in questionoften used to dismiss statistical analysis
appeal to authorityusing opinion of authority figure or institution in place of an actual argument
appeal to emotionmanipulating emotional response in lieu of valid argumenta huge part of Donald Trump's playbook
appeal to naturearguing that b/c something is “natural” it is valid / justified / inevitable / good / ideal
bandwagonappealing to popularity as evidence of validationRetort: "When everyone once believed the earth was flat — did that make it true?"
begging the questionwhen conclusion is included in the premiseone form of circular argument (tautology is another)
black or whitepresenting two alternative states as the only options, when more possibilities existvery commonly used by political and media resources as a way to polarize issues
burden of proofclaiming the responsibility lies with someone else to disprove one's claim (& not with the claimant to prove it)
composition/divisionassuming what is true of one part of something must be applied to all parts
fallacy fallacypresuming that a poorly argued claim, or one in which a fallacy has been made, is wrong
false causepresuming that a real or perceived relationship between things implies causation
gambler's fallacyputting a tremendous amount of weight on previous events, believing they will influence future outcomes (even when outcome is random)also a psychological bias
geneticvalue judging based on where something comes from
loaded questionasking a question with an assumption built in, so it can't be answered without appearing guilty
middle groundclaiming a compromise between two extremes must be the truththe media establishment is often guilty of this for a number of reasons: lack of time for thorough inquiry; need for ratings; available field of pundits and wonks; established programming formats, and so on
no true scotsmanmaking an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws
personal incredulitysaying that because a concept or argument is difficult to understand, it can't be true
slippery slopearguing that a small change or decision will inevitably lead to larger-than-intended (perhaps even disastrous) consequences rapidly
special pleadingmoving goalpost to create exceptions when a claim is shown to be false
strawmanmisrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack
texas sharpshootercherry-picking data to suit an argument, or finding a pattern to fit a presumptionthe impending era of big data will increase the prevalence of this type of sheister
tu quoqueavoiding having to engage with criticism by criticizing the accuser

Read more:

30 Common Psychological Biases ↗

These systematic errors in our thinking and logic affect our everyday choices, behaviors, and evaluations of others.

28 Cognitive Distortions ↗

Cognitive distortions are bad mental habits. They’re patterns of thinking that tend to be negatively slanted, inaccurate, and often repetitive.

Think Better with Mental Models ↗

Mental models are a kind of strategic building blocks we can use to make sense of the world around us.

Read more

word salad

Word salad is a term used to describe disorganized speech that can occur in various mental health conditions, including some personality disorders like Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). In the context of NPD, word salad may not be as severe or disorganized as it is in conditions like schizophrenia, but it can still be difficult to follow and understand.

Word salad in NPD is characterized by a mix of unrelated or loosely related words, phrases, or ideas, which may be used to manipulate, confuse, or maintain control in a conversation. This type of speech may be a defense mechanism employed by someone with NPD to avoid responsibility, deflect criticism, or maintain their sense of superiority.

Word salad almost seems like a kind of pseudoscience or paleological babble that narcissists use to hold the floor with their own agenda, such that anyone who is trying to challenge them can’t even get a word in edgewise. It is a common tactic of emotional predators, who seek to disorient and confuse their targets in order to achieve their hidden agendas and goals.

word salad from a narcissist

Some common features of word salad in NPD include:

  1. Tangential thinking: The person may go off on tangents, bringing up unrelated topics or ideas in an attempt to distract from the main point or issue at hand.
  2. Circular reasoning: The person may engage in circular arguments, repeating the same points over and over without ever reaching a resolution or addressing the underlying problem.
  3. Evasion: The person may use vague language, refuse to answer direct questions, or change the subject to avoid taking responsibility or admitting fault.
  4. Gaslighting: The person may use word salad to make others doubt their own perceptions or understanding, in order to maintain control and avoid accountability.

It is important to note that not everyone with NPD exhibits word salad. However, when it does occur, it can be a source of frustration and confusion for those interacting with the individual. Effective communication with someone who engages in word salad may require patience, setting boundaries, and seeking support from a mental health professional.

Word salad in cults

Word salad can also be used as a tactic by cults and other high control groups to create confusion and maintain control over their members. This technique involves the use of jargon, ambiguities, and convoluted language that might sound profound but is ultimately meaningless or contradictory.

By employing such language, leaders can create an illusion of insight and wisdom, often leading members to believe they must align themselves closely with the group to understand its teachings fully. The confusion created by word salad can hinder critical thinking, making it difficult for members to question or challenge the group’s ideology or leadership. This method thus reinforces dependency and control, ensuring that members remain committed to the group’s principles and less likely to seek external perspectives. In the realm of manipulation, word salad is a subtle but potent tool for influencing thoughts and behaviors.

Know the cult warning signs, and keep an eye on the use of word salad jargon in potential groups you may be considering joining.

Read more

phobia indoctrination, illustrated

Phobia indoctrination is one of the principle ways a charismatic leader will lull potential followers into his thrall, by putting them into a state of perpetual fear and anxiety. They know, either instinctively or through training (or both), that people can be induced into a prolonged state of confusion easily, and that many people in states of confusion act quite irrationally. Abusers, cult leaders, and other controllers use demagoguery and other tricks to hide in plain sight and continue to accrue power while passing themselves off as harmless or extremely patriotic.

These chaos agents use emotional manipulation and other tactics of emotional predators as a tool of control. They whip followers up into a fear frenzy frequently enough to instill a set of phobia-like instinctual reactions to chosen stimuli. In addition to stoking fears of the enemies at the gates, they also inculcate irrational fears of the consequences of questioning their authority — invoking authoritarianism. Any doubts expressed about the leadership or its doctrine are subject to terrifying negative results. Cults use this formula to wield undue influence over followers, and prevent them from questioning or leaving the group.

Phobia indoctrination is a tool of cults

As part of a larger overall program of brainwashing or mind control, cults and destructive organizations use imaginary extremes (going to hell, being possessed by demons, failing miserably at life, race war, Leftist apocalypse, etc.) to shock followers into refusing to examine any evidence whatsoever. A form of unethical hypnosis, phobia indoctrination can now be carried out on a mass scale thanks to the internet and our massive media apparatus. Be sure to be on the lookout for any cult warning signs in groups and messaging all around you.

Sociopaths and other types of emotional predators are taking ample advantage of their advantage in time and distance over the slow pace of justice. The wielding of fear as a cudgel in American politics has reached a fever pitch, with anti-Critical Race Theory hysteria, anti-vaxxers, anti-government types, anti-science, Lost Cause-revival zombie MAGA footsoldiers screeching about the “freedom!!!” they wish the government to provide them for persecuting their enemies, and other social horrors are merely the tip of the climate changing iceberg.

phobia indoctrination, illustrated

Phobia indoctrination tactics

Strategies of phobia indoctrination include Repetition and Conditioning, where fears are built through constant exposure; Misinformation and Propaganda, using false information to paint something as dangerous; Utilizing Existing Fears, exaggerating known fears or anxieties; and Social Pressure and Group Dynamics, leveraging social influences to convince others that irrational fears are common.

Other tactics include Authority and Expert Manipulation, where false credentials are used to lend legitimacy; Emotional Manipulation, appealing directly to emotions; Isolation and Control, where a person’s environment is manipulated; and Media Manipulation, using media to provoke fear.

Phobia indoctrination and cults book list:

Or, support local bookstores instead of Jeff Bezos:

Related to phobia indoctrination:

Cult Dictionary ↗

We had better get familiar with the lexicon and vocabulary of the coming era, so we can fight the creeping scourge of thought control roiling the land.

Jim Jones toasting his cult members with a cup of cyanide, by Midjourney

Disinformation Dictionary ↗

Disinformation is meant to confuse, throw off, distract, polarize, and otherwise create conflict within and between target populations.

Disinformation, by Midjourney

Cult Warning Signs: How to recognize cultish groups ↗

Recognizing cult warning signs can be vital in identifying and understanding the risk before getting involved with a group who may not have your best interests in mind.

cult warning signs, by Midjourney
Read more

cult warning signs

Cults, in general, refer to organizations or groups that often manipulate and exploit members, typically by using unorthodox beliefs and practices. Recognizing cult warning signs can be vital in identifying and understanding the risk before getting involved with a high demand group that may not have your best interests in mind.

  1. Excessive Devotion to a Leader: Cults usually revolve around charismatic leaders who demand absolute loyalty and obedience. A disproportionate reverence for these figures may serve as a red flag.
  2. Us vs. Them Mentality: Cults often draw clear lines between insiders and outsiders, emphasizing that only they possess the truth. This divisive mindset encourages isolation from family, friends, and society, leading to further control over the members.
  3. Coercive Persuasion and Manipulation: High-pressure tactics are common in recruiting and retaining members. This may include controlling information, employing guilt or fear, manipulating emotions to maintain allegiance, and other tactics of emotional predators.
  4. Excessive Financial Demands: Many cults require significant financial contributions, sometimes even requiring members to relinquish personal assets. This financial control reinforces dependence on the group.
  5. Rigidity of Beliefs and Practices: A cult’s ideology is often absolute, with no room for questioning or dissent. Those who challenge the beliefs are typically met with hostility, punishment, or expulsion. This fundamentalist mentality permeates the entire group’s thinking and behavior.
  6. Unrealistic Promises: Cults may lure individuals with promises of spiritual enlightenment, exclusive knowledge, or personal success, often unrealistic or unattainable. These promises can entice individuals seeking meaning or connection in their lives.
  7. Control Over Personal Lives: Intense control over members’ personal lives, including relationships, employment, and living arrangements, can be a clear warning sign. Such control can erode personal autonomy and self-identity.
  8. Emotional Abuse and Fear Tactics: Cults frequently use fear, shame, and guilt to control members, creating an environment where members feel constant anxiety about meeting the group’s standards or displeasing the leader.
  9. A Focus on Recruitment: Many cults prioritize recruitment above all else, viewing every interaction as an opportunity to bring others into the fold. The pressure to recruit can be relentless and is often a central component of the group’s activities.
  10. Impacts on Health and Wellbeing: The demanding nature of cult involvement can lead to negative effects on mental, emotional, and physical health. This can manifest as anxiety, depression, exhaustion, or other health issues, often ignored or downplayed by the group.
  11. Use of hypnosis and neurolinguistic programming (NLP) techniques

Recognizing these warning signs is crucial for individuals, families, and communities to understand the potential dangers and take appropriate steps to protect themselves. The subject of cults is sensitive, often tied to deeply personal and societal fears, and it requires careful consideration and empathy.

Resources on cults

  1. Cult Education Institute (CEI) – Website
    • Overview: Operated by Rick Alan Ross, an internationally known expert on cults, CEI offers extensive resources, including a database of information on specific groups, techniques for intervention, and guidelines to recognize coercive persuasion.
    • Target Audience: Anyone looking to educate themselves about cults, from concerned family members to academic researchers.
  2. International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) – Website
    • Overview: ICSA is a global network of people concerned about psychological manipulation and abuse in cultic or high-demand groups. They offer conferences, publications, and support networks.
    • Target Audience: Researchers, professionals, former cult members, and concerned family and friends.
  3. Freedom of Mind Resource Center – Website
    • Overview: Created by Steven Hassan, a mental health counselor and former cult member, this site offers resources on combating mind control in various settings, including cults, terrorism, and human trafficking.
    • Target Audience: General public, mental health professionals, and individuals directly affected by cults.
  4. Cult Information Centre (CIC) – Website
    • Overview: Based in the UK, the CIC provides information, advice, and support to those concerned about cults. They offer educational programs and direct help to those affected.
    • Target Audience: UK residents, though the information is applicable globally.
  5. Reddit’s Cults Community – Subreddit
    • Overview: This online community allows individuals to discuss personal experiences, share research, and ask questions related to cults. Moderated for respectful dialogue, it offers a more informal but still informative perspective.
    • Target Audience: Those looking for community interaction, shared experiences, and casual information on the subject.
Read more

Two psychologists ended up unlocking important keys to both the mind and to economics. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman created the field of behavioral economics and revolutionized cognitive psychology with the discovery of a set of cognitive and psychological biases that affect our decision-making abilities.

These systematic errors in our thinking and logic affect our everyday choices, behaviors, and evaluations of others. For more on this topic, please also see the Cognitive Distortions and Logical Fallacies data sets.

Heuristics: Mental shortcuts

Psychological biases are often the result of heuristics, which are mental shortcuts that help people make decisions quickly, but sometimes at the expense of accuracy.

One of the most well-known biases is confirmation bias, which is the tendency to search for, interpret, and remember information in a way that confirms one’s pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses. This can lead individuals to ignore or dismiss evidence that challenges their views.

Another common bias is the anchoring effect, where individuals rely too heavily on an initial piece of information, known as the “anchor,” when making decisions. For example, if you are told that a shirt is on sale for $50, down from $100, you might perceive it as a good deal, even if the shirt is not worth $50.

The availability heuristic is a mental shortcut that leads people to overestimate the likelihood of events that are easily recalled. For instance, if someone recently heard about a plane crash, they might overestimate the dangers of flying, even though statistically, it is much safer than driving.

The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where individuals with low ability at a task overestimate their ability. Essentially, they are not skilled enough to recognize their own incompetence. On the flip side, highly competent individuals may underestimate their relative competence.

The halo effect is a type of bias where the perception of one positive trait of a person or thing influences the perception of other traits. For example, if someone is physically attractive, they are often perceived as more intelligent, talented, or kind.

Loss aversion is the tendency to prefer avoiding losses over acquiring equivalent gains. People are generally more upset about losing $20 than they are happy about gaining $20. This bias can lead to risk-averse behavior.

The bandwagon effect refers to the tendency of people to align their beliefs and behaviors with those of a group. This can be seen in various social phenomena such as fashion trends and political movements.

The hindsight bias is the inclination to see events as being more predictable after they have happened. People often believe that they “knew it all along,” which can create overconfidence in their ability to predict events.

These are just a handful of the full list of 30 psychological biases detailed below in the dictionary table. Arm yourself with awareness of these biases, as striving to think critically can help in making more rational and informed decisions.

Psychological biases dictionary

Psychological biasExplanationExample
action biasBelief that when we're faced with an ambiguous situation or challenge, that we must take some action vs. doing nothing, whether doing something is a good idea or not (and often quickly, without taking the time to fully examine the problem); also known as "naive interventionism"sports enthusiasts rooting for their favorite teams are notorious for the superstitious rituals they are in psychological anguish if not able to perform, despite the objective fact that they have no ability whatsoever to affect the outcome (in pop culture, Robert DeNiro's character in Silver Linings Playbook exemplifies this)
adjustment heuristicTendency to start from an implicitly suggested reference point when assessing probabilities (the "anchor") and making adjustments to that reference point to reach an estimate
affect heuristicWe tend to underestimate the role of feelings of liking & disliking in our judgments and decision-makingInstead of considering risks and benefits independently, individuals with a negative attitude towards nuclear power may consider its benefits as low and risks as high, thereby leading to a more negative risk-benefit correlation than would be evident under conditions without time pressure (Finucane, Alhakami, Slovic, & Johnson, 2000)
anchoring effectFixating on a value or # that gets compared to everything else, b/c we tend to compare/contrast limited sets of items (aka “relativity trap”) — store sale items take advantage of this (so we compare the new value to the old, but not the old value on its own as a measure of worth)
availability heuristicTendency to make quick "intuitive" judgments about the size of given categories by the ease with which particular instances/examples of the class come to mind
bandwagon effectSimilar to groupthink, arising from our built-in desire to fit in and conform, we tend to "go along with the trend" when it becomes apparent to us
contagion heuristicTendency to avoid contact with people or objects viewed as "contaminated" by previous contact with someone or something else viewed as "bad"Related to/inclusive of magical thinking — believing a person's sweater still carries their "essence," e.g.
confirmation biasWe tend to agree w/those who agree with us & avoid associating with those who don't, to avoid the discomfort of cognitive dissonance (the Internet has sadly made this worse)
conjunction fallacyA formal fallacy that occurs when one believes a specific condition is more probable than a general one
current moment biasPreference to experience pleasure now, & put off the “pain” til later; lack of ability to imagine ourselves in the future & altering today's behaviors accordingly
disjunction fallacyMisjudging that the disjunction of two events must be as likely as either of the events individually (as definitionally, via probability theory)
false consensus effectPeople tend to overestimate the degree to which the general public shares their beliefs and opinionspotentially related to the availability heuristic, the self-serving bias, and naive realism
focusing illusionPlacing too much emphasis on one aspect of an event, outweighing its importance and causing error in judgment
Gambler's fallacyPutting a tremendous amount of weight on previous events, believing they will influence future outcomes (even when outcome is random)also frequently a logical fallacy
Identifiable Victim EffectTendency for people to care deeply about a single, specific tragedy but seem disinterested in vast atrocities affecting thousands or millions of peoplemore broadly, abstract concepts motivate us less than individual cases (especially when given visual evidence)
ingroup biasOverestimating abilities and values of our immediate group & underestimating that of outgroups (oxytocin plays a role)
naive realismThe belief that each one of us sees the world objectively, while the people who disagree with us must be either uninformed or irrational"Everyone is influenced by ideology and self-interest. Except for me. I see things as they are."
negativity biasWe pay more attention to bad news
neglecting probabilityReason we're afraid to fly even though it's statistically far more likely to be in a car accident (same way we fear terrorism but not more mundane accidents that are far more likely)
observational selection biasSuddenly noticing things we didn't notice before & assuming frequency has increased (also contributes to feeling appearance of certain things or events can't be coincidence)
optimism biasTendency to believe that good things happen more often than bad things
planning fallacySystematic tendency toward unrealistic optimism about the time it takes to comple
positive expectation biasSense that our luck has to change for the better
post-purchase rationalizationMaking ourselves feel better after we make crappy decisions (aka Buyer's Stockholm Syndrome)
projection biasAssumption that most people think just like us (false consensus bias is related: thinking that others agree with us)
resemblance biasTendency to ignore statistical facts and use resemblance as a simplifying heuristic to make difficult judgments
self-serving biasTendency to evaluate ambiguous or complex information in a way that is beneficial to the speaker's interests, as well as to claim responsibility for successes and attribute failures to others or to uncontrollable external factors
shifting baseline syndromeWe tend to use very recent data points in our research (even when more data is available) and thus can miss picking up on some long-term trends
status-quo biasWe fear change, so tend to make choices that guarantee things remain the same (& by extension, assume that any other choice will be inferior, or make things worse)
treadmill effectOur desire for the new version of a product or service is acute, even if upgrades are minor & incremental; but the pleasure we get from the new object wears off quickly to leave us back at the original satisfaction baseline

Read More:

Top Mental Models for Thinkers ↗

Model thinking is an excellent way of improving our cognition and decision making abilities.

28 Cognitive distortions list ↗

Cognitive distortions are bad mental habits and unhelpful ways of thinking that can limit one’s ability to function in the world.

24 Logical fallacies list ↗

Recognizing and avoiding logical fallacies is essential for critical thinking and effective communication.

Read more

Psychological projection is a defense mechanism that occurs when an individual unconsciously attributes their own feelings, thoughts, or attributes to another person. Projection is a way for people to cope with and protect themselves from unwanted or uncomfortable emotions such as guilt, anger, or anxiety. In essence, psychological projection involves transferring one’s own emotions, thoughts, or motives onto someone else, as a means to avoid confronting or dealing with them directly.

Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, initially conceptualized projection as a defense mechanism. According to Freud, the mind has various ways to protect itself from psychological distress or anxiety, and projection is one of many methods. While Freud’s work laid the foundation for understanding projection, our understanding of the concept has evolved over time, with many modern psychologists examining its cognitive, social, and emotional aspects.

Several factors contribute to the likelihood of an individual engaging in psychological projection. These factors include personality traits, social and cultural influences, and situational factors. People who are more prone to projection often have a higher level of neuroticism or difficulty regulating their emotions. Social and cultural factors can also play a role, as people may be more likely to project certain emotions or traits onto others depending on societal norms and expectations. Situational factors, such as stress or emotional conflict, can further exacerbate the tendency to project.

Types of projection

There are various types of psychological projection, including:

  1. Complementary projection: This occurs when an individual projects their own feelings or thoughts onto someone who has a complementary role in their life, such as a partner or coworker. This type of projection can often be seen in relationships, where one person may accuse their partner of being unfaithful when, in fact, they are the ones who are struggling with feelings of infidelity.
  2. Complimentary projection: In this form of projection, an individual attributes positive qualities or traits that they themselves possess onto someone else. This may be done to reinforce a positive self-image or to maintain a sense of self-worth.
  3. Projective identification: This is a more complex form of projection in which an individual not only attributes their own emotions, thoughts, or motives onto another person but also manipulates the other person into actually exhibiting those characteristics. This can be seen in interpersonal relationships where one person tries to control or manipulate the other to confirm their own beliefs or fears.
  4. Collective projection: This occurs when a group of individuals projects their shared feelings, thoughts, or motives onto another group, often as a means of maintaining group cohesion or protecting the group’s image. This type of projection can be seen in situations of intergroup conflict, where one group might blame another for problems that actually stem from within their own group.

Negative consequences of projection

Psychological projection can have several negative consequences, both for the individual engaging in projection and for those on the receiving end. For the projector, it can prevent them from taking responsibility for their actions, feelings, or thoughts, thereby hindering their personal growth and emotional development. It can also distort their perception of reality, leading to poor decision-making and strained relationships.

For those on the receiving end, psychological projection can be confusing, hurtful, and damaging. It can lead to misunderstandings, conflicts, and emotional distress. Additionally, being subjected to projection can cause individuals to question their own reality and self-worth, potentially leading to feelings of self-doubt or depression.

Projection in politics

Politicians and their supporters often engage in projection as a way to deflect criticism, discredit opponents, and maintain a positive image of themselves or their party. Projection in politics can manifest in various ways, including the following:

  1. Accusing opponents of misconduct: Politicians may accuse their opponents of engaging in unethical or illegal activities that they themselves are involved in, as a way to deflect attention from their own actions and create doubt about the opposition (classic example: when then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich waged a campaign against then-President Bill Clinton for having an affair, while he himself was having an affair with a Congressional aide on his staff).
  2. Misattributing motives: Politicians might project their own motives or goals onto their opponents, suggesting that the other side is pursuing an agenda driven by selfish or malicious intent. This can be a way to delegitimize the opposition’s policy proposals or campaign messaging.
  3. Stereotyping and scapegoating: Projection can also be seen in the form of stereotyping and scapegoating minority groups or other marginalized communities. Politicians may project their own insecurities, fears, bigotries, or prejudices onto these groups, blaming them for social or economic problems, as a way to rally support and distract from the real issues at hand.
  4. Groupthink and collective projection: Political parties, factions, or movements may engage in collective projection, projecting their own faults or shortcomings onto rival groups. This can help maintain group cohesion and reinforce a shared identity, but it can also contribute to political polarization and conflict.

Projection in politics can have several negative consequences, including the distortion of facts and reality, the exacerbation of political polarization, and the perpetuation of stereotypes and prejudice. It can also hinder constructive dialogue and compromise, making it more difficult for politicians and policymakers to address pressing issues and find solutions to problems.

To counteract the influence of projection in politics, it is essential for individuals to remain vigilant and critically examine the claims and accusations made by politicians and political parties. Media outlets and journalists also play a crucial role in fact-checking and holding politicians accountable for their statements and actions. Encouraging open and honest dialogue, promoting empathy and understanding, and fostering critical thinking can help mitigate the impact of projection in the political arena.

Read more

Emotional blackmail is a manipulative tactic used by individuals to exert control and undue influence over others by exploiting their emotions, fears, and vulnerabilities. It typically involves the use of threats, guilt, negative emotions, and other influence techniques to pressure someone into complying with the manipulator’s demands or desires.

Forms of emotional blackmail

  1. Threats: The manipulator may threaten to harm themselves, the victim, or someone the victim cares about if their demands are not met.
  2. Guilt-tripping: The manipulator may try to make the victim feel guilty for not complying with their wishes, suggesting that their refusal indicates a lack of love, care, or loyalty.
  3. Fear: The manipulator may use the victim’s insecurities, anxieties, or fears to manipulate them into submission.
  4. Obligation: The manipulator may insist that the victim “owes” them something, such as a favor or support, in order to pressure them into compliance.

Emotional predators use blackmail

Emotional blackmail can be subtle or overt and may occur in various types of relationships, including romantic partnerships, friendships, family, and professional settings. Emotional predators (often people with personality disorders) tends to use psychological manipulation techniques to get what they want from you — without much (or any) regard for your own feelings in the matter, or the ethical dubiousness of doing so.

Recognizing and addressing emotional blackmail is essential for maintaining healthy boundaries and relationships.

Read more

Negging is a manipulative tactic often used in the context of dating and interpersonal relationships. It involves making backhanded compliments or subtle insults aimed at undermining someone’s confidence and self-esteem. The term “negging” is derived from the word “negative,” and it is typically employed to make the target feel insecure or uncertain, causing them to seek validation from the person employing the tactic.

Negging is often associated with pickup artists (PUAs) and their strategies for attracting romantic partners. The idea behind negging is that by lowering a person’s self-esteem, they become more susceptible to the manipulator’s advances and more likely to seek approval or validation.

Negging examples

  1. “You’re really pretty for a girl with glasses.”
  2. “I like how you don’t care about what people think of your outfit.”
  3. “You’re surprisingly intelligent for someone who talks so much.”

Negging is part of the broad pantheon of tactics used by emotional predators. It can have negative consequences on the target’s emotional well-being and can potentially lead to toxic or abusive relationships. It’s essential to recognize negging as a manipulative tactic and maintain healthy boundaries in relationships. If you encounter negging, it is crucial to assert yourself, disengage from the interaction, or seek support from friends, family, or professionals if necessary.

Negging also falls within the realm of cult warning signs. If a group engages collectively in a lot of negging and flaw-finding, you should investigate them thoroughly and closely. They may be a high control group or cult who is interested in extracting things from you in the guise of “helping” you.

Read more

Propaganda is a form of communication that aims to influence people’s beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors towards a particular cause, idea, or ideology. It involves the use of persuasive influence techniques to shape public opinion and to create a favorable image of a person, group, or organization, while discrediting or demonizing its opponents.

Propaganda can take many different forms, including posters, speeches, films, radio broadcasts, social media posts, and news articles. It can be used for political, social, religious, or commercial purposes, and it is often associated with authoritarian regimes or totalitarian societies.

One of the key characteristics of propaganda is its use of emotional appeals, rather than rational arguments, to sway people’s opinions. Propagandists often appeal to people’s fears, hopes, bigotries, or prejudices, and use catchy slogans, symbols, or images to make their message more memorable and persuasive. They may also use repetition, exaggeration, or distortion of facts to reinforce their message and to create a sense of urgency or crisis.

Disinformation at scale

Another key feature of propaganda is its use of selective or biased information to support its claims and to discredit opposing views. Propagandists may use half-truths, rumors, lies, or Big Lies to create a false or misleading picture of the situation, and to manipulate people’s perceptions of reality. They may also use censorship or propaganda techniques such as suppression of dissent, demonization of opponents, or use of fear to create a chilling climate of fear and intimidation.

Propaganda can also be used to create a sense of unity or identity among a group of people, by emphasizing their shared values, beliefs, or interests, and by portraying outsiders or enemies as a threat to their well-being. Propaganda can thus be used to mobilize people for a common cause, such as a war or a political campaign, or to reinforce existing social norms and values.

However, propaganda can also have negative consequences, such as creating divisions, fostering hatred, or suppressing dissent. It can lead to the dehumanization of other groups or individuals, and to the justification of violence or discrimination. Propaganda can also undermine democracy by limiting people’s access to accurate information and by creating a distorted view of reality.

To resist propaganda, it is important to be critical of the messages we receive, to question the sources and motives of the information, and to seek out alternative perspectives and sources of information. We should also be aware of our own biases and prejudices, and strive to be open-minded and tolerant of different opinions and viewpoints.

More about propaganda

Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics
Read more

McCarthyism refers to the anti-communist political repression and paranoia that swept the United States in the 1940s and 1950s, beginning during the tenure of its originator: Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy from Wisconsin. It was a period of intense fear and suspicion of communism during the Cold War that manifested in government investigations, trials, and blacklisting of individuals suspected of being communists or communist sympathizers. The era was marked by a pervasive fear of subversion and betrayal, as many Americans believed that communists were working to infiltrate and undermine American institutions.

The roots of McCarthyism can be traced back to the early 20th century, when communism was viewed as a major threat to Western democracy. The Russian Revolution of 1917 and the rise of the Soviet Union fueled anti-communist sentiment in the United States, which intensified during the Red Scare of the 1920s. However, it was not until after World War II that anti-communist fervor reached its peak.

National anti-communist paranoia

In 1947, President Harry S. Truman issued Executive Order 9835, which established a loyalty program for federal employees. The program required all federal employees to undergo a background check and sign a loyalty oath, swearing that they were not members of the Communist Party or affiliated with any other subversive organization. The program was intended to weed out any suspected communists from the federal government, but it soon became the basis for a broader campaign of anti-communist witch-hunts.

In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy rose to national prominence with his claims of widespread communist infiltration in the federal government. In a speech in Wheeling, West Virginia, McCarthy claimed to have a list of 205 known communists in the State Department. He provided no evidence to support his claim, but the speech propelled him to the national spotlight and began a period of intense media fascination with the Senator’s provocative claims.

Over the next several years, McCarthy became the face of the anti-communist crusade. He chaired the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations and conducted public hearings and investigations into suspected communist activity. Many of his targets were innocent, and his tactics often included intimidation, character assassination, and guilt by association.

Army-McCarthy hearings

McCarthy’s tactics eventually led to his downfall. Between April and June of 1954, he conducted televised hearings to investigate alleged communist influence in the Army. The hearings were a disaster for McCarthy, as he made unfounded accusations and engaged in verbal attacks on witnesses. As the hearings progressed, McCarthy’s behavior became increasingly erratic and confrontational. He bullied and intimidated Army officials and witnesses, often interrupting them and accusing them of lying. His behavior turned public opinion against him, and the hearings marked the beginning of his decline.

The turning point of the hearings came when Army counsel Joseph Welch famously confronted McCarthy after he had attacked a young lawyer in Welch’s law firm:

“Senator, you’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

Joseph N. Welch, Army chief counsel
Taking down Senator Joe McCarthy and McCarthyism

The exchange was a defining moment in the hearings, and it marked the beginning of the end for McCarthy’s political career after millions of Americans witnessed his aggressive demagoguery. In fact it went on to become one of the most famous moments in the history of congressional hearings, and is often cited as an example of the power of a well-timed and well-delivered rhetorical response.

The hearings ultimately failed to uncover any evidence of communist infiltration in the Army, but they did expose McCarthy’s reckless and abusive tactics and damaged his reputation. They also demonstrated the power of televised hearings in shaping public opinion and holding government officials accountable.

Historical influence of McCarthyism

McCarthyism had far-reaching consequences for American society. Thousands of people were investigated, blacklisted, and lost their jobs or were denied employment on suspicion of being communist sympathizers. The entertainment industry was particularly hard hit, with many actors, writers, and directors being blacklisted for their political beliefs. The unfounded smears against Hollywood contributed to a negative sentiment on the right-wing that continues even to this day.

The era of McCarthyism also had a chilling effect on free speech and political dissent. Many people were afraid to express their opinions or engage in political activism, for fear of being labeled a communist or communist sympathizer. The era demonstrated the dangers of political repression and the importance of protecting civil liberties and freedom of expression.

McCarthyism was a dark period in American history that was characterized by political repression, paranoia, and fear of communism. It was fueled by the perceived threat of subversion and betrayal, and it led to the persecution of innocent people, the erosion of civil liberties, and a chilling climate of fear and suspicion. The legacy of McCarthyism serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of political repression and the importance of protecting free speech and civil liberties in a democracy.

Read more

Cancel culture refers to the practice of publicly calling out or boycotting individuals, companies, or institutions for behavior that is perceived to be offensive, controversial, or problematic. The goal is to hold these entities accountable for their actions and to pressure them to change their behavior.

This can manifest in various ways, such as social media campaigns, petitions, or protests. The aim of cancel culture is often to create social consequences for the perceived wrongdoing, such as loss of employment, loss of social status, or loss of financial support.

History of cancel culture

The term cancel culture emerged out of the earlier concept of political correctness, and gained popularity in the 2010s alongside the rise of social media. Some scholars and media theorists trace the concept of cancel culture back to even earlier phenomena, such as the boycotts and blacklists of the McCarthyism era in the United States on the right, or the call-out culture of feminist and anti-racist movements on the left.

Cancel culture and political correctness are related in that they both involve social and cultural pressure to conform to certain norms of language and behavior. Political correctness refers to the avoidance of language or actions that may be considered discriminatory, offensive, or insensitive, often with the aim of promoting inclusivity and social justice. Both tend to concern themselves with highlighting language, stereotypes, and assumptions rooted in racism, sexism, and other common forms of bigotry throughout history.

Cancel culture vs. political correctness

In some ways cancel culture can be seen as an extension of political correctness, in that it goes a step further by seeking to hold individuals and entities accountable for violating norms of respect and social justice. The collective power of Facebook, Twitter (aka “X”), and other social media outlets has helped activists organize around ethical, moral, and political issues, and provided new tools for achieving accountability goals, through activities such as public shaming, boycotts, or other forms of social and economic pressure.

In my opinion, the right-wing critique of so-called cancel culture is grounded in an erroneous conflation between governmental action and collective organizing by groups of individuals who are themselves often associated with political activism. Cancel culture is often mentioned in the same breath with censorship, whose definition connotes government tyranny and overreach.

Cancel culture vs. censorship

Typically, however, the government is not involved in actual instances of cancel culture — it is merely people exercising collective powers provided by private social media companies. In fact, it seems to me that right-wing policy tends to involve actual censorship — such as Florida governor and 2024 presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill, or (also in FL) the Republican bill introduced which would require political bloggers to register with the state.

I think it’s important to be discerning, in these instances, about who is exercising power and why — is it really a case of the government overreaching (censorship), or is it simply a group of people reacting appropriately to the continued presence of structural racism, sexism, and many other -isms in modern society: and stubbornly so, after decades and centuries of collective social justice work?

Read more

A scapegoat is a person or group who gets unfairly blamed for the wrongdoings, misdeeds, or crimes of others. Scapegoating is the act of doing this to someone.

The term comes originally from the Bible, in a story from Leviticus where a Jewish chief priest symbolically laid the sins of the people on a goat before releasing it into the wilderness. The goat psychologically cleansed the bad deeds of the population, serving as a convenient mechanism for group healing.

The modern scapegoat

In contemporary times the scapegoat metaphor is used to describe situations where a guilty party gets away scot-free by loudly and vociferously blaming an innocent “enemy” instead. This can be on a small scale like a workplace or a family, but it can also be on a larger scale within society — labelling entire groups or racial identities as “enemies” fictitiously and thus, dangerously.

Scapegoats have a close cousin in the political realm, in the “Us vs. Them” core dynamic of fascism. Fascists essentially pretend that only Outsiders are dangerous, because it gives anxious people the illusion of safety. This ideology increases the followers’ dependency on the in-group, to the point of hero worship or even cult worship.

The illusion of control

Scapegoating is often driven by prejudice and bigotry, fear, and a need to maintain the status quo. When people feel threatened, either by external factors such as economic or political instability or internal factors such as a sense of personal inadequacy, they may look for someone to blame. Scapegoating can provide a sense of control and empowerment, allowing people to believe that they are doing something to address the problem. However, this illusion of control comes at the cost of dehumanizing and harming others.

Scapegoating can have serious consequences for individuals and communities. The scapegoated individuals or groups can become marginalized, ostracized, and stigmatized. They can experience discrimination, harassment, and violence, both on a personal and group level. Moreover, scapegoating can distract attention from the real problems and prevent work towards constructive solutions. By focusing on blaming individuals or groups rather than addressing the root causes of problems, scapegoating can perpetuate injustice and inequality.

Dealing with scapegoating

Preventing scapegoating requires recognizing its underlying causes and addressing them. This can involve promoting empathy, understanding, and open communication, and fostering a sense of community and shared responsibility. It can also involve challenging the narratives that promote scapegoating and promoting a more nuanced understanding of complex issues, with less black and white thinking. Educating people about the dangers of scapegoating and the benefits of cooperation and collaboration can also help to prevent it.

Scapegoating is a harmful and unjust practice that involves blaming individuals or groups for the problems of a larger community. It can have serious consequences for the scapegoated individuals or groups and perpetuate injustice and inequality. Preventing scapegoating requires recognizing its underlying causes, promoting empathy and understanding, and challenging the narratives that promote it. By working together and taking responsibility for our collective well-being, there’s no reason why we can’t build a more just and equitable society.

Read more

The Big Lie about the 2020 Election was hardly the first or even the Biggest of the Big Lies in American history — fomented in vast majority by the right wing. Call it a personality trait, an ideology, or perhaps a financial preference — but Republicans seem to lean towards the disingenuous end of the truth scale.

What are Big Lies?

A Big Lie refers to a propaganda technique that involves repeating a falsehood or exaggeration so frequently and convincingly that people begin to accept it as truth. The term was popularized by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf, where he wrote that propaganda must be based on a “big lie” because people are counterintuitively more likely to believe a colossal falsehood than a small one because of its sheer audacity.

The technique of the Big Lie is often used by authoritarian leaders, political parties, and movements to manipulate public opinion and gain power. It relies on the psychological phenomenon known as the “illusory truth effect,” which suggests that people are more likely to believe something if they hear it repeatedly. Ironically, even a debunking of the Big Lie can contribute to the illusory truth effect by keeping the content of the falsehood top of mind in the eye of the believer.

Examples of Big Lies

Examples of the Big Lie include the election denial claim that the 2020 US presidential election was stolen from former President Donald Trump, the false assertion that vaccines cause autism, and the Nazi propaganda (blood libel and global cabal theory, among other hateful ideologies) that blamed Germany’s problems on the Jewish people, scapegoating them unfairly and setting up a justification for the horrific murder at scale known as the Holocaust.

The danger of the Big Lie is that it can lead to widespread disinformation, polarization and hyper partisanship, and even violence. It is essential to fact-check claims and resist the impulse to accept information at face value. Instead, critical thinking, fact-checking, and seeking out multiple sources of information can help individuals and society avoid falling prey to the Big Lie.

The following table is a compendium of GOP Big Lies known so far.

MythDefinition
"Antifa did it"This is a pre-planned "reusable" false narrative for right-wing extremist actions. It's a ready-made "false false flag" conspiracy for repeated deployment as white supremacists and homegrown extremists ratchet up the level of political violence.
"government overreach"When Democrats pass a law that Republicans don't like
"Makers and takers"A cynical narrative that splits society into "productive" and "dependent" classes, casting essential public support as a parasitic burden — while conveniently ignoring the subsidies that keep powerful corporations in business.
"National security party"Self-proclaimed guardians of national defense, the GOP often prioritize partisan agendas over genuine security concerns, blurring the lines between safeguarding Americans and scoring political points.
"Quality" of votesBy emphasizing “quality” over “quantity” in voting, the GOP taps into thinly veiled elitism, subtly endorsing the restriction of voting access to groups who may not support their power hold.
2nd AmendmentThe GOP’s devotion to the Second Amendment borders on the sacred, promoting unrestricted access to firearms in the name of "freedom" while dismissing the deadly toll of gun violence as a necessary cost.
2000 Mules2000 Mules is a discredited conspiracy theory film by right-wing activist Dinesh D’Souza that falsely claims a vast network of "ballot mules" engaged in widespread voter fraud to rig the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The film's claims rely on misleading interpretations of geolocation data and have been thoroughly debunked by election officials, fact-checkers, and independent experts.
Abu GhraibThe torture and abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib prison showed how the GOP’s post-9/11 policies spiraled out of control, ultimately staining America's global reputation in the name of a warped version of patriotism.
American DreamThey inverted it away from a sense of social justice and equal opportunity (self-governance) to simply embody the venal pursuit of money.
America FirstInvoked by right-wing propaganda campaigns over the past century, starting with Charles Lindbergh in 1939 through to Reagan (1980s), and again with lazy plagiarizing Donnie
American ExceptionalismA relentless insistence on America's supposed moral superiority, this myth ignores deep-rooted systemic issues and serves as a deflection tactic to dismiss legitimate critiques — because nothing says "exceptional" like refusing to self-reflect.
Anti-gayMasked as “family values,” GOP rhetoric often undermines LGBTQ+ rights, framing queer Americans as cultural threats while stoking a narrative of moral panic that distracts from genuine issues of equality.
Anti-immigrantBy painting immigrants as scapegoats for economic and social ills, the GOP has turned a nation of immigrants against itself, relying on fearmongering rather than addressing the root causes of immigration.
Anti-TaxA knee-jerk opposition to taxes serves as the GOP's rallying cry, despite relying on the very social systems taxes support — a contradiction often buried under rhetoric of “liberty” and “small government.”
Be BestMelania Trump's so-called anti-bullying initiative provided a hollow public image for an administration that thrived on divisive rhetoric, exposing the emptiness of performative kindness undercut by the reality of inflammatory policies.
Black and white thinkingGOP messaging favors oversimplified “us versus them” narratives, reducing complex social issues to crude binaries that stoke outrage, sidestepping nuanced policy discussion to breed tribalism and division.
Blacks are commiesAn outdated, racially-charged trope, this smear invokes anti-communist hysteria to demonize Black political activism, relying on fear and racism to dismiss any push for equality as a “threat” to the American status quo.
Cancel cultureA rallying cry against accountability, "cancel culture" has become a GOP catch-all for criticism, conflating consequences with censorship to defend offensive rhetoric and shield high-profile figures from scrutiny.
Christian nationalismCloaked in patriotism, Christian nationalism seeks to merge religious and political identity, positioning one faith as the cornerstone of American identity while undermining the separation of church and state.
Cities are badGOP rhetoric frequently demonizes urban areas as crime-ridden wastelands, reinforcing class and racial divides while ignoring cities' economic contributions and the diverse lives and communities they house.
Climate change is a hoaxLabeling climate change as “fake news” dismisses overwhelming scientific evidence, allowing the GOP to sidestep environmental responsibility while protecting fossil fuel interests over global health.
Coastal elitesA classic strawman, "coastal elites" are cast as out-of-touch adversaries of "real America," fanning division while distracting from policy issues affecting everyday lives across the country.
CommunistsAny left-leaning policy or social progressivism is denounced as “communist” to trigger Cold War fears, as the GOP weaponizes this loaded term to shut down discussions on equity and social reform.
Confederate statuesDefending Confederate statues under the guise of “heritage” ignores the painful legacy of slavery and oppression these symbols represent, perpetuating a sanitized version of history that glosses over systemic racism.
Conscience votersDismissed as disloyal by the GOP, "conscience voters" are cast as obstacles rather than principled citizens, downplaying the importance of voting based on integrity, ethics, and democratic values.
Corporate liberalsThe GOP paints "corporate liberals" as hypocritical elites more interested in profits than principles, wielding this label to deflect from their own corporate ties while portraying the left as disconnected from "real" Americans.
Covid is a hoax; covid is overblownBy dismissing COVID-19 as either nonexistent or exaggerated, the GOP stoked dangerous misinformation, downplaying a global health crisis that required collective action for the sake of short-term political gain.
Covid is no big dealFraming COVID-19 as minor trivialized the virus’s severe health impacts, a tactic that encouraged disregard for safety measures and contributed to preventable illness and loss, all in the name of “freedom.”
CrimeGOP messaging inflates crime rates in an effort to spark fear and justify “law and order” crackdowns, often targeting urban areas and minority communities to stoke racial and class anxieties.
crisis actorDismissing tragedy survivors as “crisis actors” has become a tactic to discredit those advocating for change, a cruel narrative that undermines empathy and dismisses firsthand accounts as part of a conspiratorial plot.
Critical Race TheoryA recent GOP boogeyman, Critical Race Theory is misrepresented as an attempt to “divide” America, redirecting attention from real racial inequities by framing academic discussions as ideological threats.
Cry more, libA favorite GOP taunt, "cry more, lib" embodies an anti-empathetic, combative stance that prioritizes “owning the libs” over constructive dialogue, turning polarization into an entertainment sport.
Democrats are SatanicConspiratorial fearmongering at its peak, branding Democrats as "satanic" plays on religious anxieties and paints political opponents as morally depraved rather than simply ideologically opposed.
Drain the SwampRather than rid Washington of its layers of corrupt supplicants as he had promised on the campaign trail, he invited all of his cronies in to benefit from the greatest expansion of corrupt graft under any President we know of thus far.
Economic superiorityThe GOP often touts its economic policies as inherently superior, claiming to champion “free markets” while endorsing tax cuts and deregulation that benefit the wealthiest at the expense of average Americans.
Election integrityCloaked in concern for “election integrity,” this rhetoric is frequently code for voter suppression, sowing doubt in democratic systems under the guise of preventing fraud that is statistically negligible.
elites should rule othersThough they publicly denounce “elites,” the GOP has long relied on an entrenched hierarchy where wealthy insiders set policy, tacitly endorsing a class structure that keeps power in privileged hands.
Elite resentmentBy stoking resentment toward "elites," the GOP strategically channels legitimate frustrations into distrust of institutions, framing experts as adversaries to push an anti-intellectual, populist agenda.
Enemy of the peopleBorrowed from authoritarian playbooks, calling the media the “enemy of the people” undermines journalism’s role in holding power accountable, fostering public distrust in factual reporting while insulating the party from critique.
Flawed saviorGOP leaders often frame their candidates as “flawed saviors,” humanizing their shortcomings as “authentic” while expecting voters to overlook misdeeds under the pretense of fighting a “greater evil.”
Free speechThe GOP champions “free speech” as a shield for offensive rhetoric, selectively defending it to legitimize hate and conspiracy while casting opponents’ criticism as censorship.
Freedom of religionUnder the banner of “religious freedom,” the GOP has promoted policies that privilege Christian beliefs, framing inclusivity as a threat and sidelining the rights of non-Christians and secular Americans.
George SorosHungarian billionaire whose liberal politics irritate Vladimir Putin. Cast as a shadowy puppet master, George Soros has become the GOP’s favorite boogeyman, allowing them to funnel fears of globalism and liberal influence into a single, often antisemitic, scapegoat for everything they oppose.
Government is the enemyBy branding government as the enemy, the GOP promotes a “small government” narrative that frames public institutions as inherently oppressive, ignoring the role of government in providing essential services that benefit all citizens.
Government spendingThe GOP’s criticism of “government spending” rarely applies to military or corporate subsidies; instead, they use it to vilify social programs, pushing a selective austerity that prioritizes profit over public welfare.
Great Man theoryEmbraced by the GOP to justify outsized authority, the Great Man theory glorifies “strong leaders” as irreplaceable forces of change, ignoring the systemic contributions of everyday people and fostering a culture of authoritarian admiration.
Guantanamo BayOnce heralded as a necessary response to terrorism, Guantanamo Bay remains a symbol of human rights abuses and unchecked government power, its continued existence a stain on America’s reputation and a testament to a decade of bipartisan moral compromise.
Heroic redeemerThe GOP often casts its figureheads as “heroic redeemers,” saviors of American values who will “restore” the nation, a narrative that overlooks their own policy failings and breeds an unquestioning devotion to the leader over democratic principles.
HollywoodPart of an "excuse framework" to ignore or dismiss something, by smearing it with vague "Hollywoodness." A cue to tune out and discredit the source. Prominent in the Qanon ideology.
Identity politicsThe GOP decries identity politics as divisive, dismissing the legitimate pursuit of marginalized groups’ rights as “playing victim,” all while promoting their own forms of identity-based rhetoric tied to nationalism and traditional values.
InsultsRather than engaging in substantive debate, GOP discourse increasingly leans on insults and ad hominem attacks, a tactic that lowers the bar for political discourse while energizing a base attracted to combative rhetoric.
Jim CrowModern GOP policies echo Jim Crow tactics in their approach to voting rights and policing, subtly reinforcing racial hierarchies through “law and order” rhetoric and voter ID laws that disproportionately impact minority communities.
Job creatorsFramed as economic heroes, “job creators” are often just wealthy corporations and CEOs receiving tax breaks, with the GOP perpetuating this myth to justify policies that favor the richest while sidelining workers' rights and fair wages.
Kyle Rittenhouse deificationRittenhouse has been elevated as a GOP folk hero, a troubling symbol that valorizes vigilantism and extreme interpretations of self-defense laws while casting violent actions as “patriotic.”
Law and orderThe GOP’s “law and order” mantra prioritizes punishment over justice, often targeting marginalized communities and framing police authority as infallible, even as it dismisses accountability for law enforcement abuses.
Leftist apocalypseGOP rhetoric about a “leftist apocalypse” is designed to incite fear, painting progressive policies as dystopian threats to freedom while diverting attention from their own regressive agendas.
Liberals“Liberal” has become a GOP catch-all slur, evoking disdain for progressive values and framing anyone left of center as a radical, promoting tribalism over thoughtful discourse on policy differences.
Lost CauseAn American mythology manufactured after the Civil War by the Confederates, to soothe their wounds from the loss and whitewash the role of slavery in fomenting their sedition. In the Reconstruction era and beyond, the retcon held that "states' rights" had animated the southern states to secede from the union when in fact, the bitter contest had been inarguably about whether or not the peculiar institution was to continue in the new nation.
MAGAMore than a slogan, “Make America Great Again” has become a rallying cry for a brand of nationalism that idealizes a past rife with exclusion and inequality, often as a coded appeal to reverse social progress under the guise of patriotism.
MarxismGOP discourse uses “Marxism” as a catch-all for any progressive policy, conflating social welfare and economic regulation with authoritarianism, and fanning fears that equity is a slippery slope to state control.
minority ruleBy leveraging mechanisms like gerrymandering and the electoral college, the GOP has solidified a power structure that enables them to hold influence even without majority support, subverting democratic norms to preserve a shrinking voter base.
Mueller ReportOriginally heralded as a potential political reckoning, the Mueller Report was quickly undermined by the GOP as “partisan overreach,” minimizing credible findings to cast the investigation as a witch hunt rather than a check on foreign influence.
MuzzledThe GOP often claims they are “muzzled” by media and tech, positioning themselves as victims of censorship while using the supposed suppression to bolster a narrative that mainstream platforms are hostile to conservative voices.
National debtSuddenly out of nowhere (aka, when a Democrat comes to town), the national debt is a pressing problem. The GOP selectively decries the national debt to criticize social spending, yet they rarely extend this scrutiny to defense budgets or tax cuts for the wealthy, using debt concerns to mask their true fiscal priorities.
NostalgiaGOP rhetoric often hinges on nostalgia for a “simpler time,” romanticizing a selective history that erases social struggles, casting the past as a lost ideal in order to resist modern demands for inclusion and justice.
Personal responsibilityThe GOP promotes “personal responsibility” as a rationale to dismantle social safety nets, shifting the burden of systemic issues onto individuals and minimizing the need for collective solutions to inequality.
Poll taxesModern GOP voter restrictions echo the discriminatory legacy of poll taxes, targeting marginalized groups under the guise of “election security” to limit access to the ballot for those unlikely to support conservative candidates.
Pro-life“Pro-life” rhetoric is selectively applied to abortion by the GOP, often ignoring broader life-affirming policies like healthcare and social support that ensure quality of life, reducing complex issues to a single, polarizing stance.
QAnonOnce fringe, QAnon’s conspiratorial beliefs have been embraced by some in the mainstream GOP, spreading dangerous misinformation and fostering a distrust in democratic institutions by framing political opponents as part of a hidden, sinister elite.
RacismGOP rhetoric often denies systemic racism, framing the issue as either exaggerated or solved, dismissing discussions on race as divisive “identity politics” and obstructing efforts toward equity and reform.
ReaganomicsThe GOP continues to champion Reaganomics, despite decades of evidence that trickle-down policies have widened inequality, promoting tax cuts for the wealthy as an unquestioned formula for prosperity that largely benefits the elite.
Refuse to recognize the legitimacy of one's opponentThe GOP’s growing refusal to accept opponents’ legitimacy fuels a dangerous precedent of distrust in democratic processes, painting opposition victories as fraudulent rather than respecting the will of the electorate.
Religious freedomUnder the guise of “religious freedom,” the GOP champions policies that often privilege Christian beliefs over others, using faith as a shield to justify discrimination and exclude non-Christian communities from equal rights.
Run the country like a businessThe GOP’s push to “run the country like a business” favors profit over people, promoting efficiency at the expense of social welfare and ignoring the unique role of government in safeguarding public well-being over private gain.
SadismGOP rhetoric and policies sometimes border on sadistic, reveling in punitive measures that target vulnerable groups, from restricting social services to celebrating harsh sentencing, with cruelty often spun as “tough love.”
silent majorityInvoking the “silent majority” allows the GOP to claim moral high ground for their agenda, positioning themselves as the voice of “real” Americans while dismissing progressive movements as fringe or unrepresentative.
small governmentThe GOP mantra of “small government” selectively shrinks programs that benefit the public, while expanding government’s reach in areas like policing, reproductive rights, and military spending, revealing a selective interpretation of freedom.
Social Justice WarriorsDismissed as “Social Justice Warriors,” those who advocate for equality and reform are mocked by the GOP as overly sensitive or “woke,” reframing calls for justice as extremist demands in an effort to downplay systemic issues.
SocialismUsed as a GOP scare word, “socialism” encompasses everything from universal healthcare to progressive taxation, stoking Cold War-era fears to oppose any policy that might threaten corporate interests or reduce inequality.
States' rightsThe GOP’s rallying cry of “states' rights” often justifies undermining federal protections, especially on issues like voting and civil rights, rehashing a states-versus-federal government narrative long used to resist progress.
The Big LiePropelled by the GOP, “The Big Lie” insists that the 2020 election was stolen, a baseless claim that undermines faith in democratic institutions and sets the stage for voter suppression efforts under the guise of so-called “election integrity.”
The Civil War wasn't about slaveryReframing the Civil War as a conflict over “states' rights” sanitizes history, obscuring the central role of slavery and excusing the Confederacy’s legacy, which the GOP uses to appeal to certain voter bases.
The New Deal was bad for AmericaThe GOP derides the New Deal as government overreach, ignoring its role in lifting the U.S. out of the Great Depression to push a narrative that prioritizes “free markets” over social welfare programs.
The SwampThe GOP paints Washington as “the swamp” to capitalize on anti-establishment sentiment, yet often fills positions with insiders and lobbyists, exposing “drain the swamp” as a hollow slogan.
Trickle down economicsDespite decades of evidence showing it widens wealth gaps, the GOP clings to trickle-down economics, framing tax cuts for the wealthy as a benefit to all when, in reality, the wealth rarely “trickles down” to everyday Americans.
Trump "says it like it is"This GOP defense casts Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric as “honesty,” portraying offensive comments as unfiltered truth rather than harmful language, allowing supporters to celebrate incivility as “authenticity.”
UbermanEmbracing a Nietzschean “uberman” ideal, some in the GOP glorify “strongmen” who embody unyielding authority, justifying authoritarian tendencies as a sign of strength while downplaying the need for democratic accountability.
VenezuelaThe GOP uses Venezuela as a cautionary tale for any left-leaning policy, equating social welfare with economic collapse to stir fears of “socialist” policies that threaten American prosperity.
Voting is a privilege, not a rightFraming voting as a privilege, rather than a right, enables the GOP to justify restrictive policies that limit access, aiming to make the ballot box less accessible to certain demographics.
War on ChristmasThe perennial “War on Christmas” narrative stokes cultural division by framing inclusive holiday practices as an attack on Christian traditions, positioning the GOP as defenders of religious heritage in a battle that barely exists.
WarmongersWhile the GOP often presents itself as “pro-military,” critics see some members as warmongers, eager to engage in conflicts that benefit defense contractors and geopolitical power, sometimes at the cost of lives and diplomacy.
Welfare queensReviving Reagan-era rhetoric, “welfare queens” is a thinly veiled racist trope that paints those who need social assistance as cheats, justifying cuts to social programs under the guise of “fiscal responsibility.”
WMDsThe infamous “weapons of mass destruction” justification for the Iraq War became a hallmark of GOP-led misinformation, fueling a conflict on misleading grounds and setting a precedent for policy based on manufactured threats.
Read more

Psychopaths are the pinnacle creatures of Cluster B — a group of personality disorders that all include pathological narcissism or NPD as a foundation. A psychopath is a cold-blooded human predator, devoid of empathy — they can be very cruel and very dangerous. They feel no shame — they consider shame the hallmark of Lesser People.

Psychopaths and their slightly-less-chilling counterparts the sociopaths (together: ASPD) make up roughly 5% of the general population — a figure which generally shocks people. That’s right — about 1 in 20 of all the people you have ever met, functionally speaking, have very little conscience. Some of them choose to behave ethically for various purposes, but many do not. They are certainly not to be trusted.

Part of the dark triad

The dark triad in psychology refers to psychopathy along with two other personality traits: narcissism, and Machiavellianism. These individuals exhibit a manipulative and malevolent style with others.

Attributes of psychopaths (this page is a work in progress):

  • no moral code beyond self-interest; ruthless
  • emotional predators
  • transactional worldview; everything and everyone is for sale
  • emotional black holes
  • they suck empathy out of the system, destructively; emotional vampires
  • emotional parasites, feeding off of others’ emotional energies and giving nothing back
  • the closest thing to pure evil in a human being

Famous examples in history and culture:

  • Hannibal Lecter
  • Ted Bundy
  • Charles Manson
  • Adolf Hitler
  • Ramsay Bolton

It’s important to note, though, that not all sociopaths are killers — far from it. These are simply the notable examples most people have heard of, to get a reference point on what these personality types are like.

Most sociopaths — unfortunately — are the guy next door, the woman at work, or the dude who took you home in his Uber. They’re someone you know.

Read more