It is often said that Donald Trump’s power base in the MAGA movement contributed to the radicalization of the Republican Party. Political scientists worry about the implications of this for the future of American democracy.
An example of such radicalization was the attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, in an attempt to overturn the result. The movement’s hostility toward much of the traditional media exacerbated this radicalization. This was amplified by the president of the United States himself, who referred to the media as “the enemy of the American people.”
But how did this radical movement of the conservative Republican Party emerge? The rise of MAGA marked a major political shift in the United States that baffled many liberal-minded people. Psychology studies can offer insights that help explain the motivations of the MAGA movement.
1. Merged identity
Identity is critical to understanding how the MAGA movement holds together as a group and can also explain many of its motives. Trump was able to effectively mobilize his base by communicating that shared identity. And it is this sense of identity and common purpose that was so important in the development of MAGA as a powerful political movement.
The almost absolute faith in Trump’s leadership has a lot to do with negative resentment towards other groups he criticizes, particularly migrants, liberals and feminists. But in reality, it is a positive identification with white nationalism that is a stronger indicator of the type of person who might identify with MAGA.
MAGA supporters unite around a shared perception of threat to their status, often related to issues of race and immigration. But it is also considered to be motivated by the desire to cultivate group belonging and pride as a way to regain lost self-esteem.
Some researchers also believe that even the act of wearing a MAGA hat is a sign of what is known as “identity fusion,” when the boundaries between oneself and the group become blurred. When this occurs, wearing a MAGA hat can be a symbol of who I am, rather than simply who I voted for.
This is significant, as the fusion of identities is associated with the supposed willingness to take more extreme actions, such as damaging people and property, to defend the Trump community and achieve his goals.
You may be interested: Family dispute: Trump’s breakup with Marjorie Taylor Greene shakes the heart of the MAGA movement
2. Moral self-justification
MAGA members also tend to adhere to the idea that their own ethnic group is morally purer than others. MAGA ideology tends to divide America into “good” and “evil” groups, viewing themselves as good and outgroups, such as those mentioned above, as evil. This positions “real Americans,” those who built the nation, patriots who “have had enough,” as among the first.
Because it frames politics as a fight for “correct values and lifestyles,” such rhetoric increases the risk of malignant moral superiority. When a leader communicates it, he creates in his followers the feeling that they have an obligation to act against these “evil” forces that threaten their group.
When this feeling of superiority is threatened, it can lead to aggression, such as the storming of the United States Capitol.
3. The right to dominate other groups
Aggressiveness in political groups like MAGA is also related to what is known as “social dominance orientation.” This relates to the belief in a hierarchy: the idea that one social group has the right to dominate others.
Research shows that people who believe in hierarchy are more likely to ignore basic democratic principles. They see society as a “competitive jungle” where groups fight for power and domination.
As a result, they consider groups that differ from them inferior. This justifies any action that maintains their ingroup status.
This is true even if, as in the case of MAGA followers, it involves believing in violence as a response to unwanted social and cultural changes. Polls revealed that Maga followers are also much more likely to believe that there will be a civil war in the United States and that violence to advance the movement’s political goals would be justified.
We recommend: Why MAGA is so concerned about Epstein and why the files are unlikely to affect loyalty to Trump
4. Aggressive followers
There is a scientific debate about what attracts people to authoritarian leaders. Some scholars emphasize the tendency to want to submit to authority, high levels of aggressiveness when disciplined, and adherence to conventional values such as traditional views on religion and sexuality. Others focus more on the preference for conformity over personal autonomy.
But they agree on one point: authoritarian followers submit to leaders who emphasize the superiority of their social group and who they consider capable of managing threats they perceive as coming from other groups.
Research on the 2016 MAGA movement shows that Trump supporters were more likely than supporters of other Republican Party candidates to score highly on one facet of authoritarianism: the willingness to resort to aggression toward people perceived as going against social norms if they are encouraged by someone they accepted as an authority figure. However, they do not appear to score as highly on two other facets: submission to established authorities and adherence to conventional values.
This suggests that authoritarianism within the MAGA movement evolved towards a more distinctive profile, characterized mainly by prejudiced aggressiveness towards other social groups.
History tells us that radical political movements tend to emerge when the social context is perceived as threatening. In this process, some people have personal predispositions that make them more likely to follow authoritarian leaders. Therefore, it is important to take both personality and context into account when trying to understand movements like Maga.
*Magnus Linden is Associate Professor of Psychology and Fredrik Björklund is Professor of Psychology, both at Lund University; Claire Campbell is Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Ulster.
This text was originally published in The Conversation
Subscribe to our YouTube channel and don’t miss our content
