The Driving Force of the American Politics

The National Psyche

In this overview, the world order designed and developed with the United States leadership after WWII is taken as the standard for assessing the social and political state of mind of the nation. After President Truman (1945-1953) presided over ending the war with a very difficult decision regarding the use of the atomic bomb, he very successfully oversaw the foundation of the United Nations to help establish world peace, kept the Russian aggression at bay with the introduction of an aid program called Marshall Plan for the post-war recovery of Europe, then the founding of NATO. Thus, in managing the international affairs, a road map was set for the United States to counter Russian aggression (and communism) with a joint international military strength, and to work on building peace also with a global effort. As for the benefit of domestic peace, he built on F.D.R. 's social assistance projects like expanding Social Security and passing the Fair Employment Act. An era of optimism, anti-war/pro-peace and globalization atmosphere emerged.

The term national psyche is used specifically to the extent of knowledge and to the ability of  people to use that knowledge with critical thinking in matters of concern to society as a whole. Accordingly, the level of basic education in the nation is taken as the formative element of that ability. And, high school education (secondary education) is taken, and of course with the addition of those with higher education (tertiary), for measure within the total population of 18 years of age and above. This overview would have been more informative if the quality of education were also to be taken into account. But such information may be the subject of a study going beyond the present brief overview.

The US population of age 18 and above is about 270 mil. Roughly 104.4 mil.  (38.6%) are high school graduates or with some college education. Roughly 107.7 mil. (39.8 %) are higher degree graduates. Hence, roughly 78.4% must be expected to make an informed and deliberated contribution to the formation of the political psyche in matters of interest to the public. But the diversity of drawing different conclusions from the same facts is also a reality. The closer this group is to a 50/50 division of opinion the more arriving at the best conclusion becomes remote. About 3.5 mil. (1.3%) is without any education and 23.8 mil. (8.8%) has only elementary education. This group, in the absence of accurate information (knowledge), research or exchange of information, is rather quick in forming opinions heavily weighed by personal emotions or biases, or prone to "believe” (rather than assess critically) and to trust unverified information (conspiracies). Some do not even find it necessary (as a civic duty) to form an opinion. Yet, the effect of this 10% on the formation of the national psyche must be taken into account since they cannot be deprived of the voting right. Therefore, if the 78.4% expected to make a knowledgeable contribution to the formation of the political psyche is divided close to 50/50, the 10% who are vulnerable to be misled can easily skew the formation of the political psyche (especially in a system that does not require the majority of popular vote). Consequently, the most effective leverage used by either political party is to divide the public opinion. An ancient thus well tested tool to seed division in public is the creation of a national fear. The post WWII era politics increasingly made use of this tool. Ultimately, the national psyche became representative of a contemporary fear of the time. 

Finally, the voting pattern of the public is not taken to assess the popular psyche because parties come to power with the majority of the Electoral College (States) votes, not with the majority of popular votes. The extent of superiority of State votes over Popular votes during the period selected for this overview is provided in the Annex.

It is common that fear tactics are based on the performance of the current government, but they manifest themselves as representing a presumed public will at Presidential election campaigns. Therefore, a very brief recollection of such campaign platforms after the Truman Presidency are summarized below for assessing them against the above mentioned standards established after the WWII for the modern era. 

Presidential Election Campaign Platforms Summary                                      

1952   

Dem.   Censuring McCarthy’s perceived communists’ hunt.                                       

Rep. Censuring failure in war against communism in N. Korea  and Vietnam.

                                                                                             

1960   

Dem. Advocating federal assistance to education and health care, equal rights, ending

barriers to voting rights. Increasing military spending against Russian armaments.

Rep. Advocating States and private enterprise involvement in social assistance

and education, school desegregation.

Censuring increase in military spending.

             THE END OF POST-WAR ERA, START OF COLD WAR ERA

                                                                      

1968  

Dem. Advocating Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, and Johnson’s war on poverty.              

Rep. Advocating private enterprise, law and order (in the wake of political  assassinations).

Censuring liberal Supreme Court.

1976  

Dem. Advocating full employment and public programs. Human rights in  foreign policy.

Rep.   Advocating cuts in government spending and taxes, increase in individuals’ economic

conditions instead an increase in social programs.

Negotiation of balance of power with Russia.

             START OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM  ERA

1980 

Dem. Advocating F.D.R. New Deal and Johnson Great Society programs             

  Human rights in foreign policy.

Rep. Advocating reductions in income tax, in regulations, and moral values instead   

of equal rights. Transfer of powers to States and to private initiatives.

            Increase military spending and strength. 

1988  

Dem. Advocating public education, housing, health care, fair share of tax by wealthy   

            individuals and corporations. 

            International cooperation to limit arms proliferation.

Rep. Advocating previous administration’s Reagan policies.

             END OF COLD WAR ERA START OF DIGITAL ERA  

1992   

Dem. Advocating tax cut for the middle class tax hike for wealthy, investment in             .

            infrastructure and education, universal health care, smaller government,                

            stronger States.                                                

            Mediation for peace in Bosnian war.

Rep.    Advocating tax cuts and deregulation, free market health care, free trade.

           Personal attacks on the opponent candidate.  

2000 

Dem. Advocating federal funding to improve education, Patients Bill of Right for           -

            health care.                                                       

            International cooperation for peace. Censuring opponent candidate’s                  

            inexperience.                                                    

Rep. Advocating tax cuts, parental education instead of federal funding, private

savings program for health care.

Censuring military actions overseas for nation building instead of investing in 

the military, in defense.   

2008 

Dem. Advocating tax cut for the middle class, tax hike for corporations and wealthy        

            individuals, regulation of the financial sector (after the 2008 financial 

            crisis), health care is basic right, universal health insurance.

            Withdrawal of military from Iraq, negotiating limitation of nuclear

            activities of Iran. 

Rep. Advocating tax cuts, tax credit for health insurance instead of universality.

Military action against terrorist groups

             START OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION ERA     

2016  

Dem. Advocating raise in middle class income, in women's wages, expansion

of health care program, universal pre-schooling, consideration of

            changes in corporations’ business practices, reform of immigration                

            regulations.

Rep. Advocating tax cuts, conservative values. protectionism, isolationism-America

        First policy.  

Censuring free trade and immigration policy, Affordable Care Act,   military 

interventions overseas.                 

               

2020  

Dem. Advocating increase in minimum wage, improvement in health care,                     

            strengthening labor unions. Censuring mismanagement of the           

        fight against the pandemic, decrease of corporate taxes.                 

Rep. Advocating deregulation of businesses, protection of national trade and energy, 

  restriction in immigration, law and  order, conservative values.

Censuring the election system, Federal Election Commission. Personal attacks

on the opponent candidate.

                                                      

2024

Dem. Advocating the improvement of the economic condition of the lower                

income class and the small business, improvement of immigration                  

             procedures; protection of freedoms and democracy.

Rep. Advocating increase in manufacturing, import tariffs, stopping immigration and

deporting illegal immigrants, closure of Dept. of Education, Christian nationalism-

American Supremacy, deployment of military under the Insurrection Act for 

keeping law and order and poll watchers for election security.

Withdrawal from international organizations and commitments.

Censuring fraud in 2020 elections, the prosecution of January 6 Capitol Hill

             invaders, and sanctions against Russia and Israel for their invasion of their

neighbors.

            (CURRENTLY, THE LAST THREE ERAS ARE CONCOMITTANTLY ACTIVE)

This brief recollection suggests that:

1. Because of the basic ideological positions entrenched in either political party, like advocating social programs including education, health care, tax cut for the middle class, their increase for corporations and wealthy on one side, advocating the provision of social assistance by States and private enterprise, parental instead of public education, private savings or free market health care, cut in taxes for corporations, cut in federal regulations, conservative moral values,  law and order on the other side; 

Republicans, using fear of socialism (spuriously equating it to communism), and of daily life taken-over by immigrants, advocate negotiation with Russia, and stopping immigration and deporting “illegals”. Democrats use fear from communism and promote  international cooperation against Russia. Republicans respond by censuring mismanagement of economy and excessive spending of military interventions overseas*. Democrats respond by censuring Republicans for increasing the national debt to support the economy and armament.   

2. Likewise, Republicans censure liberal social policy, the election system, and liberal Supreme Court, instead they promote religious and ethnic divide, and distrust in the federal government. While Democrats censure divisive cultural policies, and politicizing the third state power, the Supreme Court, they advocate ensuring equal rights and civil rights (free elections, speech, association, etc.),

*It is noteworthy that while Democrats were unsuccessful in Korean and Vietnamese wars against communism, Republicans were unsuccessful in Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Iran wars against international terrorism.

Conclusion

Both political parties take advantage of mankind's instinctive nature of fear for influencing the national psyche, domestically the fear of losing livelihood due to bad government management, and in international matters the fear of losing both economically and freedoms under communism.

Using an instinctive nature of humans to get political advantage by dividing people (even to the degree of using uncivilized rhetoric to offend the opposing individuals) so that they would not come to an agreement to preserve their economic prosperity and civil freedoms, is not civilized, patriotic, nor human. Furthermore, it is not politically wise, because overuse of fear eventually has the psychological effect of numbing people to fear.

Politicians’ duty in informing the public for the formation of a national psyche (thus national solidarity) ought to be to convince them to take realistic/constructive decisions to preserve their livelihood and freedoms, not under the duress of fear.

Party establishments must summarily dissociate themselves from such politicians. If they do not, civil society organizations could publicly expose and deny them public service in any three branches of State.

September 2026

  ANNEX

                                            

1952                    Popular vote         Electoral vote  

Democrat                   44.33              16.18

Republican                55.18 R           83.24 R   

Difference                  10.88              66.46    

Elec. over Pop. vote margin            55.58 R

                                                                                  

1960

                                     49.72 D           56.47 D                            

                                     49.55              40.78 

                                       0.17                15.69  

                                                              15.52  D                                                

1968            

                                     42.72               35.50

                                     43.42 R          55.95  R  

                                        0.7                20.45                          

                                                              19.75 R

1976              

                                     50.08 D          55.20 D 

                                     48.02              44.61               

                                       2.06               10.59 

                                                               8.53  D 

1980          

                                      41.01                 9.11                

                                     50.75 R          90.89 R     

                                       9.74               81.78 

                                                             72.04 R

1988

                                     45.65                20.63     

                                     53.37  R           79.08  R    

                                       7.72                58.45 

                                                               50.73 

1992

                                    43.01 D             68.77 D

                                    37.44                  31.23 

                                      5.57                  37.54  

                                                               31.97  D

2000  

                                   48.38 D              49.44 

                                     47.87                 50.37 R! 

                                       0.51                   0.93

                                                                 0.42  R

2008                          52.92  D            67.84 D 

                                    45.66                 32.16 

                                      7.26                 35.68  

                                                               28.42  D

2016                          48.18  D              42.19 

                                   46.09                  56.51 R!  

                                     2.09                   14.32

                                                                12.23  R

2020

                                     51.31  D            56.88  D

                                    46.85                  43.12 

                                      4.46                  13.76 

                                                                 9.30  D

2024                           48.32                  42.01

                                    49.80 R              57.99 R

                                       1.52                  15.98

                                                                 14.46  R

 

! Indicates where Electoral votes of one Party overrode Popular votes of the other.      

While the difference between the popular votes for candidates ranges from .07 to 9.74 points, the difference between their Electoral votes ranges from 0.93 to 81.78 points. The ultimately decisive difference between the popular and Electoral votes ranges between 0.42 and 72.04 points.