Narcissism: It's the term we love to throw at the larger-than-life public figures who seem to want nothing but nonstop attention and the center of the 24-hour media cycle. Politicians are particularly good targets for the narcissism label. Each election cycle seems to bring a new round of contenders for the position of Narcissist-in-Chief, and this season is no exception. Donald Trump seems to have won in a landslide, but there are plenty of other politicians who seem almost as well-qualified.
A favorite pop psychology term, narcissism is also the pet insult to use on romantic partners (especially one's ex), family members, roommates, and bosses. Imminently flexible, in common jargon it extends to mean self-centered, egotistical, and shallow. Its beauty is that it can be applied to almost any situation when you want to accuse someone of being incapable of seeing someone else's point of view and constantly in need of approval and attention.
Unlike the people we encounter in daily life, however, public figures actually need attention in order to be considered successful. Movie stars need people to pay to watch their films, singers to get their music downloaded or have people buy tickets to live concerts, and reality stars need their performances to reach the TV-watching masses. Politicians, similarly, need people to pay attention to them but more than that, to turn attention into actual votes. They can only succeed if people, in fact, love them enough to vote for them
Without psychological data, we can't diagnose with certainty if any of these celebs fits the criteria for "narcissistic personality disorder," a clinical condition. Calling them "narcissists" also, technically, is misleading. They may have many narcissistic tendencies, but calling people by their most prominent personality traits fails to take into account the complexity of human personality.
However, we do know that when politicians, business leaders, celebrities and athletes reach the highest levels of their fields, their worlds begin to undergo a radical shift. They enter a "narcissistic bubble," a self-contained little universe where those around them are employed for the sole purposes of ensuring they are happy, well-fed, and well-liked. No longer do they have to take care of their own menial tasks of everyday life, making those at the center of the bubble never experience the mundane frustrations involved in driving themselves places, making doctor appointments, picking out their clothes or even shepherding their children to school or play dates. Beyond getting those chores done for them, their aides become the mirror that reflects everything back to them in a favorable way. Either out of fear of being fired or a genuine respect for their boss, these aides protect them from what might be unflattering news or criticism from the outside world.
Presidential candidates, in addition, have security details around them constantly. They can't take a step outside without the Secret Service surrounding them. Putting yourself in the politician's place, then, think about how important you would start to feel if you always required exceptional personal protection. Add to this the flock of reporters who follow your every move, and being at the center of attention becomes your new normal.
The chicken-and-egg aspect to this concept is whether the narcissism led individuals to seek the power and glory that put them into the bubble, or whether they were regular folks who decided to seek public office, and only then became a victim of their own success. If they were psychologically healthy people prior to entering that bubble, then leaving it behind should be easy, maybe even a relief. If their narcissism stems from a longer-term, deeper, sense of entitlement and grandiosity, the job becomes far more challenging.
From the existing evidence of their lifelong careers in the public eye, we could venture a few guesses at whether the leaders of their respective parties in 2016 are unusually high in narcissism. We can assume for the moment that all, by definition, have entered the narcissistic bubble. It would be impossible to avoid it at this point in their ascension to the top of their parties. Each has a large staff of do-bees, the inevitable security details and press entourages, and even admiring children and grandchildren who regularly speak out in public on their behalf. Even a simple drop-in at a New Hampshire donut shop must be planned and scripted; it's unthinkable that they themselves would ever deign to wait in line or pay for their meals.
All of this plays out against a backdrop of the candidates knowing, at some level, that they're getting older. Perhaps they feel the now-or-never pressure of needing to create their legacies. As of mid-2016, the top two Presidential contenders were well into their later years, and the campaign would almost inevitably be their last. On top of this, with a history of some 3 or 4 decades of inhabiting the narcissistic bubble, they may panic at the thought of it all coming to an end when they lose the election.
The idea of the narcissistic bubble can be traced to a 1995 article appearing in a social work journal written by therapist Eda Goldstein, called "When the bubble bursts: Narcissistic vulnerability in mid-life." She believed that the bursting of this bubble is accompanied by intense feelings of shame and rage as the individual's vulnerabilities become exposed.
It's possible, then, that politicians are driven (especially in their later years) by the desire to avoid being humiliated at worst or treated as ordinary at best. They don't want to go back to their old lives when they'll have to take out their own trash. They don't want to lose the props that surround them, including their hordes of aides, stylists, assistants, and fawning fans.
There is probably no solution to the dilemma of the narcissistic bubble for any public figure. They can, however, gain insight into how much it affects them. Seeking the opinions of those who disagree with them, their long-time friends, or -- not out of the question -- a therapist, they can retain their grip on reality.
We also have to do our part. Let's show some forgiveness when a politician makes a single mistake for which he or she apologizes. Let's not scrutinize every fiber of their being to look for flaws or weaknesses. If we can treat our candidates as real people, maybe they'll start to act like real people. We'll all benefit from a more human, and humane, standard in politics.
Reference:
Goldstein, E. (1995). When the bubble bursts: Narcissistic vulnerability in mid-life. Clinical Social Work Journal, 23(4), 401-416. doi:10.1007/BF02191629
Earlier on Huff/Post50:
