Verified by 
When it comes to preserving their extraordinary wealth and power, the one percent (though not always Republicans) count on massaging the public’s understanding of what’s happening, what’s right, and what’s possible. My research shows that their mind games often target our doubts and concerns in five domains:
- Vulnerability: Are we safe?
- Injustice: Are we being treated fairly?
- Distrust: Who can we trust?
- Superiority: Are we good enough?
- Helplessness: Can we control what happens to us?
Those in power are most accustomed to using questionable yet psychologically persuasive appeals to control the narrative about big-picture issues ranging from domestic policy to national security. But in recent days, we’ve seen them turn to these methods in an effort to quell the controversy generated by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s credible allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Let’s consider several examples:
Vulnerability. “It’s a False Alarm.” This is typically used to downplay the societal harms caused by their priorities. Regardless of the evidence, they insist that adverse events—such as climate change—are greatly exaggerated. So, too, in the Kavanaugh context. For instance, Gina Sosa of the GOP argued, “Tell me, what boy hasn’t done this in high school?” Similarly, Christian evangelist Franklin Graham claimed, even if the allegations are true, “There wasn’t a crime that was committed.”
Injustice. “We’re the Victims.” The people in power assert that they’re targets of mistreatment rather than perpetrators of wrongdoing. This role-reversal is witnessed whenever economic inequality takes center stage. That’s when they voice opinions about unfair criticism over tax cuts for the wealthy. GOP Senators have employed this in their defense of Kavanaugh. Lindsey Graham referred to the allegations as “a drive-by shooting,” and Bob Corker lamented, “I can’t imagine the horror of being accused of something like this.”
Distrust. “Devious and Dishonest.” Here, they assert that those who oppose their agenda are unworthy of the public’s trust. Their efforts to discredit Kavanaugh’s accuser are no different. Senator Orrin Hatch claimed that Dr. Ford's allegation “reeks of opportunism,” and President Trump tweeted: “If the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local law enforcement authorities by either her or her loving parents.”
Superiority. “Pursuing a Higher Purpose.” They insist that tainted actions—such as the torture of war-on-terror prisoners—must be evaluated within the context of the greater good and America’s enduring exceptionalism. In similar fashion, Kavanaugh’s defenders insist that his behavior from decades ago should be taken in stride. Conservative columnist Dennis Prager contended that the charges should be ignored because he’s “led a life of decency, integrity, commitment to family, and commitment to community that few Americans can match.” And Senator Hatch argued, “I think it would be hard for senators to not consider who the judge is today… Is this judge a really good man? ...By any measure he is.”
Helplessness. “Resistance Is Futile.” Those in power send a clear message to friend and foe alike: We’re in charge and that’s never going to change. Sometimes they drive this point home with threats; at other times, they turn to naked assertions of authority. Powerful defenders of the status quo regularly rely on this appeal when their policies—or their preferred candidates—are challenged. So it’s no surprise that Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell offered this reassurance to those attending a Values Voters Summit: “In the very near future Judge Kavanaugh will be on the United States Supreme Court…Don’t get rattled by all of this. We're going to plow right through it.”
Other mind games also tap into issues of vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness. But these five examples should be sufficient to demonstrate a key point. There are striking and disturbing parallels between the powerful’s broad, ongoing assault on our democracy and their targeted maneuvers aimed at overcoming serious, legitimate questions about Brett Kavanaugh’s suitability for the Supreme Court. In both the war and the battle, they know that psychologically compelling appeals to our core concerns can carry the day—even when they’re flimsy. That is, unless we’re ready for them.
