HOW YOUR BRAIN IS WIRED DETERMINES HOW YOU VIEW TRUMP
The core of Trump's WEF speech:
- US is the global engine of growth. It lifts all economies in a rising tide.
- His use of tariffs as a tool for better deals for US industries and trade deficit reduction is a direct critique of decades of trade liberalism favoured by most Western governments that have benefitted at the expense of US.
- He criticised Western climate policy as economically inefficient and sacrificing competitiveness.
- He positioned Greenland as strategically vital and US wants influence there (he later said this wouldn't involve force). This is a challenge to post-WWII normas about sovereignty and alliance cooperation.
- He rebuked the European elites' approach on migration and energy issues which leads to Europe as being "not recognisable".
Everything that he said were pure and simple economic and political realism. But no, the educated elites will not discuss the substance, it's his repetitive boring style, and his bullying that is fit for discussion.
Trump speaks in the blue-collar, colloquial performative style which he leans into to signal authenticity and outsider status. Strip away the jokes and media commentary, the core of his message often critiques structural or strategic assumptions of the West, or liberal progressivism. He touches on real, systematic critiques of Western policy choices, the ills of progressive liberalism, which the media and the educated elites, by intent and, or epistemic hubris, so steeped in their own cognitive superiority, automatically disqualifies him without paying attention. They scratch their heads and wonder why Trump always resonates with the MAGA base whose heads do not circulate in the clouds. They deride a cultish following, but perhaps it is the educated who cannot see through closed minds for I know from experience, most will turn away whenever the Trump name is mentioned.
Although intellectual and philosophical musings interest me, my brain is more hard-wired the blue collar way. That is to say, I enjoy ideas, theory and abstraction, but the way I actually think, judge, and decide is grounded, practical, concrete and results-oriented rather than performative and ornamental. Perhaps that is why I am receptive to Trump's speeches. That does not mean I agree with all things said, but I have patience to understand the substance over style.
If you are receptive to Trump's speeches, you are most likely like me, blue-collar wired. If Trump's speeches turn you off, you are most likely elite-managerial wired.
Occam's razor, who wins who loses vs ornamental abstracts served from a menu of word saladsHere's an illustration of how Trump, Hillary Clinton and Obama speaks:
Trump style (blue-collar, consequence-first, plain) - "We've been ripped off for decades. Other countries cheat and we lose jobs, and Washington does nothing. I'm goin to make sure American workers come first - or we stop the deals entirely."
Hillary style (elite-managerial, narrative-driven) - "We need a strategic, multilateral approach to strengthen US manufacturing competitiveness while supporting displaced workers and engaging our allies to enforce fair trade practices."
Obama style (elite-managerial, inspirational + abstract) - "We face challenges from a global economy and it's imperative that we invest in innovation, workforce training, and international cooperation to ensure America remains competitive and our values lead the way."
Let's look at the cognitive difference, at each aspect of the speech:
Focus:
- Trump: Consequences and accountability
- Hillary: Process and fairness
- Obama: Vision and principles
Language
- Trump: Plain, direct, emotionally charged
- Hillary: Formal, policy-jargon, careful.
- Obama: Inspirational, aspirational.
Audience filter
- Trump: Workers feeling the impact
- Hillary: Policy elites, institutions
- Obama: Broad middle-class
Action Signal
- Trump: Immediate and observable
- Hillary: Multistep, mediated
- Obama: Strategic, long-term
Failure Mode Awareness
- Trump: Clear -- jobs lost now
- Hillary: Abstract -- system failures mitigated
- Obama: Diffuse -- relies on cooperation and buy-in
With Trump, we see the operator -- incentives, consequences, winners and losers -- laid bare. We see the accountability in his language. I click with Trump perhaps because I have been in operations management for 2 decades.
With Hillary, we see the general manager -- careful process, fairness, optics, risk-managed steps, often at the expense of immediate clarity (aka Prof Tommy Koh).
With Obama, we see the strategist or visionary -- big-picture framing, moral narrative, long-term planning, less concerned with who takes the immediate hit (aka Kishore Mahbubani)..
We can see clearly the Trump "blue-collar/ consequence-first" style and Hillary-Obama "elite/ managerial / narrative" style across various policy statements:
On trade/ manufacturing
- Trump: "Other countries cheat, we lose jobs, and Washington does nothing. We'll put American workers first."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need multilateral strategies to strength competitiveness while supporting displaced workers and enforcing fair trade."
What are they signaling? Trump -- direct cost and accountability; Hillary/Obama -- process and moral framing.
On immigration/ borders
- Trump: "Our borders are open, crime rises, and American citizens suffer. We'll stop it now."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need comprehensive reform, balancing security, economy and humanitarian obligations."
What are they signaling? Trump -- clear winners and losers; Hillary/Obama -- abstract balancing act.
Healthcare
- Trump: "People are losing insurance and paying too much. I'll fix it and lower costs immediately."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need to strengthen the system, expand coverage gradually, and ensure equity across populations."
What are they signaling? Trump -- observable pain points; Hillary/Obama -- long-term system-level framing.
Foreign policy/ military
- Trump: "We're getting ripped off in NATO. We pay, others don't. I'll make them pay their share."
- Hillary/Obama: "We must maintain alliances and pursue strategic cooperation, balancing diplomacy and national interests."
What are they signaling? Trump -- who pays and who benefits; Hillary/Obama -- process and principle.
Law/ enforcement and crime
- Trump: "Crime is rising, people are unsafe, and politicians ignore it. I'll restore law and order now."
- Hillary/Obama: "We must reform criminal justice while protecting communities, ensuring fairness and equity."
What are they signaling? Trump --immediate accountability and action; Hillary/Obama -- fairness, reform, systemic reasoning.
Economy/ jobs
- Trump: "Companies are moving jobs overseas, wages are dropping. We'll bring jobs back and protect workers."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need to promote economic growth, innovation, and workforce development through coordinated policy measures."
What are they signaling? Trump -- concrete outcomes; Hillary/Obama -- abstract planning + incentives
For blue-collar wired people like me, our brain clicks with Trump because we see direct consequences, we see who benefits and who pays, and we see accountability or lack thereof.
Tofu-eating educated elites miss all the Trump signals because they are trained to evaluate intentions, process, optics and narrative. They avoid attribution of cost. They make virtue or principles their anchor, not real world outcomes. (Be frank, if you hate Trump, this is your brain talking).
With Trump we see at worse verbal abuse, at best, tough love, expressed emotionally and with expediency, lacking the finesse demanded from such high a position. His quality of deliverance deemed unfit for the ears of the elites who, in their intellectual arrogance, will switch off immediately. Let's be honest, if you are a Trump-hater, the moment you see something about The Donald, your mood is gone. His WEF speech is a joke, and so you miss the core signals. You might disagree with Trump's solutions, that's fair enough. I do too. The buck stops with him, not you. But let's be frank, look at the policy speech comparatives above. Trump's Occam-razor points, is there no truth in what he said, is he not delivering as he promised?
With Hillary and Obama, we see the quintessential master politicians. The MAGA crowd and conservatives see them as cockadoodle-doos who crow loudly from the fence, but never step into the mud where consequences live, who are narrative merchants trading stories, not outcomes. The blue collar-wired folks see them giving elitist Harvard lectures and talking past them while so many low hanging problems are weighing the branches to the ground..
The ivory tower crowd tells you Trump is a populist. Whilst this is correct, there is intellectual dishonesty in not explaining to you there are actually 3 kinds of populists. I am absolutely sure you don't know this. That is why one must always reflect and apply some critical thinking. This is a very interesting topic which I shall write in a follow-up post.
This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.
- Trump: Immediate and observable
- Hillary: Multistep, mediated
- Obama: Strategic, long-term
Failure Mode Awareness
- Trump: Clear -- jobs lost now
- Hillary: Abstract -- system failures mitigated
- Obama: Diffuse -- relies on cooperation and buy-in
With Trump, we see the operator -- incentives, consequences, winners and losers -- laid bare. We see the accountability in his language. I click with Trump perhaps because I have been in operations management for 2 decades.
With Hillary, we see the general manager -- careful process, fairness, optics, risk-managed steps, often at the expense of immediate clarity (aka Prof Tommy Koh).
With Obama, we see the strategist or visionary -- big-picture framing, moral narrative, long-term planning, less concerned with who takes the immediate hit (aka Kishore Mahbubani)..
We can see clearly the Trump "blue-collar/ consequence-first" style and Hillary-Obama "elite/ managerial / narrative" style across various policy statements:
On trade/ manufacturing
- Trump: "Other countries cheat, we lose jobs, and Washington does nothing. We'll put American workers first."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need multilateral strategies to strength competitiveness while supporting displaced workers and enforcing fair trade."
What are they signaling? Trump -- direct cost and accountability; Hillary/Obama -- process and moral framing.
On immigration/ borders
- Trump: "Our borders are open, crime rises, and American citizens suffer. We'll stop it now."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need comprehensive reform, balancing security, economy and humanitarian obligations."
What are they signaling? Trump -- clear winners and losers; Hillary/Obama -- abstract balancing act.
Healthcare
- Trump: "People are losing insurance and paying too much. I'll fix it and lower costs immediately."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need to strengthen the system, expand coverage gradually, and ensure equity across populations."
What are they signaling? Trump -- observable pain points; Hillary/Obama -- long-term system-level framing.
Foreign policy/ military
- Trump: "We're getting ripped off in NATO. We pay, others don't. I'll make them pay their share."
- Hillary/Obama: "We must maintain alliances and pursue strategic cooperation, balancing diplomacy and national interests."
What are they signaling? Trump -- who pays and who benefits; Hillary/Obama -- process and principle.
Law/ enforcement and crime
- Trump: "Crime is rising, people are unsafe, and politicians ignore it. I'll restore law and order now."
- Hillary/Obama: "We must reform criminal justice while protecting communities, ensuring fairness and equity."
What are they signaling? Trump --immediate accountability and action; Hillary/Obama -- fairness, reform, systemic reasoning.
Economy/ jobs
- Trump: "Companies are moving jobs overseas, wages are dropping. We'll bring jobs back and protect workers."
- Hillary/Obama: "We need to promote economic growth, innovation, and workforce development through coordinated policy measures."
What are they signaling? Trump -- concrete outcomes; Hillary/Obama -- abstract planning + incentives
For blue-collar wired people like me, our brain clicks with Trump because we see direct consequences, we see who benefits and who pays, and we see accountability or lack thereof.
Tofu-eating educated elites miss all the Trump signals because they are trained to evaluate intentions, process, optics and narrative. They avoid attribution of cost. They make virtue or principles their anchor, not real world outcomes. (Be frank, if you hate Trump, this is your brain talking).
With Trump we see at worse verbal abuse, at best, tough love, expressed emotionally and with expediency, lacking the finesse demanded from such high a position. His quality of deliverance deemed unfit for the ears of the elites who, in their intellectual arrogance, will switch off immediately. Let's be honest, if you are a Trump-hater, the moment you see something about The Donald, your mood is gone. His WEF speech is a joke, and so you miss the core signals. You might disagree with Trump's solutions, that's fair enough. I do too. The buck stops with him, not you. But let's be frank, look at the policy speech comparatives above. Trump's Occam-razor points, is there no truth in what he said, is he not delivering as he promised?
With Hillary and Obama, we see the quintessential master politicians. The MAGA crowd and conservatives see them as cockadoodle-doos who crow loudly from the fence, but never step into the mud where consequences live, who are narrative merchants trading stories, not outcomes. The blue collar-wired folks see them giving elitist Harvard lectures and talking past them while so many low hanging problems are weighing the branches to the ground..
Trump is a populist. He is transactional. He is performative.These are terms that are always brought up to disparage Trump. We hear these all the time from professors, from our ministers, from many persons of high standing, and so many simply appeal to authority and ape the words as negative connotations appropriate for the Orange Mop, without actually understanding the meaning. Let's be frank, do you really know what these words mean as applied to Trump?
The ivory tower crowd tells you Trump is a populist. Whilst this is correct, there is intellectual dishonesty in not explaining to you there are actually 3 kinds of populists. I am absolutely sure you don't know this. That is why one must always reflect and apply some critical thinking. This is a very interesting topic which I shall write in a follow-up post.
This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.