https://www.modernmindmasters.com/victim-mentality-learned-helplessness/

Politicians have learned that it is easy for them and highly effective to portray policy positions in ways that make you feel victimized by someone. You blame that someone. You catastrophize the situation. You demonize the supposed villain. You look to the politician and political party for salvation. You attack the opposition. Our political process is polarized. We lose civility. The cycle repeats.

You can choose to reject the victim framework used by many politicians. Few political issues are simply black and white with clear villains and heroes. Most ongoing political issues remain because well-meaning people hold conflicting or non-aligned views. Politicians promote the victim framework and extreme positions because they are easy to communicate, they trigger emotions, and they can be linked to form a simple political platform. Red or blue. Liberal or conservative. Republican or Democrat.

An increasing number of Americans identify as “independents”, not strongly aligned with either party. You probably have strong opinions on some issues and weaker ones on others. You probably hold some combination of liberal, conservative and moderate views on various issues. Many politicians and political parties invest in creating “victim” language for policy areas. Once you become aware of these tricks, you can better choose your own policy views, avoid the victim game and hold politicians accountable for doing their jobs: representing all of their constituents and solving problems.

1. Populists in both parties claim that the US economy is controlled by bankers, large corporations and Wall Street. Democrats used to monopolize this view, but the rise of the Tea Party made it a Republican favorite too. There is no denying that powerful economic firms try to use their power to extract returns from customers, suppliers, employees, the government and politicians. Don’t be a victim. Economic competitors, customers, suppliers, unions, regulators, courts, financial market and politicians have countervailing powers. Be a wise consumer. Buy local. Support reasonable regulations and anti-trust results. Promote competition. Hold politicians accountable for taking practical steps to maintain a reasonable balance in this area. Consider more than just simplistic “free market” or government owned firms approaches.
2. Politicians claim American society is intentionally dominated by a commercial mentality that elevates consumption and production above other religious or philosophical values because this is necessary for a capitalist economy. This mentality is created through advertising, education and commercial experience. It privileges a reductionist, cost-benefit decision-making mentality above all other philosophies. It highlights growth at all costs and the use of GDP alone to manage human welfare. Citizens are seen as mere cogs in the machine. Democrats, liberal Protestants and Catholics promote this view. This world view sometimes inflates valid insights and criticisms into complete opposition to commercial activity. Few Americans buy this view, using their personal experience to offset the claims.
3. Politicians promote a “small is beautiful” green paradigm. Large firms are inherently tainted by the profit motive, bureaucracy and technology. Buy local. Make it yourself. Form a cooperative. Buy organic. Oppose high technology solutions. Support international handicrafts and local artisans. Source sustainably raised food, fiber and agriculture. Fair trade. Farmer’s markets. Low technology. Recycling and reuse. The world has been changed by these green initiatives, changing mindsets and creating economic opportunities. Critics warn that there are risks from “virtue signaling” and imposing these beliefs and choices on others.
4. Politicians claim that “foreign competition” is unfair. Other countries abuse their labor forces, abuse their environments, steal technology, extract skills and money from firms, negotiate better deals, use non-tariff tools to cheat, etc. This is an area that was mostly argued by the Democratic party until the last decade or so. The post WWII progress on reducing tariff and non-tariff barriers was mostly achieved at the global level with strong bipartisan US support. The US did not optimize its country-to-country results because it rightly saw that it could get better overall results through global negotiations. This “free trade” approach was used to rebuild Europe and integrate the US and global economies, to reduce the risk of war and allow the US to project its hard and soft power more cheaply and effectively than by using the discredited colonial/imperial approach. Global progress remains possible if the US, EU and China choose to make it happen. When this is not politically feasible, the second-best approach is to reduce trade barriers within larger blocks of countries. The US can choose to invest more resources in negotiating better trade deals. They are not simple. The US is not a powerful enough force on the global economic stage to simply enforce its will. None of us should see the US as a victim of foreign competition. The US has thrived in a 75-year period of freer trade. In a world of services, the US is well positioned to benefit from further investments in free trade.
5. Politicians criticize the interests of the military-industrial complex. They claim that the economy, finance and foreign policy are operated on behalf of these interests who need war, terrorism or the threat of war to maintain demand for their products. They accuse these militarists/hawks of adopting and promoting a win/lose view of the world and an “end of the world” focus to support their causes and undercut any prospects for global peace and cooperation. The military is a relatively small part of the US economy and government. It was significantly reduced after the Vietnam War and the Cold War. Its credibility has been undermined through various political and military failures. Yet, pride in the US military remains strong. The military is considered a relatively modern organization. Although local support remains high for suppliers and bases, the defense department has downsized its operations through time.
6. Politicians and conspiracy theorists have long described a global cabal of bankers and secret societies managing the world. The Catholic church, Jews, Arabs, Muslims, bankers, traders, Masons, Jesuits, universities, defense contractors and others have been implicated at various times. This view has been promoted by politicians on both sides from time to time. There are individuals, groups and organizations with significant global economic, social, political, legal, military and religious influence. The 5-fold growth in the scale of the global economy and the change in leading nation states and alliances since WWII make these conspiracy claims even more unlikely than they were in the world war times.
7. Politicians question the legitimacy of national patriotism compared with the alleged ideal intentions of global institutions such as the United Nations. They naturally see the world as a whole and claim that only global organizations can manage global issues like war, trade, finance, climate, transportation, public health, poverty, economic development, law, oceans, and the environment. They argue that technical expertise is the key to managing these challenging issues with national interests taking secondary positions. The US has created, shaped and modified global institutions to support its global interests. It has not given up its ability to independently manage global issues and is very unlikely to pursue this strategy.
8. Politicians elevate nature and the environment to highest policy goals. They argue that global survival is the first human priority and must be managed as such. They promote a long-term, risk-averse, ecosystems view. They often reject cost-benefit analyses and commercial incentives as being too narrowly focused to really solve problems. They highlight worst case scenarios to warn people of the dangers of weak protections. The US does not have a 5% Green Party as in many European countries. Politicians appeal to this set of “true believers” because they do prioritize these goals and invest time and money accordingly. Voters should evaluate politicians to see if they properly weigh these goals with others or elevate them to become super goals.
9. Politicians of both parties offer up “the deep state” as another group of traitorous individuals to be feared. They allege that small groups of career bureaucrats in key agencies such as defense, intelligence, foreign service, FBI, justice and treasury control the information, models, scenarios, options and implementation of public policy. They are alleged to be self-interested and aligned with dark forces of the left, the right, banking, corporations, commissions, churches, etc. There are career employees in key positions in the federal government, universities, churches, media and not for profits who do wield significant formal power and influence over policymaking, politicians and communications. The US federal government allows presidents and political parties to fill the top roles in all government agencies. We have alternated ruling political parties for 75 years. We maintain freedom of speech, religion and assembly.
10. Politicians allege that the judicial and regulatory state is captured by corporate interests. They highlight the differing amounts invested in lobbying, lawyers, advertising and soft expenses in influencing the government and politicians. They argue that differing salary levels inevitably lead staff to join corporations and external law firms. They point to Supreme Court decisions that undermine the ability of regulators to do their jobs. Congress has the power to define laws and regulations that are effectively administered and to manage the federal work force. Many government employees are loyal to the government and their departmental missions. Consumer supporting special interest groups and politicians have demonstrated a strong ability to fund their causes. Effective regulation is intentionally a constant struggle.
11. Politicians take the libertarian view that powerful organizations of all kinds are a threat to individuals. They say that the police, military, security services, law firms, corporations, consultants, FBI, CIA and judges tend to take conservative, orderly, power protecting stances and actions. They propose strong external leadership, advocates, ombudsmen and watchdogs to monitor their activities. The US legal system provides avenues for politicians, regulators and citizens to monitor and challenge the actions of such organizations. The US political system is sensitive to the need to increase or decrease the structural power of such organizations.
12. Politicians portray their opponents as extremists, far-left, far-right, Pinkos, nut jobs, wing nuts, socialists, anarchists, liberals, reactionaries, communists, fascists, doves, racists, globalists, isolationists … This straw-man approach is used to paint them as the opposite, to avoid finding common ground, to simplify, to fear, to build emotion, to catastrophize, to demonize, to disregard, to vilify … This is a highly effective technique. Modern individuals have disagreed about politics, religion, capitalism, philosophy and other nations at all times. We hold different political and moral views. The progress of Western civilization has come from finding ways to set aside these differences in law, commerce, political structures, contracts, science and common understanding. Stand up to the political communicators. Support your political beliefs and agents. Avoid needless, senseless, harmful polarization.
13. Politicians of both parties routinely campaign against “Washington”. The government, departments, bureaucrats, judges, institutions, lobbyists, lawyers, contractors, advisors, consultants and politicians are all tainted as part of “the system”. Washington allegedly works against the interests of the common man, the Real America, the moral majority, the people. Every nation requires a political system. Ours could certainly be more effective, less wasteful, more responsive and wiser. Running against Washington accomplishes nothing. It is an effective political tool only because we allow it to be and do not hold individual politicians accountable for their actions in making real improvements and establishing structures that hold governments and politician more accountable.
14. Politicians elevate human rights to the highest priority level. Freedom of press, speech and assembly. Food, housing, employment, social insurance, safety. Children’s, women’s, racial minority, gender, religious. Freedom of choice. They criticize others who don’t see these as absolute rights, not subject to trade-offs. They promote the definition and enforcement of strictly defined legal rights and funding. They see these rights as moral rather than political issues. Opponents liken this to raising a specific religious belief to become the law of the state. The importance of such rights and tradeoffs has evolved. The US political and judicial system is designed to manage this kind of debate. Politicians who vilify others on these issues are being quite righteous.
15. Politicians accuse their opponents of voting fraud. This happens through voting registration rules, voting processes, voting regulations, technology, district boundaries, voting methods, and collusion. The evidence for a significant amount of individual fraud is non-existent. Evidence for voting results being shaped by the legal voting framework is strong. An increasing number of states have turned to independent redistricting commissions, open primaries and ranked choice voting. Courts have placed some limits on politically advantageous redistricting and laws. Until voters demand a neutral framework for voting we will have biased results.
16. Politicians claim that the economy, culture, institutions and politics are unfairly controlled by rural, local, non-cosmopolitan, less-educated, less-experienced, parochial, fly over, backward-looking interests, who do not see the big picture or the long-term. They prevent progress and try to maintain the status quo. They are not interested in developing the economy, science, technology, information and culture of the future. Progressives often look past and discount conservative interests and views. The US political system is available for politicians to actively work together to constructively consider both sets of interests.
17. Politicians elevate public education to be a near-perfect embodiment of the American way. They praise its leadership, teachers, students, processes and results in preparing all students for life, career and civic responsibilities. They support the high professional status of teachers. They actively ensure the “separation of church and state”. They oppose vouchers and school choice as inherently undermining public schools. They accuse those who question school performance and standards or promote competition as being anti-schools and turning teachers into victims. Education is mostly a local activity. Education supporters and critics have the opportunity to work together to develop more effective policies, programs and cultures for our children.
18. Politicians have determined that some political views are so toxic and harmful that they cannot be tolerated in public debate, especially in educational settings where students are sensitive. They argue that these views are so harmful that they offset the rights of freedom of speech, assembly and religion. The conflict between basic rights in real world application has a long history. Absolute freedom is unattainable. Universities have generally been the most open and embracing of such rights of free expression, linked to their belief that public discussion leads to the truth.
19. Politicians promote women’s rights as absolute. They must be enforced by the force of law in all situations. A woman’s right to make health care choices is complete. Differences between men and women are considered cultural, never biological. Compensation and career differences are due to the male patriarchy which holds down women as a group and individually. Affirmative action is required to make up for historic and ongoing systemic exploitation. The postmodernist view of powerful majority groups taking advantage of minority groups is believed and shared. Women are victims of the system. This is a minority view, even among women, Democrats and Democratic women. It provides others with an extremist example to oppose and caricature. It promotes a sense of victimhood rather than constructive steps to analyze, program and improve equal rights.
20. Politicians also promote absolute racial equality. Historical progress in majority and minority groups is discounted because legal, individual and systemic racism continues to be experienced or directed at racial minorities. Legal cases about fine distinctions are treated as right versus wrong, good versus evil. Pragmatic policies to address income and wealth inequality are considered poor substitutes for direct actions to address racial differences. The postmodernist view of powerful majority groups taking advantage of minority groups is believed and shared. Support for affirmative action is required. Politicians who are not fully aligned with interest groups are shunned. These politicians argue that racism is a clear moral ideal which cannot be negotiated, fine-tuned or compromised. Their opponents claim that they are overly righteous and misguided.
21. Politicians proclaim equal rights for many sexual orientations. They support a rainbow coalition that says that no one’s sexual rights are safe until everyone’s rights are safe and fully supported by society. Some politicians take the position that gender identity is purely culturally and individually determined, without respect to biology. The postmodernist view of powerful majority groups taking advantage of minority groups is believed and shared. Individuals with minority identities are considered victims of the binary majority. The greatly increased legal and social acceptance or embrace of diverse identities is discounted. Historians argue that personal interactions were the key to such progress, not abstract philosophies or political actions. Some proposals to expand equal opportunity are effectively criticized by opponents.
22. Politicians claim that the “separation of church and state” must be total. Any use of religious organizations, programs, individuals, facilities or moral thoughts is inherently infringing on “freedom of religion”. Only a fully secular state, as in France, is consistent with liberty and democracy. Church property and activities should be taxed like all others. Churches and religious thought are inherently “conservative” thereby intruding on fair politics. Most Americans hold some degree of classic religious beliefs. They don’t see churches, per se, as threats to society, science or politics. They believe that individuals are aware, independent and wise enough to incorporate religion into their lives appropriately.

Summary

Politicians create issues to effectively define their positions and beliefs. They prefer “wedge issues” because they are most effective in separating individuals into opposing groups. They prefer “victim” issues because those who feel they are victims both oppose the other party and bond with the politician and his party. These distinctive, emotional issues are the most effective tools for politicians. As citizens, we must be aware of these attempts to oversimplify, to conflate, to polarize, to misrepresent, to motivate, to distract, to anger, to demonize and ultimately to disappoint.

There are “differences of opinion” on each item above. Some are honest, perhaps irreconcilable differences. Others are merely fabricated differences. Making a mountain out of a molehill. We have a personal and civic responsibility to be engaged, thoughtful participants in politics. We have allowed politicians to take misleading, divisive short cuts for much too long.