By Amy Clark
Guest Columnist
In the May 2025 edition of the Scientific American magazine, author and psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton, in an article titled, “When a Nation Embraces a False Reality,” criticizes America’s present ‘malignant normality’. Lifton defines ‘malignant normality’ as “America’s routinization of falsehood and destructive behavior. It produces psychic numbing, the inability or disinclination to feel, which can reach the point of immobilization.”
He claims, “When factual truth breaks down—with a denial, say, of the outcome of a legitimate election—a rush of falsehoods may inundate an entire society. Factual untruth requires continuous additional untruths to cover and sustain the original one. The defense of continuous falsehoods relies on more than repetition; it requires intimidation and can readily lead to violence.”
Lifton quoted German American philosopher, Hannah Arendt, from her 1971 essay, titled “Lying in Politics.” Through her study of totalitarianism, she explored “the organized lying of groups.” She noted that Adolf Hitler and his propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels influenced the German people’s sense of reality by promoting a wide-spread belief in falsehoods.
I believe many Americans, especially young men, now adopt particular popular falsehoods— such as, “The Great Replacement”—as truth because of our society’s increasing social isolation. Our lives are taken up with time spent working, shopping for food, and traveling to work. We spend our free time ingesting what is available online to shock and entertain us. Opportunities to explore our nation’s history and landscape with family and friends are limited.
The peace and quiet needed to develop independent thought and explore different points of view just doesn’t exist anymore. We need friends from our own community—not online, to help us do that.
In the May 2025 edition of the Scientific American magazine, an article titled, “The Hidden Costs of Men’s Social Isolation,” by political science researchers Angelica Puzio Ferrara and Dylan Vergara, states, “Compared with women, men report having fewer and less supportive friendships. Men’s social networks are more dependent on romantic relationships than those of women.” They believe, “In the contemporary West, norms around manhood and masculinity have emphasized qualities such as emotional stoicism, the idea that ‘weaker’ or ‘softer’ emotions should be withheld at all costs, and hyper-independence, the notion that men don’t need help from anyone, especially other men.”
Nevertheless, they claim, “Psychologists have shown that men and boys who strongly endorse these ideas have worse mental and physical health—and that they are less likely to have close friendships.”
In the June 2025 edition of the Scientific American magazine, in an article titled, “Romantic Hopes,” psychologist Elaine Hoan notes, “U.S. adults view three-year-old boys who are described as sensitive and emotional as less likable than boys with stereotypically masculine traits. Parents punish sons for expressing sadness and fear.”
As a consequence, according to psychologist Iris Wahring, “Our cultural standard makes men less likely to seek emotional support from friends and family.”
Hoan believes, “There is a need to foster a culture in which men feel encouraged to build strong, emotionally supportive friends outside of romance. This means challenging traditional gender norms that stigmatize male vulnerability and promoting the value of more meaningful friendships for men.”
How can we battle the ‘malignant normality’ we are frozen in? It takes proactive effort, I believe.
In the fall 1989 edition of the American Heritage magazine, Editor Byron Dobell suggested we look to the past for the answer.
He explained, “In 1848, the French toppled their monarch, Louis Philippe—with little bloodshed. Urban workers, the middle class, and students resented the widespread corruption. When the king banned public political meetings, they turned to ‘the revolution of contempt.’”
Dobell asked, “If enough people adopt such a tactic, can a government stand for long?”
He recommended, “Contempt can be a weapon of immense power; that’s why totalitarian societies demand not only obedience but strenuous cheering.”
If you agree that the purpose of the untruths and falsehoods flowing throughout cyberspace is to divide us, then our weapon to disarm it must be uniting our expressions of contempt for their promoters. Resist messages that seek to intimidate us into conforming passively. Let Congress hear your voice.
