In the Spring of 2016, we wrote an essay (Our Leadership Dilemma, IAPSP eforum, 2019) in which we applied ideas of Heinz Kohut, the founder of Self Psychology, regarding the psychology of leadership to the then current presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. In that essay we explored the implications of Kohut’s theory of contrasting leadership types (the Idealizable Leader and the Grandiose Leader) for our understanding of the significance each candidate held for their supporters and how the particular nature of their leadership style would possibly affect their electability. In the end we suggested some ideas regarding the impact of the election of either candidate on the state of the body politic. Now, we would like to update our earlier thesis by extending Kohut’s models to our understanding of the leadership crisis at the heart of the current Covid-19 pandemic.

Donald Trump, whom we described as the Grandiose Leader candidate, won the 2016 election and has been President for the past 3 years and now we are engulfed in the worldwide Covid-19 pandemic which is impacting human health and threatening our global social, economic and political order. One of the explanations for how the virus spread throughout the United States, making our country the epicenter of the pandemic, centers on the failure of leadership by the Trump Administration, in particular the initial denial by Trump of the severity of threat posed by the virus and resulting lack of preparedness. To some, this lack of leadership seems inexplicable and dangerous. In the remainder of this essay, we would like to offer an explanation of this frightening and dangerous failure in leadership of Donald Trump by extending our earlier analysis to our present situation. In particular we believe that Trump’s leadership style, which he has relied on during the developing phase of the pandemic, is motivated by his investment in a bond of grandiosity between him and his supporters, in which massive denial and the projection of fantasies of omnipotence and paranoia, combine to distort pragmatic judgement and cripple the capacity for appropriate action.

To begin let’s review the psychology of the Grandiose Leader as we discussed it in our 2016 essay:

The Grandiose leader is viewed as powerful, perhaps also aggressive. Rather than simply admiring the grandiose leader the voter wants to become like him or her. In other words, he or she identifies with him or her and in this way shares in the power and grandeur. This type of leader attracts those voters who feel disenfranchised, disrespected and unsuccessful. The shame and humiliation of their disaffection and sense of being forgotten propel the grandiose leader’s followers. They seek to cure their shame and humiliation by melding into the omnipotence and grandiosity of the leader. He or she offers them a fantasy of success and even revenge for grievances. In his or her presence, especially when in the midst of an emotionally charged rally, the voter feels at one with both the leader and the group. Together they feel powerful, justified and restored by dreams of restitution. The unity of the “movement” is part of its appeal; foreignness and difference are hated and repudiated.

The primary motivation of a leader such as Donald Trump is the maintenance of the bond of grandiosity with his followers. Everything is organized in such a way as to enhance the leaders image of authority, accomplishment and popularity. Even when confronted with obvious shortcomings, he remains shameless and insistent on his preeminence and special abilities. He must continually reinforce the grand image which his base of supporters mirror back to him. This explains the special function of Trump’s rallies, his appointment of sycophants as advisors and currently, his long self-indulgent press conferences where he touts the ongoing success of his nonexistent coronavirus healthcare strategy while undercutting his own medical leadership, with his hunches and lies. In contrast, Franklin Roosevelt braced the country for going to war by promoting the ideals of the four freedoms: freedom of speech and religion, freedom from want and fear, hallowed principles all, as opposed to Trump’s preoccupation with “reopening the country”, by restoring the bull market and the national economy at any cost, even at the risk of the people’s health and welfare.

Trump craves an omnipotent relationship to reality – only what he says is true, the rest is “fake news”. During the pandemic emergency when information, facts and honesty are essential and have mortal consequences, the President insists on promoting his own peculiar and false beliefs about the nature of the virus, and the course of the epidemic. He attacks reporters for promoting “fake news”. Consistent with his past behavior, he claims a unique knowledge and expertise. He promotes unsubstantiated beliefs and recommendations, while undermining those people who are promoting scientific facts and effective health strategies. He is not interested in the welfare of citizens, rather he sees in the pandemic an opportunity for exhibitionism and the enactment of an omnipotent fantasy. Hence his recent claims regarding the popularity and ratings of his daily briefings, which he compares favorably with other hit reality television shows.

Grandiose leaders such as Trump often rely on a narrative of racial purification – the virus is foreign (the “Chinese Virus”) and must be viewed as an external threat that the “wall” will protect us from. He refuses to admit that the virus is now part of us and being so, is thus our problem. This xenophobic attitude has contributed to the initial denial of the epidemic and more recently, his refusal to insist on a national lockdown. In addition, he now claims that the CDCs order to use masks in public is just a recommendation to be followed based on personal preference. To Trump Covid 19 is not an American virus, hence he promotes the premature return to business as usual, despite the economic unraveling which is occurring in such a dramatic and frightening fashion.

A grandiose leader such as Trump is organized around the idea that he is in continual battle with enemies. Hence, loyalty is everything to him, and even the most reasonable disagreement is experienced as betrayal. Earlier supporters are cast out as traitors. Now, hungering for revenge, Trump promotes a fantasy of enemies in our midst, the culprits of our epidemic, who first exaggerate the threat, and then force a “solution which is worse than the cure”

The maintenance of an image of success requires the touting of leadership accomplishments even when they do not in fact exist. Trump’s followers, dependent on their identification with the fantasy of his powerful and aggressive persona, join him in his delusional insistence on success, despite the logically irrefutable and compelling nature of the facts. The body count goes up, PPEs and ventilators remain scarce, testing is hopelessly backlogged, and political allies betray their constituents through lies and half measures, yet Trump touts his performance as A+.

Consistent with the inherent narcissistic vulnerability of the grandiose leader as we described in our earlier essay, Donald Trump depends on the maintenance of an ongoing tie to archaic experiences of being praised and valued for his greatness and reputation as a winner. However, since the maintenance of such an unrealistic and primitive grandiosity is impossible to maintain in the real world (for example the admission of powerlessness over a novel viral epidemic being experienced as a threat to self-esteem), Trump and his followers must maintain a fantasy of his success and greatness by continually ignoring his incompetence and lack of accomplishment, and promoting a narrative which belies the truth and distorts reality by declaring evidence to be a hoax and experts to be “enemies of the people”. Not surprisingly, this power strategy has impaired Trump’s ability to evaluate his own vulnerability, and to assess the problems he and the nation face in realistic terms. Most important, Trump’s continual need to see all situations and facts in regards to how they either threaten or support this grandly magnificent delusional Self, makes it impossible for him to effectively evaluate and judge real world conditions on their own terms, thus making effective and necessary planning and action impossible.

Trump’s recent acceptance of the reality of the pandemic is consistent with his past description of immigrants as rapists and criminals. He has begun to personify Covid-19 as an evil, foreign invader which must be violently expelled. The use of imagery such as Trump as a “Wartime President” fighting an “invisible enemy” is now promoted, once again making use of grandiose rhetoric to pump up his base. This martial imagery, although preferable to grandiose denial, will impair a thoughtful and unified national healthcare strategy.

Now that we have examined the nature of the Grandiose Leader and the ways in which Donald Trump personifies and actualizes their traits, we would like to discuss what we refer to as the “Idealizable Leader”. We will show how this type of leader is a counterpoint to Trump’s grandiosity, emphasizing honesty, truth, empathy and real accomplishment. We will them offer an example out of the current pandemic. To begin, let’s review a description of the Idealizable Leader from our earlier essay:

The Idealizable Leader is someone whom people want to admire and elevate. This leader embodies positive values; and the voter, through a connection with the leader feels a sense of security and comfort. Merger with the ideals and principles of the admired leader are at the heart of the relationship. Such mature idealization of another adult is not the needful gaze of children who look to a parent for safety and security or the tantrum of a four-year-old who turns to a parent to make it stop raining. Through a healthy good enough childhood, the mature person comes to value another (in this case the presidential) for his or her principles and ideals. It is the leader’s character and personhood that is admired and trusted.

Especially in a time of crisis, the Idealizable leader is viewed by the public as competent and grounded in reality. The leader’s self-organization and self-esteem is not threatened by facts or unwanted challenges, rather he or she gains strength and resolve from the most daunting situations (which the grandiose leader might recoil from or deny). Rather than retreating into delusions of grandeur, the Idealizable leader feels a heightened sense of focus and initiative. To him or her, power is not simply a means of self-aggrandizement, rather it is the actual capacity to get things done and effect change reflecting the fulfillment of the principles and ideals of society, concretized through action and accomplishment. The followers of the Idealizable leader experience the relationship on a mature level. They admire the leader, but also accept his humanity and limitations. Rather than merger and archaic identifications, they view themselves as citizens, partners in the leaders’ work, accepting some responsibility for the problems and especially the solutions.

An example of an Idealizable leader is Governor Cuomo of New York. Over the past weeks New York State and especially New York City have experienced one of the largest clusters of Covid 19 illnesses in the world. Governor Cuomo has on a daily basis conducted press conferences to provide information and answer questions regarding the threats facing the state and city, explaining to the public the plans and resources which are needed to deal with the crisis. At times his leadership style has been contrasted with President Trump’s. In this regard we believe that Cuomo does exhibit the characteristics of the Idealizable leader. As an example, the following quote is from a press conference which the Governor held on April 2, 2020 in which he answered a question regarding whether he has been “changed by the pandemic”.

“I think it will change me. This is incredibly hard. I take my job seriously. I take my responsibilities seriously. I don’t make excuses. If I fail, I fail. If something goes wrong – it’s on me. I take that personally. I feel the pain families are feeling. People dying is humbling. It’s painful, just painful. This is a long time under that level of pain. What do you look like when you get to the other side? I don’t know. I don’t know.”

The above quote reflects many of the traits of the Idealizable leader. Let’s discuss several of these in detail:

Rather than promoting a fantasy of personal power and grandeur, Cuomo admits that he is a person who is humbled by crisis. His personality structure is not rigid and fixed, but open and malleable, responsive to changing events, especially when confronted by a highly stressful situation. That being said Cuomo is well known as a hard, persistent and sometimes ruthless leader, which makes his openness and accessibility even more compelling in the present circumstance.

“This is incredibly hard.” Rather than immediately noting his success and the great work he has done (contrasted with Trump’s continual self-rating of A+), Cuomo notes the difficulty of the challenge he is faced with. By noting how hard the work is, he recognizes the effort he must make and implies the possibility of failure. This idea of the limits of political power was noted by Lincoln in an 1865 address when he said: “I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me.”

“I take my job seriously. I take my responsibilities seriously.” Rather than viewing his job as a reflection of his grandiosity and a tool for self-promotion, Cuomo describes himself as committed to responsibilities external to his self, the goal of which is promotion of the commonweal. It is the job of the Governor and the responsibilities which come with it that matter to him, not as opportunities for self-aggrandizement, but as a public trust.

“If I fail, I fail. If something goes wrong – it’s on me. I take it personally.” Unlike the Grandiose Leader who externalizes all fault by blaming others, especially those who are different or foreign (see Trump’s recent condemnation of the WHO), Cuomo accepts responsibility and even blame. This implies that he assesses his actions realistically and that his efforts may at times be imperfect and ineffective. He accepts blame because he assumes the power and responsibilities of his office, and takes his job seriously and personally.

“I feel the pain families are feeling. People dying is humbling. It is painful, Just painful.” In this statement Cuomo exhibits the defining characteristic of the Idealizable leader – empathy. Rather than being the grandiose leader whose perfection and fantastic abilities and power will “win” over the invisible enemy, Cuomo stops for a moment and reflects on the impact which the crisis is having on people, noting the pain they feel and the terrible consequences of disease and death. And he shares their suffering. by repeating the phrase “It’s painful, just painful.” He underlines not just the suffering of his constituents but his own pain as well.

“This is a long time under that level of pain. What do you look like when you get to the other side? I don’t know. I don’t know.” In this last phrase, Cuomo captures the down-to-earth nature of the Idealizable leader, who is capable of a mature and realistic form of heroism. He notes the ordeal which he and others are going through. He has earlier noted how hard the job is, how daunting the responsibilities, the grave responsibilities and possibility of failure. He recognizes the terrible consequences for his people, and himself. And finally he is willing to admit that he may change in unknown and possibly unwanted ways. Then he says something that Trump as a grandiose leader would never say (except as a means of denying responsibility): “I don’t know. I don’t know.”

We believe that our country and world need the type of Idealizable leadership we have been discussing. The prolonged reign of a grandiose leader such as Donald Trump can only further undermine the body politic, national institutions, public trust and most important in the current instance, the economy and public health. For some, at the time of the last presidential election, the risk of electing such a grandiose leader provoked concerns regarding how such a leader would deal with a national crisis – we now know the results and they are terrible. In this current Presidential election year, we can only hope that a mature and Idealizable leader will be elected in November, to provide effective moral, psychological, economic and political leadership to our stricken world.