Neuropolitical fallacies arise when traumatized political actors unreflectively project their personal experiences and psychological imprints onto socio-political decisions. These fallacies particularly manifest in three areas.

Three Dangerous Perspectives

An oversimplified black-and-white view of complex political challenges that stems from trauma-induced thought patterns. The application of personal trauma coping strategies to state actions, such as through excessive control or isolation. The exploitation of collective traumas to justify illiberal politics.

Danger Zones

These fallacies are particularly dangerous because they hide behind seemingly rational political arguments and are often only recognizable in their long-term impacts. They can lead to a spiral of political polarization and societal division.

An example of neuropolitical fallacies can be seen in the politics advocated by J.D. Vance: His worldview shaped by ACEs leads to an excessive emphasis on traditional family structures as a solution to complex social problems, while systemic causes of social inequality are ignored.

Neuropolitical fallacies are considered systemic causes because power-conscious individuals worldwide currently manage to democratically legitimize their actions. This results in a shift of what is regarded as normal. Displayed contempt is then no longer a strange character trait but a neuropolitical peculiarity that is exploited at the expense of democracy.