Communal Narcissism

The driving force of the progressive left

Written by Bert Parlee and Keith Thompson.

In June 2020, activists in the music industry organized “Blackout Tuesday”, an online protest against “racial injustice”. Numerous celebrities and influencers posted the image of a solid black square, earning praise from their supporters and racking up thousands of likes. Yet most of them took no substantive action. This is the essence of communal narcissism: claiming to do good while seeking moral superiority.

Western society has become obsessed with stunts of this kind by self-proclaimed do-gooders who cloak themselves in virtue while craving fame and attention. Unlike the brash “I’m the best!” narcissism of figures like Trump, communal narcissists wear compassion like a crown, seeking applause through affirmations of selflessness. Thankfully, academic research has shed some light on this subtler variant.

Examining the literature on clinical narcissism in the time of Trump, we discovered something surprising. Researchers had been certain they would be able to distinguish healthy individuals from those suffering from the new condition. What gradually dawned on them was that many of the individuals they’d been scoring as normal were in fact exhibiting vanity, grandiosity and entitlement—the hallmark traits that self-centered narcissists display more overtly!

Of course, the pathological aspects of the new condition announce themselves in markedly different words and gestures. It had previously been assumed that these characteristics were healthy—unlike the well-known characteristics of overt narcissism so readily apparent in people like Trump. Remarkably, the experts nearly missed telltale signs of what they would go on to characterize as communal narcissism (“communal” indicating that individuals seek validation and admiration through their perceived contributions to social groups or communities, rather than through personal achievements).

To our surprise, and that of the researchers themselves, communal narcissism turns out to be the equal and opposite variant of the self-centered overt type in which individuals boast about being “the best”.

Jochen Gebauer’s 2012 paper in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology introduced the “agency-communion model”, distinguishing agentic narcissists, who boast of their intelligence or achievements, from communal narcissists, who claim to be the most helpful or virtuous. Yet both groups share the same essential needs for affirmation and validation. Ekin Ok’s work enhanced our understanding further. The communal narcissist’s warm glow conceals a sense of entitlement and “special” status. For such individuals, feedback or criticism is commonly experienced as attack. While communal narcissism can be detected in many social movements, both today and in the past, it most closely mirrors the ethos of the progressive left. In fact, it plays a key role in the psycho-social dynamics driving that ideology.

Communal narcissism exists on a spectrum. At its mild end, individuals earnestly advocate for social justice, finding quiet satisfaction and camaraderie in their omni-cause of supporting the intersecting grievances of “marginalized” groups. When less benign, individuals become dogmatic and antagonistic, as when The View hosts engage in anti-Trump vitriol, prioritizing moral posturing over dialogue. At its most severe, individuals try to justify violence, such as BLM riots, assaults on Trump supporters, or the firebombing of Tesla vehicles. Perhaps most chilling is selective compassion, as seen in the silence of many progressives after the recent murders of Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Lynn Milgrim. Despite the victims’ dedication to peace, many self-styled champions of universal values withheld outrage, revealing a disconnect between their benevolent self-image and a deeper ideological purity.

The progressive left’s pivot away from violent revolution in the ‘60’s, and its subsequent “long march through the institutions”, echoes this pattern. From campus protests to corporate boardrooms, activists demand “systemic” change—but their need for validation often overshadows the very goals they want to achieve. Thomas Sowell’s The Vision of the Anointed unpacks this delusion, where “good intentions” habitually resist disconfirming facts, leading to blind spots, unintended consequences and lack of course corrections.

Totalitarian movements thrive by “manufacturing consent”. Ordinary people are forced to operate within “permission structures” designed by elites with power and authority. As a consequence, they come to believe things that they would not have otherwise entertained: allowing men to compete against women in sports; approving sex changes for minors; opening borders to unvetted illegal immigrants; defunding the police and decriminalizing crime. Radical changes in policy are facilitated by media and institutional narratives that provide scaffolding for fast-shifting beliefs.

In Private Truths, Public Lies, Timur Kuran introduced the concept of “preference falsification”, where individuals publicly affirm politically correct “truths”, while privately remaining skeptical. Unlike overt narcissists, who shrug off social norms, communal narcissists require moral approval from the anointed, rendering them more susceptible to social pressures and more likely to falsify their preferences. They readily adopt questionable ideas that “the narrative” insists are fair-minded and true.

In 1957, Carl Jung warned of “collective possession” driven by an “overwrought emotionality” that is immune to reason. He spoke of a “psychic epidemic fueled by utopian delusions.” Today’s progressive left, with chants like “no human is illegal”, risks falling into this trap. Arguably, it already has.

Yet a path forward exists, illuminated by two men who were both assassinated at the age of 39. Malcolm X experienced a crisis of faith after discovering abuses within the Nation of Islam, but found clarity in his pilgrimage to Mecca, where he prayed alongside “blue-eyed blonds and black skinned Africans”. Upon his return, he offered the following statement: “I’m for the truth, no matter who tells it; I’m for justice no matter who it’s for or against. I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such, I stand for what benefits humanity as a whole.”

Martin Luther King likewise sought to combine the disparate values comprising his “big tent”—love from Southern Baptist congregants and the Nietzschean “will to power” from secular allies. In his famous sermon of 1967, he forged a synthesis: “Power without love is reckless and abusive. Love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love, implementing the demands of justice. And justice at its best is power, correcting everything that stands against love.”

Such wisdom offers an antidote to the communal narcissism of today’s left: authentic compassion rooted in universal truth. Western civilization must return to these values—duty, honor, rationality and openness to debate. It was F. Scott Fitzgerald who noted that the mark of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time without losing the ability to function—for instance, accepting that there are differences between individuals and groups.

A wise culture resists what Solzhenitsyn called “the persistent utopian lie,” distinguishing authentic from performative compassion. We must teach our children that genuine goodwill comes from personal decency, not external validation. Only then will we be able to reconstitute the principles that have guided humanity for centuries.

Bert Parlee is a clinical psychologist, psychotherapist, executive coach and leadership trainer. Keith Thompson is the author of Leaving the Left and The UFO Paradox, and has written for the New York Times.

---

Support Aporia with a paid subscription:

You can also follow us on Twitter.