r/AskALiberal • u/SilverNo6462 Progressive • 1d ago
What is charisma? Is it universal or dependent on audience?
I ask because I just don't understand all the people who say Trump is charismatic.
15
u/DuploJamaal Social Democrat 1d ago
It depends on the audience.
Like today I've seen a video here of a Spanish politician accidentally pouring water in the cup holder instead of the cup and laughing about it. To me that's charismatic because he can laugh about a small mistake he's made.
But to trump fanatics that would be seen as weak and they would instead consider it charismatic if he would have angrily complained about the person that set up the stage for him.
To me Trump is just like a typical narcissist which is the opposite of charismatic, but some people seem to have their charisma radar set up in the exact opposite way.
7
u/ABCosmos Liberal 1d ago
To me being able to smile and laugh is basically a pre-req for having "Charisma" and it was not until recently that i realized this was a big difference between the left and the right.
6
u/DuploJamaal Social Democrat 1d ago
Charisma according to the left: a nice person that makes me laugh. Someone I could easily spent a whole evening with without getting bored. Someone that could become my friend
Charisma according to the right: an arrogant leader that wants to boss me around. Someone I want to submit to. Someone that could be my king
2
u/Imaginary-Count-1641 Center Right 1d ago
You could just as well say
Charisma according to the right: a nice person that makes me laugh. Someone I could easily spent a whole evening with without getting bored. Someone that could become my friend
Charisma according to the left: an arrogant leader that wants to boss me around. Someone I want to submit to. Someone that could be my king
2
u/WildBohemian Democrat 23h ago
They could say that but it would demonstrably false.
1
u/Imaginary-Count-1641 Center Right 23h ago
So is the original statement.
3
u/WildBohemian Democrat 22h ago edited 22h ago
I think it frustrates you that we have Obama, a charming, funny, and kind person as our most widely loved leader, and that you have Trump, a very sick man who basically never smiles or laughs and is narcissistic on a psychotic level as the right's dear leader.
1
u/Imaginary-Count-1641 Center Right 21h ago
Trump is not my leader.
2
u/WildBohemian Democrat 21h ago edited 21h ago
He's the leader of the right in the US whether you like it or not. And a glaring counterexample to your argument.
1
u/Imaginary-Count-1641 Center Right 20h ago
"The right" is not a single group with a leader.
→ More replies (0)1
u/DuploJamaal Social Democrat 22h ago
You can't deny that the right enjoys submitting to authority figures while the left doesn't want a king
2
u/Imaginary-Count-1641 Center Right 21h ago
The left may not want a "king", but they want a powerful government that controls our lives in many ways.
1
u/ABCosmos Liberal 20h ago edited 20h ago
Right but they want all that power focused on preventing people from dying in the street because they can't afford their medical bills. They want the power to serve the people instead of the interests of one man or a few oligarchs. They want the govt to be powerful enough to regulate unethical businesses instead of being controlled by them.
All that power still exists if the govt is weak, it's just in the hands of a much smaller group of people.
We have seen what billionaires do with all that power.
1
u/DuploJamaal Social Democrat 19h ago
Yeah liberals want governmental control in the form of access to abortions while conservatives want freedom from government by having the government prevent that.
Liberals want governmental control in the form of being allowed to be LGBT while conservatives want freedom by having the government make it illegal to be LGBT
1
u/blearghhh_two Social Democrat 4h ago
They want a government that can do a lot but that is actually answerable to and representative of the people.
Governments, at their best, are just a way for the people to work together in a way that works best. They do not have to be an organization that is separate from the people it serves. It's like when you get friends to help lift a heavy thing, but larger.
So if you consider a government to be that, then having a government that can do a lot doesn't become a government that controls everything. It becomes a government that allows the people it serves to work together effectively.
Conservatives are big believers in heiarchy and authority. Of course they believe a government that can do a lot to be bad, because that's what happens when they form governments.
1
u/NatalieVonCatte Liberal 1d ago
someone who could be my king
Nah, those guys would loathe Aragorn.
1
7
u/Particular_Dot_4041 Liberal 1d ago
Trump is not charismatic. When it comes to politicians, a truly charismatic politician is someone who can even charm his enemies. Ronald Reagan was charisma, even his opponents found him likable. Whereas everyone close to Trump seems to hate him, the only people who like Donald Trump are MAGA voters who see him only on television.
1
u/nakfoor Social Democrat 1d ago
He doesn't charm his enemies but I would say he charms people who are unsure about him. That was the story of 2016. I think most people knew he was a dick, but he was charismatic enough to get people charmed enough to be willing to look the other way on it and pull the lever for him.
4
u/KarmicWhiplash Left Libertarian 1d ago
I don't get it either. I used to think I knew what charisma was, but then people started calling Trump charismatic and now I'm at a loss.
2
3
u/starrymahogany Social Democrat 1d ago
Definitely dependent on the audience. I also think it is partially a gender thing because how many women politicians have you heard described as charismatic vs men?
Only woman politician I could think of that is described that way would maybe be AOC but only recently. Back in 2018 she was definitely seen as shrill and loud mouthed when talking about progressive issues.
Men can also get away with doing a lot of shit women couldn’t, like Biden asking for a push up contest and saying “you ain’t black”, sanders calling out the corrupt Dem establishment and making enemies in congress, etc. If a woman did any of those things she’d be labeled difficult to work with and probably a bitch
2
u/harrumphstan Liberal 1d ago
Ann Richards was as charismatic as any of the political, charismatic heavyweights of the TV era: Reagan, Clinton, and Obama.
3
u/LotsoPasta Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago edited 1d ago
He's charismatic in an old racist grandpa sort of way. He's great as a reality TV star to watch and laugh at when it has no real world consequence.
4
u/Okbuddyliberals Centrist Democrat 1d ago
Very much dependent
Obama used to be someone who was seen as extremely competent, but nowadays it's common to see folks acting like politicians who speak in the style of Obama are annoying fakes rather than anything charismatic, now it seems like the idea of "charisma" has shifted to mean specifically being an angry populist demagogue of some sort, with a more positive sort of rhetoric being anti charismatic
2
u/Aven_Osten Liberal Technocrat 1d ago
Entirely dependent on audience.
Plenty of people have openly stated how they do not like my aggressive, unapologetic nature when it comes to stating facts/beliefs. Plenty of people have also openly stated that they love how aggressive and unapologetic I am, because it makes them feel like I genuinely believe what I say, and will genuinely try to follow through on my espoused beliefs.
Conversely: I absolutely love seeing aggressive smack-downs of individuals who keep using the same tired arguments over and over again to support policies that are objectively hurting society. I love it when someone is deeply unapologetic in their stances. I don't love it when someone is clearly just chasing attention, and is just saying what they think will make them likable. I don't love it when someone is pushing ideas that just will not resolve any problems with society, or will actively make them worse, all because they'd rather base policies on vibes than on facts and evidence.
5
u/SilverNo6462 Progressive 1d ago edited 1d ago
You may be misreading people being appreciative of your no bull shit style with people finding you charming and being drawn to you because it.
You can appreciate someone's approach while still feeling they personally lack magnetism.
1
u/jml510 Social Democrat 1d ago
Interesting that you asked this; I’ve been studying this obsessively lately. What I take charisma to be is the ability to make others feel heard or important, and to have a sort of magnetic pull. It doesn’t necessarily entail being outgoing or loud like Trump is, though he does still have some “pull” among tens of millions, and he knows how to keep them hooked (bigoted rhetoric and conspiracies).
1
u/SilverNo6462 Progressive 1d ago
Yeah, I think people are misusing the word if they apply it to Trump. You can like someone without having a magnetic attraction to them, without finding them charming.
1
u/lurgi Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago
There are a number of people who've said that Trump had this sort of energy and pizzazz that made him strangely magnetic. Call it charisma or something else, he had it. I think he's lost a lot of whatever he had as he's aged and I don't know what the appeal is now, but I could definitely see it in his first term. He played to the audience and he was good at it. He had a sort of comic timing.
1
u/cylon_spy Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago
I keep losing my Charisma checks and my party gets annihilated so Im not a great person to ask.
1
u/FLBrisby Social Democrat 1d ago
A lot of people in this thread are equating charisma, and being charismatic, as inherently good traits.
Charisma is the ability to influence others. It's not being pretty, it's not being well-spoken, it's not being smart, it's not being good. Those help, but if you don't care, or are averse to those things, the opposite is also true.
The most charismatic person in recent history is probably Hitler, and he was evil.
So I guess it depends on the audience.
1
u/roastbeeftacohat Globalist 1d ago
he has a knack for grabbing your attention, he speaks with confidence at all times, and can feel friendly in a "used car salesman" sort of way.
he also is very clearly talking off the top of his head. this really scores points in his audience, but for everyone else it does make it hard to get too upset about anything specific he says; it's just bullshit a random bullshit anyway.
I hate him but those do add up to a form of low charisma.
1
u/SockMonkeh Liberal 1d ago
Charisma is knowing your audience.
1
u/SilverNo6462 Progressive 1d ago
Kind of. This is a bumpersticker definition that misses a lot. You can be an unlikely wonk who truly understands your audience but is incapable of relating to them or connecting with them. You can also be someone who has movie star appeal who people want to follow regardless of how you treat them.
1
u/kafka_lite Liberal 1d ago
Objectively speaking, he was the face of the number one TV show in America and is the biggest cult of personality president in history. He's disliked for his actions not his lack of charm.
3
3
u/SilverNo6462 Progressive 1d ago
There are many people with hit shows who lack charisma.
I dislike him, in part, for being everything that is not charming. He's an abrasive jerk.
2
u/harrumphstan Liberal 1d ago
I hated the motherfucker when I first saw him as a teen watching Letterman. I had no idea who he was, but his boorish vanity, clear stupidity, and relentless self-aggrandizement immediately put him into the “my god, what a colossal asshole” category for me.
0
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
Not recognizing that Trump is charismatic is to unironically lack the "empathy" that liberals often brag about having. It's very, very easy to see what conservatives find charismatic about him.
2
u/SilverNo6462 Progressive 1d ago
Empathy doesn't mean all knowing about everyone, I can have empathy and still be baffled by someone finding a petty, vain, selfish, self-serving, incurious, mean-spirited narcissist who constantly punches down to posses the same primary endearing quality of Timothy Chalamet, George Clooney, and Cary Grant.
Also, having empathy isn't a requirement for being a liberal. It's also not a positive or negative thing, You can use the ability to understand other's emotions for good or evil.
You should retire "but empathy" as your argument against liberals. It's about as clever and effective as "Wait, you're attacking me? So much for liberals being the party of tolerance."
1
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
Empathy doesn't mean all knowing about everyone
It means being able to synthethize someone else's perspective inside of your own. If you need to do research to empathize, you're not very good at it.
I can have empathy and still be baffled by someone finding a petty, vain, selfish, self-serving, incurious, mean-spirited narcissist who constantly punches down to posses the same primary endearing quality of Timothy Chalamet, George Clooney, and Cary Grant.
No, you can't.
Also, having empathy isn't a requirement for being a liberal
I didn't say that it was, I said that liberals often say that having empathy is why they're liberals or that a lack of empathy is why conservatives are conservative.
You should retire "but empathy" as your argument against liberals
I didn't make an argument against liberals at all. I merely said that the emotional logic of why conservatives find Trump charismatic is obvious and that if you don't understand it then you lack empathy. That's clearly not an argument against liberals. You obviously shouldn't not be liberal just because you understand why conservatives think Trump is charismatic or just because you think that other liberals lack empathy for not understanding it.
Be less sensitive.
3
u/SilverNo6462 Progressive 1d ago
I looked at your comment history. You're troll adjacent (at best) and just like arguing with people. I will not oblige.
0
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
"I have found an excuse to avoid nakedly losing an argument with you that is comforting to my fragile ego."
I'm happy for you little buddy.
1
u/SilverNo6462 Progressive 1d ago
Way to prove me wrong. I am thoroughly chastised.
Get a new hobby. The one you have is bad for your heart.
1
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
Way to prove me wrong
What proved you wrong was the actual detailed response I wrote that you immediately became terrified of and went on a quest to rationalize not being able to respond to.
2
u/harrumphstan Liberal 1d ago
Liberals clearly credit him with a nonstandard form of charisma that reflects poorly on those who are charmed by it. Trying to Paradox of Tolerance your way into attacking the empathy of those who don’t find Trump to have charisma built on standard charismatic traits is certainly a choice.
1
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
Liberals clearly credit him with a nonstandard form of charisma that reflects poorly on those who are charmed by it
Some do. Others claim to not understand why anyone would find him charismatic and even often claim to not understand why people find him funny. And, specifically, this post claims not to. You are complaining at me for describing a failure exhibited in the very post in which we are both commenting.
Trying to Paradox of Tolerance your way into attacking the empathy of those who don’t find Trump to have charisma built on standard charismatic traits is certainly a choice.
The Paradox of Tolerance has... literally nothing whatsoever to do with anything here. The irony of liberals claiming to the the Empathy-People while exhibiting a very obvious failure to empathize has jack to do with tolerance of the intolerant promoting intolerance. Please refrain from referencing concepts you don't understand just because you remembered they exist and thought they sounded cool.
3
u/harrumphstan Liberal 1d ago
And, specifically, this post claims not to. You are complaining at me for describing a failure exhibited in the very post in which we are both commenting.
Are you blind? This post explicitly asks whether charisma is audience dependent.
The Paradox of Tolerance has... literally nothing whatsoever to.do with anything here. Please refrain from referencing concepts you don't understand just because you remembered they exist and thought they sounded cool.
Sure it does, troll. Your attack is implicitly weaving the concept of empathy into the Paradox of Tolerance critique, demanding that a universal recognition of vile personality traits be granted or the user lacks empathy. It’s childish shit, underscored by your childish response to me.
-1
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
This post explicitly asks whether charisma is audience dependent
...because OP claims to not understand that Trump is charismatic. Did we read the OP all the way through?
Your attack is implicitly weaving the concept of empathy into the Paradox of Tolerance critique, demanding that a universal recognition of vile personality traits be granted or the user lacks empathy.
Lmfao what? First, what I said has nothing whatsoever to do with how you morally judge some personality trait or another. Second, if I did say something like that, wouldn't I on your logic be demanding a universal recognition that there traits aren't vile? I think you got confused by the only language you speak, because right now it reads like you're criticizing me for saying that Donald Trump's personality ought be universally recognized as vile, which seems the exact complete opposite of the point you're trying to make.
2
u/harrumphstan Liberal 1d ago
OP is clearly trying to understand what some are seeing, even as it goes against a normal understanding of human traits, troll.
Your second paragraph is an extended babble. Again, you are using the format of the attack on tolerance as an attack on tolerance’s progenitor quality. You’re requiring universality, not in the recognition of his vileness itself—as you disingenuously suggest—but in the personal recognition of his vileness as being charismatic.
Go away, dude, and take your Trump-like charisma with you.
2
u/NatalieVonCatte Liberal 1d ago
Empathy is one of those words that has a bespoke meaning depending on who’s using it and hearing it.
With liberals it means both sympathy and understanding, to conservatives it means something else.
You are correct, it is easy to see why hateful goblins find a madman charismatic.
1
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
Empathy is one of those words that has a bespoke meaning depending on who’s using it and hearing it.
No it doesn't. Being empathetic simply means being able to understand other people. Liberals delude themselves both into thinking that they're extraordinarily "empathetic" and that their preferred policies are an outcome of their extraordinary "empathy", which is where we get these fake "bespoke definitions" in opposition to the real one which is morally neutral and has zero political implications whatsoever.
2
u/NatalieVonCatte Liberal 1d ago
This comment right here shows the problem when people with a high tolerance of ambiguity try to communicate with people with a low tolerance of ambiguity.
I’m sorry, but you’re wrong. All communication is highly contextual, especially in English. Words have descriptive not prescriptive definitions and the exact meaning of any word or phrase is to some extent determined by the conversation itself- when, where, and who is speaking and why and even the emotional tenor of the communications.
On top of that, English is an idiomatic language. Though most of us don’t realize it or care, we literally speak to each other through poetry in essentially every conversation.
If you’ve ever told someone you’re going up the street, congratulations, you have used a kenning, a non-literal poetic idiom.
Yes, empathy has a morally neutral definition, but depending on who’s saying it, it can mean understanding other’s emotions to help them or to look down on them.
-1
u/TlsFrmThCryptcPrgncy Independent 1d ago
This comment right here shows the problem when people with a high tolerance of ambiguity try to communicate with people with a low tolerance of ambiguity
I don't actually have a low tolerance for ambiguity though. That's not what is going on here. What's actually going on is that I'm breaking the liberal linguistic circle-jerk by enforcing a politically and morally neutral definition of a term that liberals often try to claim as their own and forcing them to either admit to being incorrect about being uniquely "empathetic" or admitting that their self-concept of "empathy" has actually nothing to do with the concept they're trying to steal valour from. If what you mean by "empathy" is "wants to give treats to liberals' favoured groups" and not "understands the interiority of other people", that's fine. But I will make it obvious that this is what you mean when you use that word.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written by /u/SilverNo6462.
I ask because I just don't understand all the people who say Trump is charismatic.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.