Dan Rather last week saw in the funeral of President Carter the death not just of a man but of something else. It was something that can serve as a mark and measure of those who should lead. This something is called ‘character’ - something Dan was mourning perhaps as much as James Carter himself. What is character? Why and when was it abandoned? And what has replaced it? What are the new selection criteria for leadership of countries and of culture?
Thank You Dr. Simon Rogoff, your analysis is powerful in illuminating the systemic roots of this shift from a culture of character to a culture of personality. It isn’t just about individual behaviors or preferences but reflects deeply ingrained societal norms and values that perpetuate and reward certain traits over others.
By framing this transformation within historical, psychological, and cultural contexts, you offer not only clarity but also a call for awareness about how we engage with these systems.
What resonates most is how you connect the rise of narcissistic traits in leadership to trauma and systemic dysfunction. It sheds light on how the very mechanisms that elevate individuals to positions of influence often mirror the unresolved struggles within our collective psyche. This perspective is not only thought-provoking but also deeply humanizing, as it encourages us to see the broader patterns at play rather than simply pointing fingers at individuals.
Your insights encourage reflection on how we, as participants in these systems, contribute to perpetuating them—consciously or unconsciously.
It’s a reminder of the agency we have in questioning these norms, rethinking the qualities we value in leaders, and fostering environments that prioritize connection, integrity, and collective well-being over performance and charisma.
Thank you for articulating this so clearly and compellingly. It opens up a vital conversation about how we can collectively create systems that reflect and nurture the values we wish to see in the world.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment, and for contributing to the conversation. Yes there is a lot more to ask: for example, what systemic and societal changes pushed us in this direction over a hundred years ago. It wasnt something temporary. It also made me think of societies today that might still operate a culture of character. And as you say, what are we doing to perpetuate this?
Simon, thank you for your thoughtful response. Your question about systemic and societal changes resonates deeply with me. Reflecting on my own history and transgenerational trauma, I’ve seen how certain cultural traits persist across centuries, shaped by power dynamics and politics, subtly influencing societies in ways we may not immediately recognize.
Growing up in Germany, I became acutely aware of how the traits and values that defined the Germanic world—discipline, hierarchy, and Großmannssucht (a kind of grandiosity or delusions of grandeur)—have left their mark far beyond Europe. Figures like Charlemagne and the Habsburgs, as well as the strategic marriages of the Habsburg and British royal families, created a web of cultural exchange that reinforced these traits in unexpected places, including the Americas.
What resonated most in your response was how these traits sometimes resurface in modern contexts, as you noted. The parallels between Trump’s behavior and Großmannssucht feel almost uncanny. Digging deeper, I’ve noticed how many of his core voters have ancestral ties to regions historically shaped by Germanic values, whether directly or through colonization and conquest. This isn’t to say it’s deterministic, but it’s a thread worth tugging at.
Your mention of societies that still operate with a "culture of character" makes me wonder: are there ways to consciously nurture these traits without perpetuating the shadows they can cast? Perhaps that’s one of the great questions of our time—how to acknowledge our inherited cultural frameworks without being bound by them.
In my reflections, I’ve found examples of societies that have managed to shift away from such legacies. For instance, Sweden, which was once highly competitive and embraced the expansionist politics so reminiscent of the German Reich, ultimately took a different path. After 1818, under the French Bernadotte dynasty, Sweden moved toward neutrality and egalitarian governance. This marked a departure from its Germanic-influenced militarism, which had its own ties to German nobility, and allowed Sweden to focus on internal stability and peace.
Similarly, Spain transitioned from the Germanic-oriented Habsburgs to the French-influenced House of Bourbon-Aragon. Except for the Franco period, Spain has largely refrained from conflict and fear-mongering on the global stage. These examples reflect only a part of my exploration of this theme, but to me, it feels like much more than coincidence.
Thank you for sparking such a rich conversation. Exchanges like these give me hope that we can gain greater clarity and awareness, both individually and collectively.
Thanks Jay, i hope you can use these helpful and thoughtful comments full of history in an article at some point. Very interesting. Yes the the Swedish example sounds important. It seems to me that we have run so far from charatecter as to get lost in narcissism, and there must something that is more like an integration of the benefits of both, or perhaps just a new version of character. I fear there is also a slight danger of a full counter-revolution (eg Iran?)
Among all your perceptive writing here, Dr. Rogoff, this is my favorite post. I find that it brings so many threads together in such a concise manner. This is important stuff for us all.
As a retired Clinical Social Worker of 45 years, I commend your understanding and explanation of narcissism, trauma and celebrity. I, too, see "malignant" narcissism as
psychopathy--most evidenced in our president-elect. His charisma and powerful presence
overwhelm many people who are not psychologically aware into thinking that he will somehow "save" them from their economic and sociological pain. Vulnerable and powerless people, both men and women, are seduced by this belief. I call this "waiting for Santa Claus."
This saddens me, because it will not end well. Thank you for this cogent and well written article. I look forward to reading more on your Substack.
Thanks Kate! Yes I also wrote the article about ‘when leaders love bomb’ with this seduction in mind. I think Robert Hare’s Snakes in Suits book has a lot to say about this and Im surprised it doesnt get mentioned more. I looked for Hare today on social media but couldnt find him…
It is no coincidence that as personality has become more important, that the United States Military Academy at West Point has dropped the phrase "Duty, Honor, Country" from its mission statement. It was added to the mission statement in 1898 and was omitted when the mission statement was revised in 2024. The 12 points of the Scout Law as I learned it in my teens could be seen as listing the important parts of character.
Yes, and narcissism is a huge negative factor in many people's daily lives too. We have a covert narcissist in our family that is the most difficult type to notice. It has been hell and there isn't much we can do about it as the smear campaign has been done over more than two years and the main flying monkey presents her opinion as fact! One of my three newsletters here will focus a lot on this and related PDs.
Piggybacking on this fantastic and thought-provoking piece, I'd love to see you explore how modern-day manipulative marketing principles and practices (which the nephew of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays, helped establish and which were designed to take advantage of the vulnerable aspects of the 20th century human psyche) have contributed to the development of our current culture of narcissism and celebrity. For some reason this thought was going through my mind like an Indian drone note as I was reading your piece here...
Thanks Rebecca! So youre thinking about how marketing perpetuates a culture of narcissism? I havent read about Bernays - where did you read/hear about him? And do i hear you making a connection with Freud and narcissism perhap?
I forget how I heard about Bernays, it may have been when I served as a VP of Marketing at a high tech firm decades ago, but the marketing principles he established capitalized on his uncle's (Freud) 'discoveries' and assertions about our psyches. You'll want to read this article here, 'The Manipulation of the American Mind: Edward Bernays and the birth of Public Relations: https://theconversation.com/the-manipulation-of-the-american-mind-edward-bernays-and-the-birth-of-public-relations-44393
Excerpt: 'Often referred to as “the father of public relations,” Bernays in 1928 published his seminal work, Propaganda, in which he argued that public relations is not a gimmick but a necessity:
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind."' (End quote)
We live in a culture that is in part shaped by what we are told to be and to want through marketing / advertising practices and content. There seems to me to be a direct correlation with this and aspects of your article here. For example, a study was done recently and a high percentage of children and teens shared that their greatest goal and aspiration was to be a YouTube influencer. In the past - and to this day - ads tell us how to look, feel, think, and be. If the ad values are narcissistic in orientation, this would be reflected in the society and values such ads and attendant marketing practices strive to create, promote, and preserve. See where I'm going here?
Thanks Rebecca for the link and yes i think i see where youre going. And theres maybe a snowball effect with marketing influencing society, society changing and marketing ‘responding’ to society… for a year i lived in a place with very little advertising and from what i notice looking back, something like a culture of character. It was a highly conservative walled town in north pakistan. But then muslim culture references ‘submission’ as a central principle and so guards against narcissism perhaps.
Except, there are in Muslim cultures those who control and those who must submit to those in control...(the people must submit to those in charge religiously and socio-politically; and the women must submit to men, especially and specifically), mirroring narcissistic characteristics, both individual and systemic (covert and overt control of individuals in said systems).
PS, from my friend here Julia Hubbles: "You can find the BBC documentary about Bernays and the beginning of PR on YouTube: The Century of the Self. After watching it you will be irritated as holy shit you were ever convinced you HAD TO HAVE THAT (fill in the blank). www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoMi95tfgP4"
Interesting. Stephen Covey’s phd was on the transition from character to personality. It was the foundation for “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People”. In this realm David Brooks’ “The Road to Character” is also a great read. I included it in the revised edition of “50 Self-Help Classics”
Thank You Dr. Simon Rogoff, your analysis is powerful in illuminating the systemic roots of this shift from a culture of character to a culture of personality. It isn’t just about individual behaviors or preferences but reflects deeply ingrained societal norms and values that perpetuate and reward certain traits over others.
By framing this transformation within historical, psychological, and cultural contexts, you offer not only clarity but also a call for awareness about how we engage with these systems.
What resonates most is how you connect the rise of narcissistic traits in leadership to trauma and systemic dysfunction. It sheds light on how the very mechanisms that elevate individuals to positions of influence often mirror the unresolved struggles within our collective psyche. This perspective is not only thought-provoking but also deeply humanizing, as it encourages us to see the broader patterns at play rather than simply pointing fingers at individuals.
Your insights encourage reflection on how we, as participants in these systems, contribute to perpetuating them—consciously or unconsciously.
It’s a reminder of the agency we have in questioning these norms, rethinking the qualities we value in leaders, and fostering environments that prioritize connection, integrity, and collective well-being over performance and charisma.
Thank you for articulating this so clearly and compellingly. It opens up a vital conversation about how we can collectively create systems that reflect and nurture the values we wish to see in the world.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment, and for contributing to the conversation. Yes there is a lot more to ask: for example, what systemic and societal changes pushed us in this direction over a hundred years ago. It wasnt something temporary. It also made me think of societies today that might still operate a culture of character. And as you say, what are we doing to perpetuate this?
Simon, thank you for your thoughtful response. Your question about systemic and societal changes resonates deeply with me. Reflecting on my own history and transgenerational trauma, I’ve seen how certain cultural traits persist across centuries, shaped by power dynamics and politics, subtly influencing societies in ways we may not immediately recognize.
Growing up in Germany, I became acutely aware of how the traits and values that defined the Germanic world—discipline, hierarchy, and Großmannssucht (a kind of grandiosity or delusions of grandeur)—have left their mark far beyond Europe. Figures like Charlemagne and the Habsburgs, as well as the strategic marriages of the Habsburg and British royal families, created a web of cultural exchange that reinforced these traits in unexpected places, including the Americas.
What resonated most in your response was how these traits sometimes resurface in modern contexts, as you noted. The parallels between Trump’s behavior and Großmannssucht feel almost uncanny. Digging deeper, I’ve noticed how many of his core voters have ancestral ties to regions historically shaped by Germanic values, whether directly or through colonization and conquest. This isn’t to say it’s deterministic, but it’s a thread worth tugging at.
Your mention of societies that still operate with a "culture of character" makes me wonder: are there ways to consciously nurture these traits without perpetuating the shadows they can cast? Perhaps that’s one of the great questions of our time—how to acknowledge our inherited cultural frameworks without being bound by them.
In my reflections, I’ve found examples of societies that have managed to shift away from such legacies. For instance, Sweden, which was once highly competitive and embraced the expansionist politics so reminiscent of the German Reich, ultimately took a different path. After 1818, under the French Bernadotte dynasty, Sweden moved toward neutrality and egalitarian governance. This marked a departure from its Germanic-influenced militarism, which had its own ties to German nobility, and allowed Sweden to focus on internal stability and peace.
Similarly, Spain transitioned from the Germanic-oriented Habsburgs to the French-influenced House of Bourbon-Aragon. Except for the Franco period, Spain has largely refrained from conflict and fear-mongering on the global stage. These examples reflect only a part of my exploration of this theme, but to me, it feels like much more than coincidence.
Thank you for sparking such a rich conversation. Exchanges like these give me hope that we can gain greater clarity and awareness, both individually and collectively.
Thanks Jay, i hope you can use these helpful and thoughtful comments full of history in an article at some point. Very interesting. Yes the the Swedish example sounds important. It seems to me that we have run so far from charatecter as to get lost in narcissism, and there must something that is more like an integration of the benefits of both, or perhaps just a new version of character. I fear there is also a slight danger of a full counter-revolution (eg Iran?)
Among all your perceptive writing here, Dr. Rogoff, this is my favorite post. I find that it brings so many threads together in such a concise manner. This is important stuff for us all.
Thanks Jane!
As a retired Clinical Social Worker of 45 years, I commend your understanding and explanation of narcissism, trauma and celebrity. I, too, see "malignant" narcissism as
psychopathy--most evidenced in our president-elect. His charisma and powerful presence
overwhelm many people who are not psychologically aware into thinking that he will somehow "save" them from their economic and sociological pain. Vulnerable and powerless people, both men and women, are seduced by this belief. I call this "waiting for Santa Claus."
This saddens me, because it will not end well. Thank you for this cogent and well written article. I look forward to reading more on your Substack.
Thanks Kate! Yes I also wrote the article about ‘when leaders love bomb’ with this seduction in mind. I think Robert Hare’s Snakes in Suits book has a lot to say about this and Im surprised it doesnt get mentioned more. I looked for Hare today on social media but couldnt find him…
It is no coincidence that as personality has become more important, that the United States Military Academy at West Point has dropped the phrase "Duty, Honor, Country" from its mission statement. It was added to the mission statement in 1898 and was omitted when the mission statement was revised in 2024. The 12 points of the Scout Law as I learned it in my teens could be seen as listing the important parts of character.
Thanks Don, And what is it now, at West Point, that they will fight for?
It's still the motto. But the mission statement now refers to the "Army values" of which there are about seven. NPR describes the difference. https://www.npr.org/2024/03/14/1238617877/west-point-usma-duty-honor-country-mission-statement
Yes, and narcissism is a huge negative factor in many people's daily lives too. We have a covert narcissist in our family that is the most difficult type to notice. It has been hell and there isn't much we can do about it as the smear campaign has been done over more than two years and the main flying monkey presents her opinion as fact! One of my three newsletters here will focus a lot on this and related PDs.
Thanks Hein v for commenting. Im sorry you are experiencing this close up. Will look out for your articles.
Great exploration!
Thanks
Piggybacking on this fantastic and thought-provoking piece, I'd love to see you explore how modern-day manipulative marketing principles and practices (which the nephew of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays, helped establish and which were designed to take advantage of the vulnerable aspects of the 20th century human psyche) have contributed to the development of our current culture of narcissism and celebrity. For some reason this thought was going through my mind like an Indian drone note as I was reading your piece here...
Thanks Rebecca! So youre thinking about how marketing perpetuates a culture of narcissism? I havent read about Bernays - where did you read/hear about him? And do i hear you making a connection with Freud and narcissism perhap?
I forget how I heard about Bernays, it may have been when I served as a VP of Marketing at a high tech firm decades ago, but the marketing principles he established capitalized on his uncle's (Freud) 'discoveries' and assertions about our psyches. You'll want to read this article here, 'The Manipulation of the American Mind: Edward Bernays and the birth of Public Relations: https://theconversation.com/the-manipulation-of-the-american-mind-edward-bernays-and-the-birth-of-public-relations-44393
Excerpt: 'Often referred to as “the father of public relations,” Bernays in 1928 published his seminal work, Propaganda, in which he argued that public relations is not a gimmick but a necessity:
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind."' (End quote)
We live in a culture that is in part shaped by what we are told to be and to want through marketing / advertising practices and content. There seems to me to be a direct correlation with this and aspects of your article here. For example, a study was done recently and a high percentage of children and teens shared that their greatest goal and aspiration was to be a YouTube influencer. In the past - and to this day - ads tell us how to look, feel, think, and be. If the ad values are narcissistic in orientation, this would be reflected in the society and values such ads and attendant marketing practices strive to create, promote, and preserve. See where I'm going here?
Thanks Rebecca for the link and yes i think i see where youre going. And theres maybe a snowball effect with marketing influencing society, society changing and marketing ‘responding’ to society… for a year i lived in a place with very little advertising and from what i notice looking back, something like a culture of character. It was a highly conservative walled town in north pakistan. But then muslim culture references ‘submission’ as a central principle and so guards against narcissism perhaps.
Except, there are in Muslim cultures those who control and those who must submit to those in control...(the people must submit to those in charge religiously and socio-politically; and the women must submit to men, especially and specifically), mirroring narcissistic characteristics, both individual and systemic (covert and overt control of individuals in said systems).
Yes I’ll have to give that more thought. And Imran Khan is not the most submissive leader in history…
PS, from my friend here Julia Hubbles: "You can find the BBC documentary about Bernays and the beginning of PR on YouTube: The Century of the Self. After watching it you will be irritated as holy shit you were ever convinced you HAD TO HAVE THAT (fill in the blank). www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoMi95tfgP4"
Interesting. Stephen Covey’s phd was on the transition from character to personality. It was the foundation for “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People”. In this realm David Brooks’ “The Road to Character” is also a great read. I included it in the revised edition of “50 Self-Help Classics”
Thanks Tom. I havent yet read Covey’s book or The Road to Character. Will have to check them out.
Both brilliant in their own way