"Well, who's the underdog?"
On how cheering for the powerless can lead to expressions of hate toward the powerful.
I remember a moment from my childhood when I sat in the living room with my family watching the Super Bowl. My dad’s side of the family cheered fervently, while my mom’s side was just there for the food. My dad tried to get his father-in-law into the game by asking, “Which side are you cheering for?” My grandpa instinctively and without hesitation asked, “Who’s the underdog?” This seems silly because to get into the Super Bowl, you are almost by definition not the underdog. But my Grandpa wasn’t using his logical mind here, he was speaking from an intuitive desire to see those on the bottom rise. Many people think this way. I am one of these people. But why didn’t he hope for a tie?
A simple answer might be that, well, nobody likes a tie. They are boring, especially in zero-sum games. But not everything in the world is zero-sum. Often, all boats rise together. Even many of the poorest people in America have phones, TVs, and a PlayStation. Yet, we still claim inequality is worse than ever. This might be true. But why do we care about inequality per se? I would choose a world with disgusting inequality where the poorest are still living pretty lavish lifestyles over one with perfect equality but everyone's standard’s of living are meh. I, along with a majority of others, am not preoccupied with how well Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos lives. I am primarily concerned with my standard of living.
Yet, I wouldn’t mind seeing Musk or Bezos slip and fall into a puddle. Why do I, and everyone else besides Musk and Bezos, feel this way? It’s not through direct hate via malicious envy, constrastive judgments, or competition over resources. I don’t care how well they live. They are so detached from my life that they may as well be unicorns. People express hate through meta-perceptions: “I know people won’t judge me harshly for hating wealthy people, so I may as well use them as an outlet for my hatred toward a system that allows them to benefit more than others.”
Other mechanisms are at play too. Though my grandpa didn’t express hate toward the top dogs, it’s not hard to imagine how he could get there. The game being zero-sum could play a part. But humans like to think in black-and-white terms. It’s simpler that way. This idea is behind the ancient philosophy of Manicheanism, which posits that the world is divided into good and evil. Supporting the underdog makes it easier to say, “Therefore I should not support the top dog.” Saying that your support is nuanced and inclusive takes too much explaining and dampens your support for the underdog. It sounds more powerful to say, “I want those who are suffering to rise up” than to say, “I want everyone to rise up, including those who are suffering.” It might also be too hard to have the same amount of compassion for everyone. This psychology might arise from an evolutionary past where resources were limited.
Summarizing this psychology, I propose that hatred towards the powerful, wealthy, advantaged, gifted, and privileged arises at least partly through:
Sympathy with and support for the disadvantaged.
The belief that the world is zero-sum.
The meta-perception that others won’t judge you for hating the advantaged because it makes your support for the disadvantaged appear more focused.
+ The feeling that it is too hard to have the same amount of compassion for everyone.
+ The realization that the advantaged don’t need our support. They can do it on their own.
Why does this matter? Firstly, hatred is never good. It is divisive, and it is just not good for you, or the person you are hating on, for that matter. Finding excuses for hatred can lead to extremist ideologies. It’s also what drives a bulk of contemporary conspiracy theories, Asian hate, and antisemitism. Secondly, not all “advantaged groups” are actually advantaged. For example, the poorest whites in America are often categorized as an advantaged group by dint of their race. These people already show elevated levels of hatred toward the educated elites. Does it make them more or less resentful when these same elites tell them they are benefiting from “white privilege”? My guess is that it exacerbates resentment and drives support for candidates like Trump, who is at least half populist in his rhetoric.
I’m not asking people to start rooting for the tie. We can still root for the underdog without wanting the top dog to lose. So next time you have trouble deciding who to cheer for during the Superbowl, just go with the team with the best-looking uniforms.
Social
Twitter: @RyanBruno7287
Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@ryanbruno
Threads: @rbruno777
Glad to see a post from you again, Bruno!
I wonder if "hate" is the best word here. Perhaps some people "hate" a generic top dog, but "hate" seems to be a person-specific (or team-specific) emotion, one, I would offer, is never justified. It seems morally OK to hope that someone or some team will fail or lose for reasons of fairness or hubris or undeserved privilege. But to hate them? Hm. Also, doesn't "hate" require that the one who's hated has done something or may potentially do something that negatively affects you or your moral sense personally?