2021 Sunstein_This Is Not Normal

Briefing Document: This is Not Normal - The Politics of Everyday Expectations

Executive Summary

Cass R. Sunstein's "This Is Not Normal" explores the profound influence of "what is normal" on human judgment, societal behavior, and the fate of democracies. The central thesis is that "what provokes our outrage depends on what surrounds us—on what we consider ‘normal.’" This concept of normalcy is not static; it can expand or contract, often with significant implications for political and moral landscapes. The book delves into historical instances, psychological phenomena, and prominent figures to illustrate how norms are established, challenged, and transformed, particularly in the context of democratic stability and its potential collapse into authoritarianism.

Key Themes and Concepts:

1. The Power and Fragility of "The Normal"

• Definition: What is considered "normal" profoundly shapes individual and collective outrage, acceptance, and behavior. It can be "either wonderful or horrible." (p. x)
• Dynamic Nature: Norms are constantly shifting. For instance, once-normal practices like requiring public school prayer, driving without seatbelts, or bans on same-sex marriage are now viewed differently. The COVID-19 pandemic vividly demonstrated how rapidly "radical social changes were normalized." (p. x)
• Opprobrium Contraction & Expansion:Contraction: As undesirable or horrific behaviors become prevalent, what was once seen as terrible may become "mildly distasteful or even fine." This phenomenon is crucial to the rise of authoritarianism. (p. 16)
• Expansion: Conversely, as societal behavior improves, actions previously considered acceptable may become "bad or terrible." This reflects an increasing societal sensitivity and a refusal to tolerate what was once overlooked. (p. 16)
• Prevalence-Induced Concept Change: Drawing on psychological research, Sunstein explains how human judgments, particularly those lacking "well-defined absolute criteria," are influenced by what is prevalent. If "the number of very threatening faces was reduced, people started to see faces as threatening that they did not previously see that way at all." (p. 19-20) This applies to moral and political judgments as well: "If people are surrounded by conduct that is morally abominable, or seeing a lot of it, they will not disapprove of, and may even be fine with, conduct that is morally bad (but not abominable)." (p. 21)

2. Authoritarianism and the Erosion of Democratic Norms

• Incremental Descent: The rise of authoritarianism, as illustrated by Nazi Germany, often occurs through a "gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise." Each step can be "so small, so inconsequential, so well explained, or, on occasion, so ‘regretted,’” that people fail to see the larger picture until it is too late. (p. 7)
• Focus on Daily Life: Ordinary people, even under tyrannical regimes, tend to focus on "their own lives and ‘the sights that meet them in their daily rounds.’" This "automatic continuation of ordinary life" can hinder "any lively, forceful reaction against the horror." (p. 6, 11)
• Preference Falsification: A key factor in the fragility of political orders is that "people often fail to say what they like and think, at least in public, because of existing social norms (or official threats)." (p. 5) This creates "pluralistic ignorance," where the true extent of public opposition or dissatisfaction is hidden, making large-scale political shifts unpredictable. (p. 30)
• Leaders and "Enemies": Authoritarian leaders often employ tactics like George Orwell's "Two Minutes Hate," focusing public attention on "enemies and heretics—those who seek to destroy society’s fabric." (p. 15) The repetition of accusations can make them "difficult not to feel, in some part of one’s soul, that the accusation is correct." (p. 15)
• The Trump Era: Sunstein uses the Trump presidency as a contemporary example of "barks" that "make a mockery of essential political norms and prepare the way for worse." (p. 11) Trump's election "apparently weakened the social norm against supporting anti-immigrant groups," liberating people to express previously concealed sentiments. (p. 33)

3. Drivers of Political Change and Unpredictability

• Preference Falsification (revisited): The hidden nature of private preferences makes revolutions and large-scale shifts hard to anticipate. People conceal their true beliefs due to social norms or official threats.
• Diverse Thresholds: Individuals require varying levels of social support to "reject the status quo or disclose what they actually believe." (p. 34) "Zeroes" act first, and "ones," "twos," etc., follow, creating cascades that can lead to rapid societal change. (p. 34-35)
• Interdependencies: The success of a movement depends crucially on who acts and who observes them. If conditions are "just right," almost everyone might rebel. (p. 36)
• Unpredictability: Due to unobservable preferences and thresholds, and unpredictable social interactions, "large-scale political change is impossible to predict." (p. 36) Seemingly small, "random events" can spark significant movements. (p. 37)
• Preference Transformation vs. Revelation: Social movements don't just reveal existing preferences; they can "construct new preferences and values" or "transform preferences, beliefs, and values," casting "a new light on past experiences." (p. 38, 40)

4. "Lapidation" and Group Dynamics

• Definition of Lapidation: Sunstein repurposes "lapidation" to describe a group's "disproportionate" and often frenzied response to a "real or imagined transgression," aiming to ruin the transgressor's life. (p. 42-43) It is "reserved for excessive or unjustified reactions." (p. 45)
• Violation of Taboos: Lapidation typically occurs when a "person or institution has violated a taboo," and "lapidators operate as a kind of private police force, enforcing some intensely held moral or political commitment." (p. 45)
• Group Polarization: A key enabler of lapidation is "group polarization," where "like-minded people speak with one another, they tend to go to extremes." (p. 46) This can escalate mere disapproval into a fervent, unified "outrage." (p. 47)
• Expressivism: Lapidation is often "expressive," driven by a desire to "scream loudly at injustice, or to stand up and be counted," rather than a "judgment about its effects on institutions." (p. 48-49)
• Ineffectiveness of Apologies: Empirical evidence suggests that apologies by public figures facing lapidation often "tend to decrease rather than increase support for people who said or did offensive things." (p. 55) They might be perceived as a "confession," leading to continued demands for "execution." (p. 50)
• Free Speech Implications: While the First Amendment generally protects even "vehement, ugly, but truthful attack[s]," anticipated lapidation "compromises free speech" by causing people to "silence themselves about their deepest convictions." (p. 57-58)

5. American Constitutionalism: Founding and Refounding

• Publius's Vision (The Federalist): The framers of the U.S. Constitution, particularly James Madison, argued that a "large, diverse" republic, with a "robust system of checks and balances," would be more stable and protective of liberty than small, homogeneous ones. (p. 60) This was a "Republican remedy for the diseases most incident to Republican government." (p. 60)
• Rejection of Classical Republicanism: Publius explicitly challenged Montesquieu's idea that small republics foster civic virtue, arguing that factionalism is inherent in human nature and more severe in small republics where majorities can easily oppress minorities. (p. 69-73)
• Deliberative Democracy: The Constitution's design (bicameralism, separation of powers, federalism, indirect elections) aimed to "refine and enlarge the public views" through deliberation and to prevent any single faction or branch from dominating. (p. 74-79)
• The Radical American Revolution: The American Revolution was a deeply "radical and social" transformation, driven by republican ideals and the "explosive principle: the equal dignity of human beings," overturning established hierarchies. (p. 62-63)
• Constitutional Amendments as Refounding: The difficulty of amending the U.S. Constitution (Article V) reflects the founders' desire to "normalize the republic they had created." (p. 87) Major amendment periods (Bill of Rights, Civil War amendments) represent "refoundings," fundamentally altering the document and expanding the scope of rights and self-government. (p. 87-88)
• Contemporary Challenges to Publius: Sunstein acknowledges that the American system has not been perfect (slavery, civil liberties compromises). Modern challenges include:
• Judicial Activism: Supreme Court decisions (e.g., Heller on gun rights, Citizens United on campaign finance) have established "a new normal" by expanding judicial power or limiting democratic regulation, often contrary to democratic self-government. (p. 90-94)
• Increased Presidential Power: The "immensely powerful presidency" was not fully anticipated by Publius, posing a question about what can constrain it if it "is really determined to move in authoritarian directions." (p. 83)
• Polarization: Intense party identifications have led to legislative paralysis, where "ambition reinforces ambition, as legislators bow (supinely) to the will of the chief executive." (p. 86)
• Checks on Presidential Power (Remaining): Despite challenges, the system still has safeguards: legislative authorization, judicial review (enforcing the rule of law), the Bill of Rights, and the "court of public opinion." (p. 84-85)

6. Radicalism and Societal Change

• Norm Entrepreneurs: Radicals often "cast doubt on widespread beliefs and assumptions" to change norms and conceptions of what is normal. (p. 102)
• Types of Radicals: Sunstein uses Jeremy McCarter's "Young Radicals" to categorize radical types:
• Manicheans (e.g., John Reed): See the world as a simplistic struggle between good and evil, attracted to "drama and bullets, not ideas, substance, or even people." (p. 103-104, 115) Their "ardent embrace of Soviet-style Communism" is not admirable. (p. 115)
• Democrats (e.g., Alice Paul): "Devoted much of her life to making American democracy live up to its own ideals." (p. 106-107, 117) She worked to "expand and to contract people’s conception of what was normal" by challenging systematic exclusion (gender, race). Her "anti-caste principle" is admirable and transformative. (p. 117-118)
• Identitarians (e.g., Randolph Bourne): Focused on recognizing and respecting differences, rejecting the "melting pot" idea in favor of "trans-nationality." (p. 109-110) While helpful in addressing exclusion and humiliation, a sole focus on identity has "serious limitations" for many policy issues (e.g., COVID-19, food safety). (p. 116-117)
• Propagandists (e.g., Max Eastman): Aim to "disseminate ideas" and "give them currency." (p. 111-112, 117) Eastman's embrace of tyranny after initial censorship, despite his wit, questions his legacy. (p. 112-113)
• Technocrats (e.g., Walter Lippmann): Advocate for a larger role for "experts, including scientists," in policymaking to overcome public ignorance and deal with "unseen reality." (p. 114, 119-121) Lippmann argued that "the real sequence should be one where the disinterested expert first finds and formulates the facts for the man of action." (p. 120) This is a "radical thought" needed for complex policy problems where facts, not just values, are key. (p. 121)

7. Liberalism: A "Wide Tent" and its Critics

• Diversity of Liberalism: "Liberalism includes a wide range of positions," making it "reckless, to speak of 'the logic of liberalism.'" (p. 124-126) Prominent liberals span various philosophical traditions and political stances.
• Criticisms of Liberalism: Critics often link liberalism to negative social trends (e.g., lower marriage rates, rise of populism, economic inequality). (p. 127) Sunstein argues that these "causal explanations...tend to be highly speculative" and often lack empirical grounding, often being "normative accounts" rather than historical explanations. (p. 127-128, 133)
• Defense of Liberalism: Liberals are capable of and do defend "inherited political ideals and norms" (e.g., freedom of speech, due process, equal protection). (p. 129) Liberalism also emphasizes the need for "constraints," not just freedom, for instance, through "prohibitions on harm to others" and social norms. (p. 131)

8. The Cult of Ayn Rand and "Who Will Stop Me? Capitalism"

• Rand's Influence: Ayn Rand's novels (e.g., The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged) have had an "astonishingly" enduring influence on American politics, particularly on the right, appealing to a "fierce independence" and contempt for "parasites." (p. 135-136, 145) She provided a "specifically moral objection to redistribution of wealth and to interference with property rights and market arrangements." (p. 145)
• "Who Will Stop Me? Capitalism": This phrase, inspired by Howard Roark's defiance, captures the Randian ethos of rejecting any external limits on individual ambition and economic activity. (p. 146-147)
• Objectivism as a Cult: Rand's philosophical movement, objectivism, developed into a "personality cult" characterized by "secrecy" and "enforced orthodoxy" among her devotees. (p. 141-143)
• Lack of Serious Argumentation: Sunstein argues that Rand "did not defend her conclusions so much as pound the table for them," and that other libertarian thinkers offer more serious philosophical arguments. (p. 146) Her influence is more "visceral," stemming from her "ability to capture the sheer exhilaration of personal defiance, human independence, and freedom from chains of all kinds." (p. 147)

9. Counterfactual History and Causation

• Inherent in Causal Claims: Sunstein argues that "any causal claim is an exercise of counterfactual history." (p. 151) When historians explain "what caused what," they implicitly imagine "what the world would be like if one or another [factor] were removed." (p. 156, 158)
• Challenging Hindsight Bias: Counterfactual history is important because it "weakens the power of hindsight bias," showing that what seems inevitable "might be the result of something small or accidental." (p. 149-150)
• Criteria for Valid Counterfactuals: While acknowledging frivolous counterfactuals, Sunstein emphasizes the importance of "well-specified antecedents and consequents," "logical consistency," avoiding "preposterous claims about causality," and "maintaining consistency with well-established historical facts." (p. 155)
• Beyond Description: Historians are not merely chroniclers of "what actually happened"; they often provide "explanations," which necessitates engaging with counterfactual thinking. (p. 152)

Conclusion: The Paradox of the Normal

Sunstein concludes by highlighting the "paradox" of the normal: its immense power in shaping human judgments and its surprising fragility. Human beings are "astonishingly resilient" and capable of "remarkable adaptation." (p. 161) This adaptability, while enabling survival and progress, also helps explain "social horrors, and the success of authoritarian leaders." (p. 162) Ultimately, understanding the dynamics of the normal is crucial for comprehending both the breakdown of democratic norms and the potential for positive social change.

NotebookLM can be inaccurate; please double check its responses.