I keep hearing about how the Trump admin just had another humiliating defeat. So if you go big and bold and you just keep on trucking, is it really humiliating? To what extent does your purpose affect your ability to suffer humiliation? I sense a glee from the MSM when they can pile humiliation on the Trump team, but if the Trump team views the MSM as the enemy, are they really humiliated?
There are all sorts of things that happened to me that others would find mortifying, but for me they weren’t a big deal because I had a mission. Conversely, I’ve found many things mortifying that wouldn’t bother others.
Donald Trump is the most powerful man in the world. Does suffering an adverse ruling from a district judge that humiliating?
Mission creates a focus that filters out the social static. When you have a clear objective, the opinions of bystanders carry less weight because those people do not contribute to the goal. Mortification requires you to value the perspective of the person watching you. If you view their judgment as irrelevant or even as a sign that you move in the right direction, the sting of embarrassment vanishes. You treat a setback as a logistical hurdle rather than a reflection of your worth.
Alliance Theory explains this through the lens of group loyalty. If you believe your mission serves a specific “in-group” or a higher principle, the “out-group” and its laughter become a tool for solidarity. Their mockery proves you occupy the front lines of a conflict. You stop seeking the approval of a broad, neutral public and instead double down on the approval of those who share your mission. This shift in reference points makes you immune to the typical social punishments used to enforce conformity.
Many social norms function as “bullshit” designed to keep people predictable and manageable. A mission-driven life rejects these scripts. You realize that the fear of being mortified acts as a leash held by people who have no skin in your game. By ignoring the potential for humiliation, you reclaim the agency to act boldly. The mission provides a psychological buffer. You don’t see a “humiliating” event; you see a data point or a necessary cost of doing business.
Humiliation depends on a shared recognition of authority. For the Trump team, the mainstream media does not represent a neutral referee or a moral authority; it represents a rival in a zero-sum conflict. When a rival attacks you, the experience is one of combat, not shame. Humiliation only occurs when you value the opinion of the person trying to shame you. By framing the press as the “enemy,” the administration effectively short-circuits the emotional mechanics of humiliation. They treat media “glee” as a confirmation of their own effectiveness. If the “enemy” is laughing at your setback, they are merely celebrating a temporary tactical advantage in a larger war.
David Pinsof argues that our moral judgments are strategic tools used to support our allies and demonize our rivals. In this view, the media’s attempts to humiliate the administration are not objective observations of failure. Instead, they are “propagandistic tactics” meant to coordinate a coalition against the president. The administration understands this and responds with its own alliance-building strategy. By staying “big and bold,” they signal to their own allies that they remain unbowed. This transforms a potential moment of shame into a rallying cry for their base, which views the media’s glee as proof of a deep-seated bias.
Much of the “humiliation” the media attempts to manufacture relies on elite norms, such as “decorum” or “precedent.” If the administration views these norms as arbitrary rules created by a protected class to maintain its own power, then violating them carries no weight. They see the “humiliation” as a social construct designed to enforce conformity. When you reject the entire game, you cannot lose by its rules. The “bullshit” filter allows the team to ignore the noise and focus on the mission, which they define by their own metrics rather than those of the press.
Suffering humiliation requires a sense of “on-par” dignity with the shamer. You only feel humiliated by someone you consider your peer or your superior in a shared moral community. By defining the media as outside their alliance—and as a hostile force—the Trump team removes the possibility of feeling shamed by them. The media’s laughter becomes “white noise.” It is a signal of the current state of the battle, not a reflection of the administration’s internal reality. As long as they keep “trucking on,” they maintain the frame that they are the ones defining success, while the media is merely shouting from the sidelines.
