President Trump has two well-documented behaviors that indicate a fear of reality. This is another way of saying that he fears truth. It also explains why he lies so much.
- He often ignores scientific facts that are generally accepted as truth by most Americans regardless of political affiliation. He repeatedly suppresses, downplays, discredits or ignores scientific research when it conflicts with his policy goals and political messaging — oftentimes by labeling scientific facts as fake news without any evidence. This was especially evident in areas such as climate change, public health and economics, where experts were pressured to restrict access to information or cast doubt on established science. As President, Trump further acted on those fears by defunding research, silencing, scientists, and spreading lies that contradicted scientific truth.
- He often reframes news that is not complementary of him as lies (i.e. fake news). This tactic is a consistent feature of his communication style. Fact-checkers and media analysts have documented tens of thousands of false or misleading claims by Trump — many of which involved dismissing or distorting widely accepted facts. By redefining “fake news” to encompass any reporting he disliked, Trump contributed to public confusion and eroded trust in both the media and scientific institutions. These behaviors can be interpreted as indicative of a “fear of reality” in the sense that they involve systematic avoidance or denial of inconvenient truths in favor of narratives more favorable to Trump’s financial interests, political interests or worldview. This approach has had significant consequences for public discourse, politics, scientific integrity, and the broader understanding of reality among the American public. The only logical explanation for these habits is that he fears what will happen to him if people — especially his supporters — accept commonly held realities as absolute truths.
These two behaviors describe a set of experiences where individuals — including Trump and his followers — feel intense anxiety or discomfort when confronted with aspects of reality (i.e. truth) that they find distressing or overwhelming. Examples of this anxiety/discomfort are found in the 2020 election results and issues related to race and slavery. This phenomenon can overlap with several established psychological concepts:
Depersonalization-Derealization Disorder: Individuals — including Trump and his followers — with this disorder may feel disconnected from themselves (depersonalization) or from their surroundings (derealization) because of the lingering effect of their fears. While they are aware that their altered perceptions are not reality, these feelings can be deeply unsettling and may lead to avoidance of confronting real-life situations.
While Trump has not been diagnosed with this disorder, he often exhibits patterns of reality distortion through persistent denial, solipsism, and alternate narratives that align closely with narcissistic traits, pathological lying, or shared psychosis.
Analyses describe Trump’s “solipsistic reality,” where he filters facts through self-needs, doubling down on falsehoods (e.g., election lies, policy distortions) without apparent distress or insight into unreality. Experts note extreme narcissism, emotional fragility, and intolerance for contradicting realities, fostering delusions or “shared psychosis” with followers, but no detachment from self—rather, hyper-investment in his narrative.
In summary, Trump’s behavior involves aggressive embrace of a self-crafted reality — not the reality recognized by emotionally healthy people.
F.E.A.R. (False Evidence Appearing Real): This concept describes how people sometimes experience fear based on imagined or exaggerated threats rather than actual dangers. Such fears can lead to avoidance behaviors and a reluctance to face reality, even when the perceived threat is not supported by facts. This kind response to reality is found in people who subscribe to conspiracy theories.
This concept aligns with how the brain’s amygdala triggers fight-or-flight responses to perceived dangers, often hijacked by past traumas or ego-driven projections rather than present realities. It explains irrational fears, like those in phobias or anxiety disorders, where distorted memories amplify non-threats into existential risks.
People drawn to conspiracy theories (including Trump’s followers) often exhibit F.E.A.R.-like patterns, interpreting ambiguous, unelated events as orchestrated plots due to confirmation bias and a need for certainty amid uncertainty. This fosters avoidance of contradictory evidence, reinforcing group identities through shared “hidden truths,” much like social dominance orientations heighten threat perception in political contexts. Such dynamics mirror authoritarian-leaning mindsets, where exaggerated fears of out-groups sustain belief systems disconnected from verifiable facts.
Phobic Reactions: In cases of phobias, individuals experience irrational and disproportionate fear of specific objects, situations, or ideas, often leading them to avoid reality by introducing lies and or distortions of truth into conversations. Strong evidence that this phobia exists in Donald Trump’s rhetorical style, as seen in his persistent rejection of verified election results and attacks on critics.
Trump exhibits phobia-like aversion to threats like electoral loss or legal accountability, often distorting facts by labeling investigations as “witch hunts” or claiming massive fraud without evidence, mirroring how phobias rewrite reality to evade discomfort. This prompts followers to echo distortions, avoiding engagement with courts or recounts that disprove claims.
Such reactions fuel polarized echo chambers, where fear of opposing narratives drives conversational lies, like exaggerated immigrant threats or “deep state” plots, sustaining support despite factual contradictions. This aligns with F.E.A.R. dynamics previously discussed, amplifying avoidance in authoritarian-leaning contexts.
Because President Trump’s fears adversely affect his thinking and behaviors, he habitually exposes himself to criticism and ridicule. Many people — especially his political opponents — experience a distinct sense of satisfaction when learning about and reporting Donald Trump’s unusual behaviors, problematic policies, and personal problems. His political base, on the other hand, tends to believe his lies or dismiss attacks because they find him mostly credible and trustworthy.
Seemingly undaunted by criticism, Trump continues to make himself a target for social media posts, unflattering cartoons and news. And every time his words contradict verifiable facts, or his actions violate established social and political norms the media and Democrats react. Then, when attacked, he bites back and doubles down on his rhetoric rather than recoil, recant or apologize. Challenges to his fears incite him to bold action — never to retreat. Actually, it sometimes appears that he welcomes the attacks because anti-Trump public attention and his role as victim of the system endears him to them because they also feel like victims.
At the same time, anti-Trump critics experience some psychological benefit from bitter verbal spats with Trump and his followers. These benefits include:
Norm Violation and Outrage: Trump’s behavior is frequently described as transgressive, which provokes strong emotional reactions. For many, especially liberals and moderates, reporting on his actions is a way to reaffirm shared values and express collective outrage.
Schadenfreude: There is an element of schadenfreude—pleasure derived from another’s misfortune—when Trump’s missteps or oddities are exposed, especially given his polarizing persona and history of antagonizing critics.
Community and Identity: Sharing and discussing Trump’s behavior helps build a sense of community among political liberals, reinforcing group identity and providing a shared narrative.
Media Dynamics: The media’s extensive coverage of Trump’s behavior, often highlighting the most sensational or strange moments, feeds public fascination and encourages further discussion and reporting.
This cycle is amplified by mainstream media and social media, where reactions to Trump’s actions—ranging from mockery to genuine concern—spread rapidly and become trending topics, further fueling the satisfaction some feel in spotlighting his perceived flaws or failures. But while these attacks may yield some short-term satisfaction for Trump’s detractors, they do nothing to change Mr. Trump or his MAGA supporters. In fact, public criticism solidifies his adoring base and inspires them to rally his defense. This happens for several reasons:
- Criticism from mainstream sources is reframed as unfair attacks or confirmation of bias, prompting Trump’s followers to see themselves and their leader as united against a hostile “establishment.” This unity strengthens group identity and fosters intense loyalty.
- Legal challenges, negative news, and media investigations regularly trigger a “rally around Trump” effect among Republicans and conservative-leaning independents. For example, after high-profile indictments or accusations, Trump’s support within his base surged, turning potential weaknesses into mobilization moments.
- Trump’s rhetoric often encourages the perception that criticism is not just about him, but about his supporters and their values. This personalization drives collective action, with followers defending both Trump and their political worldview against perceived attacks.
- The dynamic contributes to Trump’s ongoing ability to defy conventional political expectations: rather than alienating supporters, controversies and criticism strengthen their resolve and willingness to overlook his personal and policy flaws.
Whether Mr. Trump intentionally lies for these reasons or not is unknown. What is known, however, that his lies and the public criticism they arouse in media energizes, rather than erodes, Trump’s base which rallies to defend him more fervently. In effect, his lies push his followers to disengage from mainstream institutions they perceive as adversarial. Psychological and civic research shows several mechanisms at play in responses to Trump’s lies:
- Many Trump supporters are already civically disengaged or distrustful of mainstream institutions like national media, government agencies, and established parties. When Trump is criticized for dishonesty or unethical behavior, his base often interprets this as an attack from adversarial, untrustworthy elites, reinforcing in-group loyalty and alienation from those institutions.
- Public criticism and “fact-checking” from media are viewed by Trump loyalists as proof of a biased establishment intent on undermining their values and leader. This perceived adversarial relationship increases polarization and drives deeper emotional investment in defending Trump, sometimes regardless of the validity of the criticisms.
- When lies or misinformation are exposed and widely condemned, Trump uses rhetorical strategies (claiming victimhood, attacking his critics, framing himself as a champion against corrupt elites) to strengthen bonds with followers and galvanize resistance to institutional authority and expertise.
- Populist leaders like Trump have strategically disengaged from international and domestic institutions that oppose their narratives, criticizing, obstructing, or withdrawing from collaborations as a form of performative opposition. This disengagement is tactical—it creates solidarity among followers and heightens their sense of embattled purpose.
In effect, the cycle of public lying, criticism, and defensiveness pushes Trump’s followers to distrust and disengage further from mainstream social, media, and political institutions. Instead, they embrace alternative networks and echo chambers more aligned with their beliefs. If Trump’s critics understood these dynamics, they might not be so aggressive in their attacks.
RESOURCES FOR FURTHER STUDY
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fear-false-evidence-appearing-real-conquering-illusions-mullne-qjzlc
https://james-schroeder.com/phobic-reality-fear-beyond-reason/