Maslow’s Hierarchy – Harder Question

In 1943, an American psychologist named Abraham Maslow studied how people behave and concluded – in general terms – that people have five basic needs and tend to satisfy them in order. New idea:  Modern politics may upset this. Republicans may live by one set, Democrats by another.

While this is a radical concept, stay with me, and reach a conclusion on your own. If you do, you are likely Republican. If you prefer to stay with Maslow’s one-size-fits-all, you may be a Democrat.

In short, doing Maslow a terrible injustice, the great thinker used empirical research to conclude that all humans satisfy five needs in order. The order he proposed, again with apologies for brevity, was something like this.

Humans put top priority on things physical, such as food, water, shelter, and clothes. Next, they rank safety and personal security. Third, they want to belong, so they seek love and approval. Fourth, they want “self-esteem,” summed as confidence. Finally, they seek “self-actualization,” fulfillment.

Now, to be honest, these things are very loosely defined, overlap, and can be pursued simultaneously. Even Maslow later said, maybe they worked differently for different people. Taking that modification as true, one open question is: Do conservatives and liberals differ in priorities?

My argument, which could help explain wider issues, is yes. A conservative may be more interested in confidence, independence, and self-reliance (priority four) than “belonging” or the approval of others (priority three).

Likewise, they may seek higher purpose or fulfilment (priority five) ahead of their own safety and food (priority one).  Or they may think in terms of security (priority two) ahead of food (priority one).

By contrast, what do modern Democrats – Progressives, Socialists, or Marxists – seem to want? Clearly, they want physical things, often via entitlements, though, not hard work. They want a free ticket for priority one.

Often, they skip community and personal security (priority two) for “belonging to the group” (priority three). They crave acceptance, conformity over safe streets, secure borders, and law enforcement.

Similarly, they seem more inclined to turn to group, or to government, to get what conservatives believe individuals must secure for themselves, confidence, self-reliance, and life value (priority four), plus fulfilment or higher purpose (priority five).

In fact, many Democrats seem not to understand these higher value – or harder to achieve – priorities. Rather than choosing hard work, hard choices, risk-taking, and adversity to achieve self-worth and fulfilment, including faith-based higher aims, they look for shortcuts, which do not exist.

All of this is to say, one wonders, as the cultural landscape divides into different ways for seeking physical and security outcomes, different levels of need to conform or belong, different values on independent thought and fulfilment or spiritual connectivity, if Maslow might now rethink things.

Maybe conservatives or traditional Republicans look at the original Maslow hierarchy as roughly the same, and still expect individuals to reach each level by effort, while modern Democrats or leftists see the order as different, elevating “conformity” (requiring no thought), and expect the government – or someone other than themselves – to meet the needs, whatever their order.

Net-net, the world is as far different from 1943 as that year was from survivalist, early American pioneering, and the Founders’ era. But looked at from this distance, maybe Maslow was right about what people and the rough order. But he missed the twist of leftist political indoctrination, which elevates “belonging” or conformity and pushes responsibility from individuals onto the government.

Bottom line: People’s needs – whatever they are – do not change unless minds get twisted by ideology, putting conformity near the top. The question Maslow did not ask is how we expect our needs to be met – as individuals responsible for our destinies or by an all-powerful government. A republic survives the first, not the second. Time to ask that harder question.

Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, Maine attorney, ten-year naval intelligence officer (USNR), and 25-year businessman. He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (North Country Press, 2018), and “Cherish America: Stories of Courage, Character, and Kindness” (Tower Publishing, 2024). He is the National Spokesman for AMAC. Today, he is running to be Maine’s next Governor (please visit BobbyforMaine.com to learn more)!