Many of us have experienced interpersonal relationships that are transactional in nature. That is, the couple has a tacit or explicit agreement that each will provide for the needs and wants of the other, but only if their own needs and wants are also met. These needs could include anything important to a couple, such as companionship, financial security, contributing to the work of running a household, and sex/intimacy. Transactional relationships involve an ongoing evaluation of the balance-of-payments: Is the other partner giving less or getting more? If so, tension and eventually rupture may result. These relationships can be stable and have substantial mutual benefits. But they do not allow one to escape the boundaries imposed by one’s own ego, and thus often have an element of loneliness.
For some lucky couples, neither partner needs to look out for himself or herself. Instead, the other partner assumes that role, and typically does a much better job of it! This of course only works if both partners care more about the other than about the self. Each person can drop that internal mental tally that determines if “conditions are being satisfied”. This makes for an enduring love relationship and provides the special joy of transcending the self.
The psychology of nations
Most relationships between sovereign nations are transactional in nature. Often this is appropriate and is the best that can be done when there is mistrust and conflict. Of course, nations dont experience love the way individuals do. But like persons, as nations become more mature and secure in themselves, they can afford to be less self-focused. After World War I, the arrangement that the winners made with the losers was transactional: You started and then lost the war, therefore you must pay reparations. That seemed fair! Twenty years later, the nations who made that deal found out how well it had worked. Following World War II, we tried something more evolved: the Marshall plan, in which we paid a lot to rebuild the nations destroyed in the war, especially those who started it. And now those nations are wealthy, stable democracies contributing to a more peaceful world. Other examples of US initiatives that have an element of altruism include the Peace Corps created in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy, and the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief launched by President George W. Bush. However, to enjoy more evolved relationships, both persons and nations must first have their own house in order. They must have already met their own essential needs. For the USA, many Americans are unsure that these conditions are met.
Losers and suckers?
Which sort of international relationships does the President-elect envision? One of his basic tenets is that the USA has been getting “ripped off” by our “so-called allies”. We have been “suckers”, providing other nations and peoples with various benefits but with insufficient rewards. And the cure is to make all international relationships entirely transactional, managed by an aggressive negotiator who inspires fear. His comments to our NATO allies illustrate this: If you don’t pay more of the expenses, Mr. Putin can do whatever the hell he wants.
Sleeping alone
Have you noticed that, although wealthy and powerful, the president-elect rarely seems joyful, or even particularly happy? (If you havent, take a look at his official photo.) Will our nation be happier when we “put America first?” Fully transactional nations, like fully transactional people, have a hard upper limit on their well-being. In his first term, Mr. Trump was the first US president since Richard Nixon to sleep alone in the White house. Nations and people are happier when, in addition to self-interest, they are able to value the welfare and success of others. And they are also a lot less lonely.