How the Human Immune System
Can Heal Our Democracy
by Matt Lyman
Part 1 appears in this issue.
conclusion
Becoming a T-reg
Several researchers have written scientific articles and books linking politics and narcissism. Political environments select for those with personal traits of grandiosity, self-confidence, entitlement, and a willingness to inflame and disrupt a system for their own gain. Ramani Durvasula, in her 2019 book Don’t You Know Who I Am? warns: “When politicians make foolish, polarizing, nasty, and divisive comments, recognize that they won’t stop... The shifts in the world have normalized and legitimized narcissism, entitlement, and incivility and have given narcissists a sense of new power in the world.” The inflammation observed in U.S. politics today directly results from narcissists having sweeping access to Americans via technology.
This is where the immune system offers a precise, prescriptive solution. The immune system maintains “tolerance of self” by weeding out immune cells that may react with healthy tissues — a function called central tolerance. It is comparable to removing those who challenge the rule of law. However, when central tolerance fails, there are specialized cells known as regulatory T cells or “T-regs” that suppress the activation of other nearby immune cells.
Research has shown that animals, including humans, that lack T-regs die because of systemic inflammation in their bodies. Thus, the primary role of the T-reg is to suppress inflammation by preventing an overreaction to allergies, asthma, and dietary antigens. They help a woman prevent rejecting her developing fetus, protect healthy bacteria in the microbiomes of our gut, down-regulate the immune response after fighting off a bad case of the flu, and so on.
The T-regs work through two distinct mechanisms: they absorb inflammatory signals and secrete suppressive signals to maintain healthy tissue homeostasis. In layperson’s terms, T-regs absorb shit and secrete sunshine. Without them, the human body is an autoimmune inferno.
To absorb inflammatory signals, the philosopher Robert Pirsig wrote:
“If you take all this karmic garbage [pain, suffering, hate] and make yourself feel better by passing it on to others, that’s normal. That’s the way the world works. But if you manage to absorb it and not pass it on, that’s the highest moral conduct of all... If you look at the lives of some of the great moral figures of history — Christ, Lincoln, Gandhi, and others — you’ll see that’s what they were really involved in, the cleansing of the world through the absorption of karmic garbage. They didn’t pass it on.”
In 2021, a group of political scientists tested the hypothesis that empathy on Twitter (now X) changes people’s behavior. They published their findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences under the title “Empathy-based counterspeech can reduce racist hate speech in a social media field experiment.” The study validates what many proponents of empathy have known for centuries: empathy is the glue that binds society, and the suppressive signal to social inflammation.
I believe George Washington was a T-reg. In 1796, President Washington published his “Farewell Address” to the nation. He warned:
“It occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts [emphasis added]. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection.”
His message is apropos: We are all Americans regardless of geography. Shield yourself from those that create divisions based on misrepresented opinions. Bind by fraternal affection.
In has been twelve hours since I left Northern California. I have climbed from sea level to 6,700 feet and crossed into Wyoming. It feels like a mountain peak: cold, windy, and icy. La La Land is about 800 miles in the rearview mirror. No more sun, palm trees, or diversity/equity/inclusion. I am reminded of the openness of the country, the lack of traffic, and the state with the real teats: the Tetons!
I can smell the wet sagebrush when I pull over to urinate. In the distance I can see the house where Dad passed away. He owned a sheep ranch near Cody for many years; he lived his final years with my brother in Evanston. He wore a black hat with “Don’t Tread on Me” and the snake from the Gadsden flag. He was a gruff rancher that could fix anything with his hands.
What would he say to all this intellectualizing about being empathetic? That’s easy. Something to the effect of “stop being weak.” Although he was right on many topics — including the best smoked-meatloaf recipe — this assumption is as wrong as a Wyomingite wearing Gavin Newsom socks.
T-reg Behavior Fits Winning Game Theory
It is important to emphasize that being a T-reg, i.e., secreting empathy, is not weak or passive behavior; it is a superpower. At its core is a tantalizing mix of empathy, pro-social protection and patriotism. A T-reg is in the (immunological) fight; it is protecting the health of the larger system, preventing it from self-destructing and returning it to cooperative behavior. This approach fits into a broader philosophical view on how to win in all aspects of life. In game theory, specifically The Prisoner’s Dilemma, we see the T-reg idea in its glory.
The concept behind The Prisoner’s Dilemma is this: two rational individuals can cooperate for mutual gain or betray the other person for individual gain. Different points are awarded depending on mutual or individual gain, and how often a person cooperates or betrays the other person. The framework was established at RAND corporation in 1950 by Merrill Flood and Melvin Dresher; it models real-world interactions between microbes, people, countries, militaries, etc.
Decades after RAND developed the concept’s framework, the political scientist Robert Axelrod established a Prisoner’s Dilemma tournament in which collaborators from around the world could submit computer programs to “fight” one another. After dozens of computer strategies were contested head-to-head in multiple iterations, one strategy emerged victorious. It was known as “tit-for-tat.”
At its core, the tit-for-tat strategy has four qualities that made it surprisingly successful: be nice, be forgiving, be retaliatory, and be clear.
- First, the most successful strategies were those that were “nice” instead of “nasty.” The players sought to cooperate.
Second, successful strategies were forgiving. If one player betrayed the other player, the response was also betrayal, but with an occasional return to cooperating. This avoided the “eternal betrayal” phenomenon, which is the equivalent of dangerous inflammation. There was always a mechanism to reset to cooperation.
Third, the tit-for-tat approach was retaliatory. If a player betrayed, the tit-for-tat approach would trigger the other party to betray in the next round. By retaliating immediately, the tit-for-tat strategy was not a pushover. Then, with occasional forgiveness as mentioned, tit-for-tat allowed for a fresh start.
Finally, tit-for-tat was clear on its strategy with the other player. It did not conceal how it was going to behave. If a person cooperated, s/he was rewarded with cooperation. If the person betrayed, s/he was punished with retaliatory betrayal. With occasional forgiveness, there was always a chance to return to cooperation.
The T-reg approach, in the immune system as well as in life, follows a similar path. Start with the hope of cooperation (be nice), be willing to occasionally forgive and de-escalate a situation after being attacked (be forgiving). Don’t be a pushover (immediately betray if betrayed), and communicate intent with the other person (be clear about objectives).
Nasty strategies — always seeking to betray the other player — are losing strategies. Being nasty and inflammatory loses in the long run. Why? Because the most points in life are gained through cooperative, non-inflammatory behavior. Look around. The Prisoner’s Dilemma is everywhere. Cooperation, if accomplished, is most rewarding and healthy for individuals and societies alike. But to succeed, it takes people who are willing to de-escalate and reset the system after inflammatory behavior has occurred. The most damaging approach is to remain in a loop of betrayal, forever driving inflammation in the system.
I ease off I-80 at the Lyman exit. I slow the car and start scanning for deer near the road. I do the same exercise when driving through Oakland for carjackers. I have no illusions about there being more wild animals here than people. Many zip across the road in the dark.
I traverse a few miles to a small bluff that is Lyman, Wyoming, population 2,139. The town is sleepy. The Taco Time is closed. I see one truck at the Maverick gassing up. Then a few trucks driving the other way. I might be the only Honda Accord for a hundred miles. The streets are as wide as a four-lane highway in California. Open land, fresh air, and solitude. Time to settle in for the evening.
Where It Matters to Me
T-reg people can stand their ground, forgive, and reset, just as winning game theory suggests. If we suppress the inflammatory rhetoric through empathy, a balanced perspective can take hold. We can dismiss extreme thinking. We can embrace the notion that California and Wyoming need each other, like organs in a system.
Pirsig said it best:
“Sometimes a dynamic increment goes forward but can find no latching mechanism and so fails and slips back to a previous latched position. Whole species and cultures get lost this way. Sometimes a static pattern becomes so powerful it prohibits any dynamic moves forward. In both cases the evolutionary process is halted for a while. But when it’s not halted the result has been an increase in power to control hostile forces or an increase in versatility or both... without dynamic quality, the organism cannot grow. Without static quality the organism cannot last. Both are needed.”
California is more dynamic. Wyoming is more static. Perhaps California values more innovation while Wyoming values more community. Both play a role in facilitating growth. We don’t need to radicalize society to recognize how both ideologies contribute to a healthy America, a less inflamed America.
When my Wyoming neighbor says he hopes California falls into the ocean with the next earthquake, I can affirm that California is a hub of technology that keeps us competitive with China and Russia. When my colleagues in California scoff at Wyoming for not supporting electric cars, I can politely ask if they’ve ever driven in Wyoming during the winter.
My mother, who was a clinical psychologist, often reminded me of three levels of relationships: co-dependence, independence, and interdependence. Co-dependence is the most harmful, as one relies on someone else for their self-validation (e.g., narcissism).
As one might imagine, having a healthy sense of self, and not being “a people pleaser” is independence that allows someone to establish their own identity. Independence is good. Once an individual establishes their identity, they can work with others in an interdependent manner, allowing each person to bring their unique traits to help build something bigger than him/herself... just like organs in a system, individuals in a loving marriage, or high-performing business teams. Interdependence reigns supreme.
Can Americans be civil and interdependent? One thing is certain: narcissists will always attempt to drive Americans into an “us or them” mentality. Setting America on fire brings them the attention they crave. Washington knew this in 1776: “Nothing but disunion can hurt our cause — this will ruin it, if great prudence, temper, and moderation are not mixed in our counsels and made the governing principles of the contending parties.”
Americans that temper, suppress, and re-message the inflammatory signals will protect the connective tissue of our nation. This connection fosters vibrancy, collaboration, and forbearance. The minority can accomplish it. Strong, thoughtful warriors among us can accomplish it. Personally, I choose the path of the T-reg.
In a few days, this path will be tested.
* * *
I’m returning from my bird hunt along the Yellowstone River, driving westbound along the Wyoming and Montana border. It’s dusk. I notice smeared pheasant blood trapped along my fingernails as my hands rest on the steering wheel. A flatbed ranch truck passes on the left; I barely notice. Then the driver hits the brake and drops back. It passes again on the left, revving the engine louder as it zooms by. Then brakes again. It swerves behind me, and I realize he has seen my California plates. He’s posturing.
As the truck pulls near me a third time, I look over to see an animated driver, his middle finger up, mouth contorting. I feel a surge of anger, and I’m ready to roll down my window and yell, “I grew up here, you fuckstick!” Other unpleasantries are on the tip of my tongue.
I picture my goodly mother, RIP, about to say my full name as I prepare to unleash rage on my new friend. Time to T-reg. I maintain my speed and heading. I glance over with no emotion. My eye contact communicates that I belong here; I’m not lost. He stares back and then speeds off for the third and final time. My blood pressure returns to normal. No harm done. No escalation. I pat myself on the back as I continue the long return journey to the land of the avocado. A new thesis has emerged for the trip: immunology is the new psychotherapy. Now that is La La.
Copyright © 2025 by Matt Lyman
