Just what do those three things have in common you might be asking yourself? Or you might be thinking that Larry has finally lost it. Bear with me and I will explain it. I decided to write this blog post after some back and forth on “X” with a GOP PAC account, in addition to TN State Representative Faison.
Before I get into the meat of this post, I want to remind my followers about what it is that I do professionally at this stage in my life. After retiring from 30 years in the U.S. Navy, I started my own business where I am a leadership, human performance, and safety coach. I work with high risk, high reliability organizations to enhance those three aspects of their workplace cultures. One of the practices that I seek out when coaching these organizations is the prevalence of the normalization of deviance.
So, let’s start the discussion with the normalization of deviance in the workplace. In workplace safety, the concept of ‘normalization of deviance’ is a critical yet often overlooked phenomenon that often leads to catastrophic consequences. The term was coined by sociologist Diane Vaughan in her analysis of the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. It refers to the gradual process by which unacceptable practices or standards become acceptable over time. In the context of workplace safety, it describes how small deviations from safety protocols, when repeated without immediate negative consequences, become normalized, eroding safety standards and increasing the risk of accidents.
Breaking it down, just what is ‘normalization of deviance’? Normalization of deviance occurs when individuals or organizations slowly accept risky behaviors or shortcuts as part of their routine operations. Initially, a deviation from a safety protocol, such as skipping a safety check or bypassing a procedure to save time, may seem minor. If no immediate harm results, the behavior is repeated, and over time, it becomes an accepted part of the process. What was once considered unsafe becomes “normal,” even though the underlying risks remain unchanged. For example, imagine a construction site where workers are required to always wear hard hats. If a worker removes their hard hat to cool off and nothing happens, they might do it again. Others may follow suit, and soon, not wearing hard hats in certain situations, becomes an unspoken norm. The absence of immediate consequences reinforces the behavior, but the risk of injury from falling objects persists. Now we must consider the impact. As I wrote earlier, my work is primarily in high risk, high reliability organizations. It is carried over from my career in the Navy, and in particular the Submarine Force where I served on nuclear-power warships alongside the world’s best nuclear power plant operators. Now, normalization of deviance is particularly dangerous in high-risk industries like nuclear power, oil & gas, construction, manufacturing, healthcare, or aviation, where safety protocols are designed to prevent serious injuries or fatalities. Here’s how it undermines workplace safety:
**Erosion of Safety Standards** – Small deviations accumulate, weakening the safety culture. What starts as a one-time shortcut can become standard practice, leaving workers vulnerable to hazards.
**Increased Risk of Accidents** – When deviations are normalized, the safeguards designed to prevent accidents are bypassed. This increases the likelihood of incidents, which may only become apparent when a serious accident occurs.
**Complacency and Reduced Vigilance** – Repeated deviations without consequences foster a false sense of security. Workers and management may underestimate risks, assuming that “nothing has gone wrong before, so it must be fine.”
**Blurring of Accountability** – As unsafe practices become normalized, it becomes harder to hold individuals accountable. The line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior blurs, making it difficult to enforce safety protocols.
The Challenger disaster is a textbook case of normalization of deviance. Engineers repeatedly observed O-ring erosion in previous shuttle launches but, since no catastrophic failures occurred, they accepted it as an acceptable risk. This normalization contributed to the tragic explosion in 1986. In a workplace context, consider a factory where machine guards are occasionally removed to speed up maintenance. If no injuries occur, workers may continue to bypass this safety measure, assuming it’s unnecessary. However, a single misstep could lead to a severe injury, revealing the hidden dangers of this normalized practice.
Now, let’s take the discussion into the second item in the subject, raising children. The concept of ‘normalization of deviance’, as explored in workplace safety, also applies to raising children and maintaining discipline. In this context, it refers to the gradual acceptance of behaviors or practices that deviate from established rules or expectations, which can erode a parent’s disciplinary framework and lead to long-term challenges in child development. Just as in workplace safety, small, seemingly harmless deviations in parenting, when repeated without immediate consequences, can become normalized, undermining authority and healthy boundaries. In parenting, normalization of deviance occurs when parents or caregivers allow minor infractions of rules or expectations to slide, often because addressing them feels unnecessary or inconvenient in the moment. Over time, these deviations become accepted as the new norm, weakening the structure and consistency that children need to thrive. For example, if a child is allowed to ignore a bedtime routine once without consequence, they may push the boundary again. If this becomes a pattern, staying up late may become the default, even though it disrupts the child’s health and behavior.
This process is driven by the absence of immediate negative outcomes, leading parents to underestimate the long-term impact of leniency. Keep that in mind when we discuss politicians in a bit. What starts as a small exception can snowball into a breakdown of discipline, making it harder to enforce rules later. When deviations from rules or expectations are normalized in parenting, it can have significant consequences for a child’s behavior, development, and understanding of boundaries:
**Erosion of Boundaries** – Consistent rules provide children with a sense of security and structure. When deviations are allowed—such as skipping chores or ignoring a curfew—children may perceive rules as optional, leading to defiance or entitlement.
**Undermined Parental Authority** – Allowing small infractions to go unaddressed signals to children that rules are flexible. This can make it harder for parents to enforce discipline when it matters most, as children may challenge authority or negotiate boundaries.
**Behavioral Issues** – Normalized deviations can lead to problematic behaviors over time. For instance, if a child is occasionally allowed to speak disrespectfully without correction, this behavior may become ingrained, leading to conflicts at home or in social settings.
**Inconsistent Expectations** – Children thrive on predictability. When deviations become the norm, they may struggle with understanding consequences or developing self-discipline, as the boundaries keep shifting.
Consider a scenario where a parent sets a rule that screen time is limited to one hour per day. One evening, the parent allows the child an extra 30 minutes to avoid a tantrum. If this happens repeatedly without addressing the rule-breaking, the child may expect extra screen time regularly, and the one-hour limit becomes meaningless. Another example is a parent who asks their child to clean their room but doesn’t follow through when the task is ignored. If the child faces no consequences, they may learn that ignoring requests is acceptable, leading to a pattern of non-compliance in other areas, like homework or helping with household tasks.
Now let’s move on to what is really the main theme of this post and that is the normalization of deviance in voter apathy and holding republican politicians accountable to conservative principles. Bottom Line Up Front – Tennessee State Representative Jeremy Faison believes that the rugged individualism that President Ronald Reagan championed means that he, and others of his ilk currently in the Tennessee General Assembly, can run for office as a Republican yet govern like a Democrat (screenshot of his “X” reply to one of my posts at the bottom of this post). He doesn’t believe that Republicans need to have any loyalty to conservative principles and he considers conservatives, ilk like me, are a small part of Tennessee. The truth is completely different as we will explore.
I’d like to add my own Ronald Reagan quote for the benefit of Representative Faison – “”Government is like a baby: an alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.” Or how P’J. O’Rouke neatly summarized – “”Governments are like diapers. They need to be changed often and for the same reasons.”
The concept of ‘normalization of deviance’, just like in workplace safety and raising children, also applies to the political sphere, particularly in the context of voter apathy and the failure to hold Republican politicians accountable to conservative principles. In this scenario, normalization of deviance describes how Republican voters gradually accept deviations from core conservative values—such as limited government, fiscal responsibility, or traditional social principles—when these deviations occur repeatedly without significant pushback.
Over time, this erodes accountability and allows politicians to drift from the ideals they were elected to uphold, contributing to voter disengagement and apathy. So, what is normalization of deviance in politics? In the political context, normalization of deviance occurs when voters tolerate actions or policies from Republican politicians that stray from conservative principles, often because the deviations seem minor or don’t immediately lead to catastrophic outcomes. For example, a politician might support a bloated spending bill (Bill Lee’s school voucher scam), despite campaigning on fiscal restraint. If voters overlook this because it’s a one-time compromise or because the politician is otherwise popular, the behavior may be repeated. Or maybe the voters were lied to about polling on the question by the politician. Over time, such deviations become accepted as “just how politics works,” weakening the expectation that politicians must adhere to conservative ideals. This process is exacerbated by voter apathy, where disengagement or fatigue leads voters to stop scrutinizing their elected officials. When voters fail to demand accountability, politicians face little pressure to align with conservative principles, and deviations become normalized – resulting in people like Jeremy Faison, William Lamberth, Jack Johnson, Randy McNally, Cameron Sexton and Bill Lee being reelected as “Republicans”.
How Does Normalization of Deviance Affect Voter Accountability? Normalization of deviance in this context has significant consequences for the relationship between Republican politicians and their conservative base:
**Erosion of Conservative Principles** – When deviations from principles like limited government, free-market policies, or traditional values are tolerated, these ideals lose their prominence. We have witnessed that over time, the Tennessee Republican Party has shifted away from its foundational values, leaving voters with candidates who no longer represent their priorities.
**Voter Apathy and Disillusionment** – As deviations become normalized, voters may feel that holding politicians accountable is futile. Especially since local GOP organizations and Political Action Committees continue their support and funding of these “Transpublicans.” This breeds apathy, as supporters disengage from the political process, believing their votes or activism won’t make a difference.
**Weakened Accountability** – When voters overlook deviations—whether due to loyalty to a politician, partisan priorities, or fatigue—politicians face less pressure to adhere to conservative principles. This has led to many election cycles where politicians prioritize personal or party interests over their constituents’ values.
**Polarization and Partisan Loyalty** – Normalization of deviance can deepen partisan divides. Voters may excuse deviations from conservative principles to “support the team” against political opponents, prioritizing party loyalty over ideological consistency, even when their party’s candidate has an ideology similar to their political opponent’s.
Consider a Republican politician who campaigns on reducing government spending but votes for a massive omnibus bill that includes wasteful expenditures. If voters shrug this off as a necessary compromise or because the politician aligns with them on other issues, the behavior may continue. Over time, supporting such bills becomes a norm, and fiscal responsibility—a core conservative principle—takes a backseat. Another example is a politician who softens their stance on a traditional conservative social issue, such as marriage, religious liberty, or pro-life stance, to appeal to a broader electorate. If voters accept this shift without demanding accountability, it signals that deviations from social conservatism are tolerable, potentially reshaping the party’s platform.
In conclusion, normalization of deviance in the context of voter apathy and Republican politics undermines the accountability that ensures politicians uphold conservative principles. That is why we have the least conservative Republican supermajority in the history of the party. When small deviations from ideals like limited government or fiscal responsibility are tolerated, they become normalized, weakening the party’s ideological foundation and fostering voter disillusionment. To counteract this, conservative voters must remain vigilant, actively hold politicians accountable, and reject apathy in favor of engagement. Just as in workplace safety or parenting, maintaining a strong commitment to core principles requires consistent effort and a refusal to accept “small” compromises that erode the bigger picture. By doing so, voters can ensure that Republican politicians represent the values they were elected to champion.
