Suicidal empathy
Theory of pathological and excessive empathy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Suicidal empathy is a purported phenomenon in which excessive, misdirected and pathological forms of empathy are claimed to be destructive for the party that exhibits it. This is often claimed to happen through prioritizing compassion, understanding and empathy over logic and long-term consequences.
Origin and popularization of the term
The term was coined by Canadian evolutionary psychologist[1] and marketing professor Gad Saad in his book "Suicidal Empathy: Dying To Be Kind".[2] According to The Times of India, the book criticizes how "excessive, irrational empathy in Western culture prioritizes offenders, certain groups, and feelings over reason, self-preservation, and societal stability".[3]
According to Saad, suicidal empathy is the inability to implement optimal decisions when one is psychologically conditioned to prioritize empathy or displays of empathy over a rational course of action.[4] He states that suicidal empathy prioritizes minority groups such as illegal immigrants at the expense of survival and security of one's own groups and values.[5] For example, Saad observes that in the US, soldiers fighting for the country receive much less empathy than immigrant gang members.[6]
The Wall Street Journal linked Saad to Elon Musk, claiming the two had a 'public bromance'.[7][8] Musk's usage of the term popularized it.[9] In a 2025 interview with podcaster Joe Rogan, Elon Musk uses the phrase "civilizational suicidal empathy" to refer to the corrosion of American culture.[10] According to Musk, suicidal empathy refers to weaponized empathy to bring about political and policy modifications.[11][12][13]
Usage
According to the conservative The Federalist magazine, the events around the 2026 New York City protest bombing attempt demonstrate "suicidal empathy": after an ISIS supporter almost killed an attendee, the attendee continued to publicly support open-border policy, and equalized the ISIS terrorist with the terrorist's target.[14]
According to US senator Eric Schmitt, suicidal empathy is "a tolerance of anything and everything, which overpowers all reason and undermines all distinctions between right and wrong". As examples, he mentions importing millions of unvetted refugees, releasing violent criminals, tolerating violent riots.[15]
Iain Macwhirter has compared Britain's net zero strategy to suicidal empathy, with moral ambition superseding economic self interest. The article argues that by restricting North Sea oil and gas production, imposing steep windfall taxes, and accelerating the shift to renewable resources, the UK is undermining its own energy security and industrial base. It makes the claim that these policies have led to inflated electricity prices, unemployment, and greater dependence on imported fuel, and as a result, sacrificed economic stability to meet climate targets that larger global emitters are not matching.[16]
The term is commonly used by right-wing commentators and Christian nationalist figures to criticize empathy toward groups such as immigrants and racial minorities. In this context, it is sometimes linked to the Great Replacement conspiracy theory.
It has been referred to as a "right-wing buzzword" by The Bulwark.[17]
Reception
The concept has been compared to the Great Replacement, a "white supremacist conspiracy theory", as both posit the imminent destruction of western societies at the hands of immigrants. JD Vance was criticized by Pope Francis in 2025 for citing the medieval Catholic doctrine of ordo amoris to justify the withholding of empathy for migrants.[8] According to the news magazine Salon, the portrayal of empathy as a weapon is an "overt assault" on what is a "natural virtue" of human beings.[18] The magazine Eureka Street criticized Elon Musk for using the term "suicidal empathy" as a way to say "barbarians" are going to threaten "the American way of life".[19]
Historian of psychology Susan Lanzonia stated that she has never perceived a vilification of empathy as reflected in "current sources". Lanzonia believes that the disparagement of the concept of empathy is a structured attempt to dehumanize people who might be in need of it.[8]
The Guardian discussed Saad's book among other works critical of empathy, characterizing the topic as a right-wing effort "...to dismantle and discredit one of the essential tools for any society – our capacity to recognize and respond to suffering. We should see the campaign against empathy by Trump supporters for what it is: a flashing red light warning of fascist intent."[8]