It is likely that most humans respond to an upbringing of abuse and intimidation with a desire to be special and exclusive in balancing the scales. The result of this yearning, prompted in large part by familial conditions they can’t change, is to respond positively to rescuers promising something better in the here and now and in the future. The abused are particulalry susceptible to flattery and probably recognize it in others for what it is. So, what some people find disgusting in the Dude, identifies him by the dispossessed as one of their own.
For some reason, large segments of the U.S. population value obedience over every other virtue. It even comes out in Roy Moore’s assertion that he got permission from the mothers of the girls he was harrassing or, as he might have put it, “grooming for their wifely duties.” I have referred to it as “the culture of obedience” after coming to the realization that all cultivation is coercive. The culture of obedience is coercive and persists in being identified as a virtue, probably in an on-going effort to deny that “involuntary servitude,” along with buying and selling humans like cattle and sometimes calling it a dowery was/is wrong. If man’s dominion is God’s gift to man, how can domination be wrong? Take God out of it and the nation will make it right. Take the abusive pater/father out of it and the nation will make it right. Nationalism appeals because it makes a man feel superior without any moralistic/religious poppycock.
But, at its root lies abuse and intimidation and, unlike money, that is a heritage not easily lost. Abuse and intimidation travel from generation to generation. The Palestinians can tell you about it. The Slavs can tell you about it. The Irish can tell you about it. The Germans can tell you about it. The culture of obedience just codifies it. And, it seems part of the nature of abuse is that rescue has to come from outside. We have learned that from its domestic version. Abuse starts in the domi (plural of domus/house) and spreads to the nation.