Left-wing authoritarianism exists and is a key predictor of psychological and behavioral outcomes

[Bomb#20]

When your country's government does succumb to authoritarianism, you can bet a lot of civil liberties will be stripped, and we just narrowly avoided succumbing to an authoritarian administration, though it left enough damage that our democracy could yet possibly not recover.

We avoided succumbing to those idiots about as narrowly as the Castro regime avoided succumbing to the Bay of Pigs. Our democracy is a lot tougher than the Chicken Littles of America give it credit for.

It's being willing to sacrifice other people's civil liberties that makes one an authoritarian.

No, it isn't. As a general definition and as a social science and poli science term, that's not what the word authoritarian means.

Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of a strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.

Uh huh. So provided you aren't using your rejection of political plurality, use of a strong central power to get your way, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers and democratic voting for the purpose of preserving the status quo, you get a free pass from being classed as authoritarian? As long as you're trying to remake the country in your own image you're on the side of freedom? Please. That's as disingenuous and self-dealing as the U.S. government including "by a non-state actor" in its definition of "terrorist".

Sound familiar? Hint: it's not the current administration in the U.S. that can be characterized this way.

Why are you bringing the current administration up? Did someone here call Biden authoritarian? Speaking of terrorism, Biden's not the one who declared the NRA a terrorist organization as an argument for using strong central power and reductions in rule of law in order to do away with political plurality and democratic voting, on the subject of gun rights. Now who was it who did that? Oh, right, that was you.

But I take your point: you're falsely insinuating that I'm a Trump supporter. If you had the power to, then most probably you'd use Trump's pathetic putsch attempt as an excuse to define Trump supporters collectively as terrorists; you'd declare the entire Republican Party "a corrupt terrorist organization that has its hooks in our political system"; you'd "dismantle" it; you'd institute one-party rule; you'd treat your own libel against me as evidence that I'm a Trump supporter too; you'd strip me of my civil liberties; and you'd still manage to perceive yourself as saving political plurality, rule of law, separation of powers and democratic voting.

 

[Angry Floof]

We avoided succumbing to those idiots about as narrowly as the Castro regime avoided succumbing to the Bay of Pigs. Our democracy is a lot tougher than the Chicken Littles of America give it credit for.

No, it isn't. As a general definition and as a social science and poli science term, that's not what the word authoritarian means.

Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of a strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.

Uh huh. So provided you aren't using your rejection of political plurality, use of a strong central power to get your way, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers and democratic voting for the purpose of preserving the status quo, you get a free pass from being classed as authoritarian? As long as you're trying to remake the country in your own image you're on the side of freedom? Please. That's as disingenuous and self-dealing as the U.S. government including "by a non-state actor" in its definition of "terrorist".

Sound familiar? Hint: it's not the current administration in the U.S. that can be characterized this way.

Why are you bringing the current administration up? Did someone here call Biden authoritarian? Speaking of terrorism, Biden's not the one who declared the NRA a terrorist organization as an argument for using strong central power and reductions in rule of law in order to do away with political plurality and democratic voting, on the subject of gun rights. Now who was it who did that? Oh, right, that was you.

But I take your point: you're falsely insinuating that I'm a Trump supporter. If you had the power to, then most probably you'd use Trump's pathetic putsch attempt as an excuse to define Trump supporters collectively as terrorists; you'd declare the entire Republican Party "a corrupt terrorist organization that has its hooks in our political system"; you'd "dismantle" it; you'd institute one-party rule; you'd treat your own libel against me as evidence that I'm a Trump supporter too; you'd strip me of my civil liberties; and you'd still manage to perceive yourself as saving political plurality, rule of law, separation of powers and democratic voting.

Not necessarily a trump supporter per se, but not too distant. No, no one wants to strip you of anything. And no to the rest of your fantasy, although the GOP has pretty much become a corrupt terrorist organization who have been actively doing all of those things, and still at it through voter suppression legislation in states across the country. The rest is fantasy you pulled out of your ass. I don't know who you're confusing me with, but confused you most certainly are.

 

[Bomb#20]

Not necessarily a trump supporter per se, but not too distant.

And you accuse me of pulling fantasies out of my ass. You really have a serious self-knowledge problem.

No, no one wants to strip you of anything.

Lady, do you need me to go dig up a link to your post so I can prove to readers that you actually said the words I'm throwing back in your face, or will you just own them? Yes, of course you want to strip me of anything: you want to strip me of my right to politically agitate against gun control cooperatively with the great mass of the country's gun control opponents. The circumstance that it's a right I have no interest in exercising since I don't agree with them is neither here nor there -- I have a right to do it, and you want to strip me of that right.

And no to the rest of your fantasy, although the GOP has pretty much become a corrupt terrorist organization who have been actively doing all of those things, and still at it through voter suppression legislation in states across the country. The rest is fantasy you pulled out of your ass.

Uh huh. You called the NRA a corrupt terrorist organization and you used that as an argument for "dismantling" them; now you say the GOP is also a corrupt terrorist organization; and somehow you dismantling the GOP if only you had the power to is "fantasy I pulled out of my ass"?!? Get a bloody grip! If in fact you really wouldn't dismantle the GOP, that's you being inconsistent, not me confusing you with someone else. You live and breathe left-wing authoritarianism. When you deny it exists, that's just a fish denying the existence of water.

 

[Swammerdami]

wrong thread.

Yes, there are at least 2 wrongnesses in the thread. You can click the Report button to report a specific wrongness anonymously.

There are strict rules against insulting other TFT Members. Apologies would go a long way. You know who you are. Please don't make me experiment with my new-found Moderator powers!

(I myself have been an offender in the past. I think they made me a Mod to force me to monitor my own posting! )

 

[untermensche]

Our democracy is a lot tougher than the Chicken Littles of America give it credit for.

We have no democracy.

We have a government controlled by wealth.

We have a military industrial complex.

We have a government constantly spying on every citizen.

We have endless war overseas.

We have no democracy.

We get to vote for the people working for the National Security State, not working for us.

 

[Angry Floof]

And you accuse me of pulling fantasies out of my ass. You really have a serious self-knowledge problem.


Lady, do you need me to go dig up a link to your post so I can prove to readers that you actually said the words I'm throwing back in your face, or will you just own them? Yes, of course you want to strip me of anything: you want to strip me of my right to politically agitate against gun control cooperatively with the great mass of the country's gun control opponents. The circumstance that it's a right I have no interest in exercising since I don't agree with them is neither here nor there -- I have a right to do it, and you want to strip me of that right.

And no to the rest of your fantasy, although the GOP has pretty much become a corrupt terrorist organization who have been actively doing all of those things, and still at it through voter suppression legislation in states across the country. The rest is fantasy you pulled out of your ass.

Uh huh. You called the NRA a corrupt terrorist organization and you used that as an argument for "dismantling" them; now you say the GOP is also a corrupt terrorist organization; and somehow you dismantling the GOP if only you had the power to is "fantasy I pulled out of my ass"?!? Get a bloody grip! If in fact you really wouldn't dismantle the GOP, that's you being inconsistent, not me confusing you with someone else. You live and breathe left-wing authoritarianism. When you deny it exists, that's just a fish denying the existence of water.

Yeah, sure, holding power accountable is "left wing authoritarianism." All those poor politically powerful people and their wealthy backers behind the scenes! Those left wing "authoritarians" are anti-establishment and anti-convention!!111!! Sooo authoritarian!!!!1!!!

Hold power accountable and protect the least among us. Such a scary world view!

 

[Elixir]

I wish to thank the OP for reminding people of the obvious - that authoritarians of all stripes share characteristics. I await the next alert that rain is wet.

Right.
But ya gotta give Meta the props he is due for starting another flamebait thread that actually got a rise out his intended targets.

 

[lpetrich]

Options for getting the Book – The Authoritarians

You could have left-wing authoritarian followers as well, who support a revolutionary leader who wants to overthrow the establishment. I knew a few in the 1970s, Marxist university students who constantly spouted their chosen authorities, Lenin or Trotsky or Chairman Mao. Happily they spent most of their time fighting with each other, as lampooned in Monty Python’s Life of Brian where the People’s Front of Judea devotes most of its energy to battling, not the Romans, but the Judean People’s Front. But the left-wing authoritarians on my campus disappeared long ago. Similarly in America “the Weathermen” blew away in the wind. I’m sure one can find left-wing authoritarians here and there, but they hardly exist in sufficient numbers now to threaten democracy in North America. However I have found bucketfuls of right-wing authoritarians in nearly every sample I have drawn in Canada and the United States for the past three decades. So when I speak of “authoritarian followers” in this book I mean right-wing authoritarian followers, as identified by the RWA scale.

So Prof. Altemeyer does acknowledge the existence of left-wing authoritarians. But there are not nearly as many as some right-wingers seem to believe.

As to Communism and authoritarianism, look at the people who inhabit Communist regimes and who defend those regimes. They act very much like the right-wing sorts of authoritarians.

Thanks to Mikhail Gorbachev (Thanks so much, Mikhail!) I can show you how thoroughly some high RWAs sop up the teachings of another set of authorities, their government. As soon as Gorbachev lifted the restraints on doing psychological research in the Soviet Union an acquaintance of mine, Andre Kamenshikov, administered a survey to students at Moscow State University with the same freedom that western researchers take for granted. The students answered the RWA scale and as well a series of questions about who was the “good guy” and who was the “bad guy” in the Cold War. For example, did the USSR start the arms race, or the USA? Would the United States launch a sneak nuclear attack on the Soviet Union if it knew it could do so without retaliation? Would the USSR do that to the United States? Does the Soviet Union have the right to invade a neighbor who looks like it might become allied with the United States? Does the USA have that right when one of its neighbors starts cozying up to the USSR? At the same time Andre was doing his study, I asked the same questions at three different American universities.

We found that in both countries the high RWAs believed their government’s version of the Cold War more than most people did. Their officials wore the white hats, the authoritarian followers believed, and the other guys were dirty rotten warmongers. And that’s most interesting, because it means the most cock-sure belligerents in the populations on each side of the Cold War, the ones who hated and blamed each other the most, were in fact the same people, psychologically. If they had grown up on the other side of the Iron Curtain, they probably would have believed the leaders they presently despised, and despised the leaders they now trusted. They’d have been certain the side they presently thought was in the right was in the wrong, and instead embraced the beliefs they currently held in contempt.

So both sides agreed that the other side was an evil empire.

Where have these authoritarians gone after the fall of the Soviet Union? Do they now love Vladimir Putin?

Gidi Rubinstein similarly found that high RWAs among both Jewish and Palestinian students in Israel tended to be the most orthodox members of their religion, who tend to be among those most resistant to a peaceful resolution of the Middle East conflict. If their authorities endorse hostility, you can bet most authoritarian followers will be combative. A lot of high RWAs apparently do not think that the peacemakers will be blessed.

 

[lpetrich]

Large study indicates left-wing authoritarianism exists and is a key predictor of psychological and behavioral outcomes

“Our study doesn’t mean that left-wing authoritarianism and right-wing authoritarianism are equally prevalent or equally dangerous (in the U.S. or elsewhere),” Costello said. “It doesn’t mean that there is a moral equivalence across the far-left and far-right. We simply show that (1) left-wing authoritarianism exists and (2) left-wing authoritarianism and right-wing authoritarianism seem to overlap quite a bit. Readers should not use our paper to score political points (though, sadly, they almost certainly will). ”

Postscript On The 2008 U.S. Election – The Authoritarians

Unfortunately, the wretchedly divisive 2008 GOP campaign will, I fear, poison the country for some time. High RWAs have been told over and over again by their trusted sources that Barack Obama is a Muslim socialist/Communist America-hating dictatorial terrorist intent on destroying the country. They have been led to intensely dislike, if not hate the president-elect, and it’s no accident, I submit, that the Secret Service noted a sharp increase in the number of threats to the Democratic standard-bearer as Palin’s crowds became more rabid. Furthermore the Republican National Committee, Fox News, and so on have sold authoritarian followers the myth that the Democrats won through massive voter fraud, because the media conspired to keep Americans from discovering “the truth” about Obama, and that the Democrats caused all the problems that have occurred over the past eight years. You could easily find postings on various blogs in the last weeks of the campaign saying people should be ready to “take up arms” against an “illegal Obama tyranny” to “preserve democracy and the Constitution.”

Thus while Barack Obama may genuinely seek a more inclusive, consensual approach to the country’s dire problems, many high RWAs may say “Count me out.” Their leaders–social dominators pursuing their own agendas–will instead stoke the often racist dislike for Obama that was so evident at Republican rallies in the closing days of the campaign.

So right-wingers were sore losers back then also. What they claimed about 2020 they also claimed about 2008, that the reason that their side lost was because of massive voter fraud.

 

[lpetrich]

Comment on the Tea Party Movement – The Authoritarians -
April 20, 2010

Anger among economic conservatives rose yet higher in early 2009 when Congress responded to President Obama’s call for a massive economic stimulus to keep the recession from turning into a Depression. Almost every major Western government, whatever its political stripe, went deeply into the red at this time to keep its economy afloat. Republicans in Congress voted massively against the bill, and Democrats took the heat for trying to stop a recession that the Republicans had largely caused by deregulating the banking system.

...
On February 18, President Obama announced a plan to help people refinance bad mortgages. This led Rick Santelli, a Chicago-based editor for the CNBC Business Network, to complain on air about “promoting bad behavior” by “losers,” and to suggest that a Tea Party be held in Chicago to protest this decision. The conservative news website, The Drudge Report, prominently featured “the rant” and it raced around the Internet. On February 27, “Chicago Tea Parties” were staged across the United States. But the turnout was light. Only about 200 appeared in Chicago, a rather typical result by most reports. Still, there had only been about a dozen at the first protest on February 10.

...
So are the Tea Partiers ordinary people with no political leanings, as they say they are? Definitely not. The findings cited above and other data in the polls indicate that the Tea Party is overwhelmingly stocked with Republican supporters. They are by no means “ordinary people,” although the public’s perception that they are is one of their strongest suits.

Not surprising. Prof. Altemeyer then noticed lots of features that are typical of RWA's: authoritarian submission, fearfulness, self-righteousness, authoritarian aggression, lack of critical thinking, lots of things being our "biggest problem", compartmentalized thinking, double standards.

 

[Angry Floof]

Options for getting the Book – The Authoritarians

So Prof. Altemeyer does acknowledge the existence of left-wing authoritarians. But there are not nearly as many as some right-wingers seem to believe.

Metaphor posted this thread to insinuate that "both sides are the same" and that the left just as violent and rabid as the right, and linked to an article about some, at best, disingenuous "research" and presenting it as just offering interesting scientific information.

It's actually pretty comical, though. Their "three primary dimensions" for identifying authoritarianism among the left actually describe anti-authoritarianism. I think the bulk of the effort put into this research was trying to find definitions that make anti-authoritarianism sound like authoritarianism.

The first is anti-hierarchical aggression. People who score high on this dimension agree with statements such as “The rich should be stripped of their belongings and status” and “We need to replace the established order by any means necessary.”

"Anti-hierarchical." Does that sound authoritarian to you? Yeah, ordinary citizens fighting back against corrupt power and rich people is authoritarian. Anyway, no one's anti-hierarchical. There's just people who don't need to worship narrow social and organizational structures. I wonder if the researchers themselves actually believe this and if they really believe making up new definitions for words really counts as honest research.

The second is top-down censorship. People who score high on this dimension agree with statements such as “I should have the right not to be exposed to offensive views” and “Getting rid of inequality is more important than protecting the so-called ‘right’ to free speech.”

In other words, "cancel culture," another made up boogieman. Not sure what authority figure they think sits at the top of this cascade of censorship against affluent cis het white men who were raised to love Jesus.

The third is anti-conventionalism. People who score high on this dimension agree with statements such as “All political conservatives are fools” and “The ‘old-fashioned ways’ and ‘old-fashioned values’ need to be abolished.”

Yeah, threatening convention is sooo authoritarian, man.

Still wondering if the researchers wrote this shit with a straight face. I'm guessing some rich right wing organization paid them big bucks to find "authoritarianism" on the left.

And the rest is full of such disingenuous shell game of definitions and outright lies, such as that RWA research has only been done on conservatives. In fact, most of the subjects of Altemeyer's studies (and probably previous research as well) were liberal arts students. They were not surveyed for ideological identity for selection. That was done the same way it was supposedly done by this team of "LWA" researchers, by random selection and then surveyed. If the accusation is that Altemeyer surveyed for conservatives and then conducted his study on them, then they are outright liars.

But it's not likely they are willing to go into detail about what they're accusing RWA researchers of. Probably sounds good to funders, though.

And all of this shit is presented as "Left-wing authoritarianism exists and is a key predictor of psychological and behavioral outcomes," as if there is some new insight here that previous authoritarianism researchers missed, and to boot the accusation that they missed it due to only studying conservatives.

Self reflection is not a strong trait of those on the right. As I said, pretty comical that this biased, sloppy research is supposed to show how biased and sloppy RWA research as been, as well as to imply that some roughly equal level of authoritarianism and violence can be found among left wingers.

"No, YOUUUUUU" is really the only idea underlying right wing argumentation these days. The rest is just hilarious window dressing.

 

[Metaphor]

Metaphor posted this thread to insinuate that "both sides are the same"

Achievement Unlocked: No Evidence Mind Reader

and that the left just as violent and rabid as the right,

x2

Still wondering if the researchers wrote this shit with a straight face. I'm guessing some rich right wing organization paid them big bucks to find "authoritarianism" on the left.

Achievement Unlocked: No Evidence Speculation

 

[lpetrich]

Donald Trump and Authoritarian Followers – The Authoritarians - July 18, 2016

Authoritarians did not disappear after George W. Bush left office and the United States avoided financial collapse. Instead they flocked to the Tea Party Movement, which the Republican Party cleverly (it thought) helped create and gathered unto itself. But the movement drove moderates from the GOP and sent radical conservatives to Congress. The “Tea Party Party” produced eight years of non-compromising stalemate in Washington as they imposed their own agenda on the Republican leadership. Now American authoritarians have united behind a presidential candidate who unabashedly says he wants to destroy the traditional Republican Party and deal a devastating blow to the Democrats as well. Is that anything to worry about?

BA continued by saying that the real problem with authoritarian leaders is what followers they attract.

... Research indicates that a bed rock 20-25% of the adults in North America is highly vulnerable to a demagogue who would incite hatred of various minorities to gain power. These people are constantly waiting for a tough “law and order,” “man on horseback” who will supposedly solve all our problems through the ruthless application of force. When such a person gains prominence, you can expect the authoritarian followers to mate devotedly with the authoritarian leader, because each gives the other something they desperately want: the feeling of safety for the followers, and the tremendous power of the modern state for the leader.

BA then went into details of authoritarian followers, and asked how well his profile fits Donald Trump's followers. Highly ethnocentric, highly fearful of a dangerous world, highly self-righteous, aggressive, highly prejudiced, highly supportive of persecutions, believing in a mass of contradictions, being poor at reasoning, highly dogmatic, dependent on social reinforcement, greatly overestimating how much other people agree with them, strong on group cohesiveness and loyalty, easily duped by manipulators who pretend to support their causes, lacking in self-understanding.

"I hasten to add that studies find examples of all these things in lots of others, not just authoritarian followers. But not as consistently, and not nearly as much."

Then on how Donald Trump is an authoritarian leader. How might he score with statements like “Winning is not the first thing. It’s the ONLY thing.” and “Deceit and cheating are justified when they get you what you really want.”

The most remarkable thing about Donald Trump as an authoritarian leader, in my mind, is that he’s so obvious about it. Look at his comments about Vladimir Putin, Saddam Hussein, and Kim Jong-un. While he has some negative evaluation of each, he praises all three for becoming autocrats and using their power to dominate their countries. How hard is it to see what he’s hoping to do? Who will stop him if he becomes President?

 

[lpetrich]

Why Do Trump’s Supporters Stand by Him, No Matter What? – The Authoritarians - August 23, 2018

"Many people, including I, have labeled Donald Trump an authoritarian leader. But they are honestly baffled by the loyalty of his followers. The decades of research on authoritarian followers provide some answers."

In another sense, however, the fidelity of Trump’s base remains astounding. He has made so many unforced errors because of his lack of understanding and low problem-solving intelligence, his vast ignorance, his enormous, never-ending dishonesty which seems as reflexive as his breathing, his explosive hostility, his uncontrollable vanity, his despicable demeaning of women, his squalid vulgarity, the stupidity of his stereotypes, the shabbiness of his thinking, the buffoonery of his parading, his attacks on the institutions he needs most to safeguard the country, his incredibly poor judgment about the character of those whom he has brought into his administration, his equally mind-numbing lack of judgment about foreign leaders, friend and foe, and his willingness to inflame Americans’ disagreements and turn them into conflagrations which make us that deeply divided house which the Gospels and Abraham Lincoln warned against—how can his supporters have stood so solidly behind him? You’d think they’d be having some second thoughts at least.

Also lack of diligence and unwillingness to do the work of his office. He has been so contrary to so many things that conservatives claim that they value that it's amazing that they haven't turned against him.

"The main reason, I submit, is that most of Trump’s backers are authoritarian followers—people who submit too much to the leaders they consider legitimate, trust them too much, and give them too much leeway to do whatever they want."

"Compared to most people, studies have shown that authoritarian followers get their beliefs and opinions from the authorities in their lives, and hardly at all by making up their own minds. They memorize rather than reason."

 

[Angry Floof]

Achievement Unlocked: No Evidence Mind Reader



x2

Still wondering if the researchers wrote this shit with a straight face. I'm guessing some rich right wing organization paid them big bucks to find "authoritarianism" on the left.

Achievement Unlocked: No Evidence Speculation

Well, I did say "I'm guessing."

Anyway, you now know that the research not only doesn't offer any new insight into authoritarianism, it's also bogus. The three primary dimensions they described are anti authoritarian in nature yet presented as authoritarian, plus some other easily debunked lies. Aren't you a little pissed that you were misled like this? You made a whole thread about it and everything.

 

[Angry Floof]

Large study indicates left-wing authoritarianism exists and is a key predictor of psychological and behavioral outcomes

Loren, this is the article linked in the OP.

 

[lpetrich]

Large study indicates left-wing authoritarianism exists and is a key predictor of psychological and behavioral outcomes

Loren, this is the article linked in the OP.

I should have noted that I put the title in the link. Firefox and Chrome have extensions that will do that.

 

[Angry Floof]

Large study indicates left-wing authoritarianism exists and is a key predictor of psychological and behavioral outcomes

Loren, this is the article linked in the OP.

I should have noted that I put the title in the link. Firefox and Chrome have extensions that will do that.

I don't understand this response. I was just telling you that your post was just a repeat of what the thread is already about.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

 

[TSwizzle]

Lefties love authoritarianism, just look at how much power the pandemic and lockdown gave them and how stubbornly they cling to that power. Trying to control every aspect of people’s lives. And to cling to that power they will invoke another hobgoblin, climate emergency.