What is driving it all?

[phands]

Read The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer. It's about research, not opinions. Free ebook, link is in my signature.

I worked with Bruce Hunsberger at Laurier (Yes, the same Laurier that a long time afterwards had the infamous Lindsay Shepherd incident), in collaboration with Bob Altemeyer. Bruce was my undergraduate thesis advisor. I am very familiar with Altemeyer's work. I helped run some of the research he has quoted. Authoritarianism scared me then from the right, and it now also scares me from the left. It isn't exclusively right wing.

I don't believe you. I don't think you are familiar with this research at all if you think you see the traits of right wing authoritarianism among liberals.

We are not submissive to authority. We don't want conformity or to punish non-conformists. We're not afraid of change. We don't look for powerful bullies to protect us from all the most vulnerable people in our society, or support inhumane treatment of them. We're not afraid to look around the world for ourselves rather than remain as ignorant as possible and letting authority figures tell us what to think.

We tend to be open, inclusive, and not scared of every fucking thing that's not familiar to us no matter what some public figure or ideological mouthpiece says. We are not bound by rigid traditions. We seek to help and share and build, not take and deny and punish.

I could go on, but I'd rather you just get familiar with the research if you're going to talk about it at all.

I don't believe him either.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

We are not submissive to authority. We don't want conformity or to punish non-conformists.

Perhaps you personally are not. I am seeing more and more now on the left who are.

Everything from demands to use "proper" gender pronouns under threat of law, and the forementioned Lindsay Shepherd incident here in Ontario, to the censoring of cartoons rather than holding them up when Charlie Hebdo happened, to the removal of politically unpopular figures from media, both traditional and online, because of social pressure, to the forced deplatforming of conservative speakers invited by student groups. If you don't think more on the left have become demanders of conformity, you have not been paying attention. Millions more are afraid to speak for fear of offending someone.

This isn't what I consider liberal. Liberal is Voltaire. Let them speak. Defeat them in the marketplace of ideas. Strong man their ideas, rather than strawmanning them, show you understand them and then utterly refute them. The facts are on the liberal's side.

As Cathy Newman said in her now infamous interview with Jordan Peterson, "why should your right to free speech trump a trans person's right not to be offended?". She isn't alone in such sentiment. Against where are today's George Carlin's?

As for submission to authority, that's on the rise to on the left. Jon Haidt did a great analysis of this, how more of the new generation are more likely to run to authority figures and obey their directives than handle things themselves given a conflict. So much of what people on the Christian Right was trying to ban years ago, there are Feminists trying to ban today. Sex and violence in videogames? Porn? Check, double check.

We're not afraid of change.

Depends on the change , doesn't it?

look for powerful bullies to protect us from all the most vulnerable people in our society, or support inhumane treatment of them.

I have noticed more bullies on the left lately than I have seen on the left before. And yes, often they bully the vulnerable, such as minorities within minorities who don't conform.

We're not afraid to look around the world for ourselves rather than remain as ignorant as possible and letting authority figures tell us what to think.

I wish that was true of more on the left that it is.

I could go on, but I'd rather you just get familiar with the research if you're going to talk about it at all.

I was both a participant/subject and later a research assistant on the early research you refer to. Granted, that was over a decade ago, nearly two, but I was actually there and had conversations with Hunsberger and corresponded with Altmeyer as they went about this research. You read an e-book....

 

[Angry Floof]

In other words, you are not at all familiar with the research. Show us these "left wing authoritarians" who demonstrate the traits of right wing authoritarian followers.

It doesn't mean people you don't like. It doesn't mean people who are adamant and loud about their views. It doesn't mean people who may behave badly in chaotic times.

Try as you might, you just can't wish it into reality that the "enemy" you've invested so much of yourself in actually matches your cherished cartoon.

You just don't know what you're talking about and every post you make on this topic makes that clear. Sit there and dream up all kinds of opinions, but you won't (and can't) provide backup to your assertions.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You just don't know what you're talking about and every post you make on this topic makes that clear. Sit there and dream up all kinds of opinions, but you won't (and can't) provide backup to your assertions.

You addressed none of the many examples I just gave. You imagine left wing authoritarians can't exist because that suits your politics. I get it. I used to think the same thing. Je suis Charlie.

 

[Angry Floof]

No matter how much you want to think you've given examples, you haven't.

First of all, right wing authoritarianism is called such because it tends to correlate strongly with endorsement of political conservatism. Furthermore, while attempts have been made to investigate “left wing authoritatianism”–high adherence to left wing party lines and aggression to those who do not endorse left wing values–these attempts have fallen flat, suggesting that perhaps such a thing does not exist. When one measures submission to authority using different scales, it is still found to correlate with right wing ideology; it is likely, therefore, that authoritarianism and being right wing go hand in hand.

Following a lot of research, Altemeyer has identified a lot of ideologies which correlated with right wing authoritarism. The right wing authoritarian is likely to oppose abortion, support nationalistic ideas and behaviours, capital punishment, capitalism, religion and conservative economic policies. They believe the world to be a dangerous place. They also put less value on social equality, and are far more accepting of infringements on civil liberties–Altermeyer found that high RWA people were often not fazed by the Watergate scandal. Unsurprisingly, given this set of correlates, high RWA people are also more likely to be prejudiced against ethnic minorities and gay people, and more likely to be bullies or friends with bullies in childhood.

RWA is not correlated with intelligence, but arguing with a person who is high in RWA may be difficult, as they have been found to uncritically accept poor evidence–how many times have you found yourself arguing with someone who will not listen to reason and instead clings on fervently to a story they were once told by a friend of a friend? High RWA people often hold the perception that they are right, with less ability to accept their own limitations. They are also less creative than less RWA people. High RWA people have less tolerance for ambiguity: this means they are less able to accept change and jump to conclusions in ambiguous situations.

NONE OF THIS DESCRIBES LIBERALS. Much of this can be described in terms of spectrums of traits, and liberals are at the other end of that spectrum from conservatives.

Open vs. closed, inclusive vs. exclusive, acceptance vs. fear, altruism vs. selfishness, etc.

What traits on such spectrums as these are reflected in the right wing world view?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Furthermore, while attempts have been made to investigate “left wing authoritatianism”–high adherence to left wing party lines and aggression to those who do not endorse left wing values–these attempts have fallen flat, suggesting that perhaps such a thing does not exist.

At the time this was the case. I have seen it change. And yes, each of what I listed are examples of it. If Hunsberger was still alive and at Laurier and looked for it today, he'd have to look no further than the very building his office was in, where the Lindsay Shepherd incident happened.

NONE OF THIS DESCRIBES LIBERALS

You have liberal and left joined in your mind just as I did. I'm no longer onboard with that.

 

[Angry Floof]

You don't understand the research. Period. You cannot be relied on to recognize right wing authoritarianism because you don't know what it is.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You don't understand the research. Period. You cannot be relied on to recognize right wing authoritarianism because you don't know what it is.

I can recognize right wing authoritarianism. I can also recognize the existence and growth of left wing authoritarianism. You can't. That's ok. Nobody expects you to.

 

[Angry Floof]

You don't understand the research. Period. You cannot be relied on to recognize right wing authoritarianism because you don't know what it is.

I can recognize right wing authoritarianism. I can also recognize the existence and growth of left wing authoritarianism. You can't. That's ok. Nobody expects you to.

And you won't back that up because you can't.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You don't understand the research. Period. You cannot be relied on to recognize right wing authoritarianism because you don't know what it is.

I can recognize right wing authoritarianism. I can also recognize the existence and growth of left wing authoritarianism. You can't. That's ok. Nobody expects you to.

And you won't back that up because you can't.

Fun game this. You go on ignoring what I wrote and claiming I never wrote it, rather than understanding and refuting it. Maybe substitute something else and tell us what you say I really think. That reminds me of the right wing.

 

[masterpeastheater]

Well sure rank and file right wingers don't believe in climate change. However, the elites behind the scenes probably know better. A tack they could take instead of admitting it, and therefore losing some of their billions and/or power is to condition a large segment of the population-other white people- to accept genocide and a police state to deal with the fallout instead of anything constructive. Is there any particular reason to believe the Adelsons, Kochs, Mercers and the good ol' boys are not that evil? Also, Trump voters and neo-nazis could be responding to environmental cues subconsciously/primally even if they don't believe exactly in climate change or limits to growth. Am I crazee?

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Well sure rank and file right wingers don't believe in climate change. However, the elites behind the scenes probably know better.

They do, unquestionably. They just don't give a fuck.

First of all, the vast majority don't care about anyone but themselves. Secondly, those that may give a tiny shit about their children know that they'll likely be ok.
Third, for those who even smaller percentage that may give a tiny, tiny shit about their grandchildren think that their wealth will probably protect them well enough, which means the only real danger for wealthy people (that actually give a flying fuck today) is really only for their great-grandchildren, which they absolutely don't give a flying fuck at all about.

Iow, to the people that could change everything overnight, their only motivation would be to protect their great-grandchildren. So for them, it's weighing their needs now against the needs of children who don't exist yet.