"The Authoritarians" A free ebook worth a read

[Agathon]

I recommend this free ebook to anyone interested in contemporary politics. I think it sheds more light on current issues than most other books I have read.

The author is Rob Altemeyer, a professor from the University of Manitoba, and probably the world authority on the so-called "authoritarian personality". I came across it from reading one of John Dean's (yes, the Watergate Dean) books, which was heavily based on Altemeyer's research.

For the record, I think I got in the mid 20s for his authoritarian personality test, which is in line with my odd results for the political compass test (-10 left, -9.5 authoritarian).

You can get a complete PDF of the book here (it has been authorised for download by the author). It's less than an hour's read for most people.

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf

[Kuciwalker]

For the record, I think I got in the mid 20s for his authoritarian personality test, which is in line with my odd results for the political compass test (-10 left, -9.5 authoritarian).

Oh come on, you know you've always wanted to throw a capitalist out of a helicopter.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

For the record, I think I got in the mid 20s for his authoritarian personality test, which is in line with my odd results for the political compass test (-10 left, -9.5 authoritarian).

Oh come on, you know you've always wanted to throw a capitalist out of a helicopter.

Everyone knows I was the throwee in that situation (I think I was the target of that particular bomb).

Anyway, you should read the book. All Libertarians should read it for a start, as it might make them understand themselves better (and no, they aren't authoritarians, but it will help them understand why they make such little headway in the conservative movement).

[Kuciwalker]

Everyone knows I was the throwee in that situation (I think I was the target of that particular bomb).

I know; my statement stands

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Everyone knows I was the throwee in that situation (I think I was the target of that particular bomb).

I know; my statement stands

No it doesn't. Everyone knows my preferred method of dealing with incorrigible capitalists is the gulag.

A helicopter embodies a significant amount of the people's labour. It is not to be wasted on punishing reactionaries.

[RGBVideo]

I had my doubts, but since I had half an hour to spare before going bicycling with a friend, I started reading. Three minutes on, I got slapped by this paragraph (emphasis mine) on page 11 of the pdf:

Author of "TheAuthoritarians.pdf":

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist Party, or any other political party. I do give money to various parties, trying to defeat whomever I am most disgustatated with at the time. (My political contributions have almost become automatic withdrawals from my bank account since one ofour sons became a Member of the Legislative Assembly in our province.) I did not flee to Canada in 1968 because of the war in Viet-Nam. I crossed the border with my draft board=s good wishes because the University of Manitoba offered me the best job I could find. And my research has not been funded by "some liberal think-tank" or foundation. Instead, I paid for almost all of it out of my own pocket. I have not had a research grant since 1972--not because I am opposed to people giving me money, but because I proved so lousy at getting grants that I gave up. (Whereas I, like my politician son, found I was a soft touch whenever I hit me up for some dough.)

Right. I think I'll pass and concentrate on reading OTF instead...

[Arrian]

I found this amusing:

Altemeyer, inventor of the RWA Scale, believes that there is no such thing as a Left Wing Authoritarian.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/34935.html

Heh. Let's redefine all the authoritarian commies as "right wingers!"

-Arrian

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Arrian
I found this amusing:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/34935.html

Heh. Let's redefine all the authoritarian commies as "right wingers!"

-Arrian

Ugh what a ****** that guy is. And you should be ashamed of yourself for not bothering to read the book before spouting off with a response from some half baked idiot site. You only have to read as far as page 9 in this case. Instead, you just pied yourself in the face.

"right" in Altemeyer's "right wing authoritarian" doesn't refer to the political right wing. If you read his book, you would know this. Obviously you didn't even try to read it before saying something plainly wrong (so what's new).

Page 9

Because the submission occurs to traditional authority, I call these followers right- wing authoritarians. I’m using the word “right” in one of its earliest meanings, for in Old English “riht”(pronounced “writ”) as an adjective meant lawful, proper, correct, doing what the authorities said.

He does not say that there is no such thing as a left wing authoritarian. Again, from the same page:

In North America people who submit to the established authorities to
extraordinary degrees often turn out to be political conservatives, 2 so you can call them “right-wingers” both in my new-fangled psychological sense and in the usual political sense as well. But someone who lived in a country long ruled by Communists and who ardently supported the Communist Party would also be one of my psychological right-wing authoritarians even though we would also say he was a political left-winger. So a right-wing authoritarian follower doesn’t necessarily have conservative political views.

He goes on to say that the only left wing authoritarians he met were a few radicals in the 1970s, who slavishly followed their particular figurehead (the sort of commies I don't like).

He goes on:

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.

It's just an established fact that authoritarian personalities in Canada and the US are predominantly conservatives. But it does not follow that because someone is a conservative, that they are most likely an authoritarian.

Whoever wrote that article you linked to hasn't read Altemeyer properly. He is not saying that conservatism is a mental disorder, or that right wing authoritarianism is a mental disorder. The latter is simply a personality type, whereas the former is a political orientation.

But then again, don't expect authoritarians to accept anything that is scientifically demonstrated. According to Altemeyer's research, they are pretty much immune to reason if it conflicts with established authority.

[Arrian]

Ugh what a ****** that guy is. And you should be ashamed of yourself for not bothering to read the book before spouting off with a response from some half baked idiot site. You only have to read as far as page 9 in this case. Instead, you just pied yourself in the face

I found it while doing a google search on his "authoritarian test" hoping I'd find an online version so I could take it.

I didn't find that, but instead found the "reason magazine" thing. Then I had to go to a meeting. So I posted what I had found, which amused me. I noticed that the hyperlink in the article was broken, which might've been a hint

I may still read the book. I just had other things to do.

-Arrian

[Tuberski]

Because the submission occurs to traditional authority, I call these followers right- wing authoritarians. I’m using the word “right” in one of its earliest meanings, for in Old English “riht”(pronounced “writ”) as an adjective meant lawful, proper, correct, doing what the authorities said.

So, the current definition doesn't fit his perceptions, so he goes back centuries to find a correct usage.

This book is obviously not worth reading, unless you are a Communist Philosophy student. ;p

ACK!

[Kuciwalker]

Why reinvent "right wing"? Why not just call them lawful neutral?

[Arrian]

And, of course, the test is in the book.

27.

The questions were pretty silly, though. Then again, they usually are.

-Arrian

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Why reinvent "right wing"? Why not just call them lawful neutral?

It allows the author to define all law abiding peoples as submissives and right wing hacks. Duh.

Thus defining Chaotic Evil types like Aggy as the good guys.

[Kontiki]

I got 51 on the test. Everyone needs to obey me.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Tuberski


So, the current definition doesn't fit his perceptions, so he goes back centuries to find a correct usage.

This book is obviously not worth reading, unless you are a Communist Philosophy student. ;p

ACK!

Not true. You could also be a communist philosophy professor.