Glenn Beck's star continues to rise. Sarah Palin can do no wrong. Fox News is still considered credible to its viewers. And these are just a few examples of the tiger being led by its tail. What's going on here?
The short answer is that the country's awash in right-wing authoritarian personalities. The long answer is well worth exploring, because it doesn't necessarily mean what you think it does.
On the recommendation of geomoo, I read Bob Altemeyer's - The Authoritarians the other evening. It's a fascinating research paper written for laypeople. Although it's 261 pages long, it's written in a brisk, engaging style and there are even the occasional quizzes to take. Who doesn't like a good quiz?
Obviously, I recommend you read the paper for yourself. What follows are just some of the observations that most struck me. Your reading may reveal yet more useful insight.
Who are these people?
Altemeyer begins with an exploration of right-wing authoritarian followers, describing them this way:
"[A] right-wing authoritarian follower doesn’t necessarily have conservative political views. Instead he’s someone who readily submits to the established authorities in society, attacks others in their name, and is highly conventional. It’s an aspect of his personality, not a description of his politics. Right-wing authoritarianism is a personality trait"
Most people will recognize the basic features of the mentality (this from my notes):
Pronounced sense of being threatened
Marked defensiveness
Profound ethnocentrism
Such poor integration of highly compartmentalized ideas that illogic, double standards and blatant hypocrisies can exist and trouble them not at all.
The use of self-righteousness to channel innate aggression.
Also noteworthy, to me at least, was this surprise about authoritarian followers (again, from my notes):
In spite of being told not to take something they're being told as an article of faith, if what they're told drew to an agreeable conclusion they were likely to believe that it was offered in sincerity anyway.
I suppose it stands to reason, but the "little 'd'" democrat in me had always hoped it couldn't really be true. It goes a long way towards explaining why participating in exclusive-interest astroturf campaigns and political theater doesn't give them pause though, eh?
One of the real standouts for me was the Global Change Game (somewhat like Risk that simulates a 40 year span): No matter how those who scored highly on the authoritarian scale are configured to play the game with each other, the features of their thought processes are such that they self-destruct every time. The participants either engaged in nuclear holocaust, or they found themselves on the brink of it by the time the game ended, every time. That may not be surprising, exactly, but it's still remarkable.
Worried about the religious angle?
Chapter Four deals with the worrying confluence of authoritarian followers and religious fundamentalism. Religious Democrats and Independents here would probably mine more interesting insights from those revelations than I can because of its specificity. But even those without any religious inclinations can learn a lot about how they re-enforce, and fail, each other.
Here, my heart sank
Chapter Five deals with Authoritarian Leaders. This was the chapter that most troubled me, specifically with regard to the Exploitive Manipulative Amoral Dishonesty scale. This is where authoritarian followers and leaders differ most significantly. And the news of that jam-up is bad, because in addition to those differences, the very self-image and function of the United States is almost tailor-made to throw authoritarian followers into a self-perpetuating loop.
This was my "Oh, shit" moment. Reading this chapter and laying it over our economic policies and the near-total breakdown of our political process to function without corruption and produce healthy policies in its legislative "sausage factory" is enough to turn modestly authoritarian followers into ardent, aggressive foes of democracy itself.
This makes the current, staggering cynicism of Republican leaders and predatory populist pundits even more damnably low in my mind. There isn't even any sport in screwing their followers over, it's that easy to do.
Well, okay... So that's the bad news.
In a rare, optimistic mood, though, I searched for some good news in the form of light at the end of this tunnel. It's there, but there are no real guarantees we'll emerge intact. Still, it's in all our best interests to try.
Take these broken wings...
Because I don't like beating my head against brick walls any more than you all do, I'm going to focus exclusively on trying to deal with the authoritarian followers.
The good news is that personal experiences really do seem to make a difference for them. They have a surprising ability to soften their opinions with exposure to the previously unknown and while it may not turn them 180 degrees, their loyalty instinct kicks in and any turn they do make will be in earnest. Continued education apparently takes the edge off too, and for similar reasons.
Another interesting point to consider, especially for you framing-fiends, is the fact that this type of person has a very pronounced need to be considered normal and belong to the in-group. I suspect this is what Palin's mainlining them at the moment. Read the paper yourself to see why letting her (and people like her) define concepts like "normal" and "real" is such a dangerous idea, if you can't already guess. (Hint: Search for the portions on social dominator and "Double High" types of authoritarians.)
Not surprisingly, the religious among you have a strong role to play in helping American democracy weather this storm. The successful fusion of evangelical forms of Christianity to a diametric political agenda with Republicans (by thoroughly unscrupulous people, from pulpits to public offices) has left a lot of these people in danger of belonging to nobody if they let go. Some of them have no interest in stepping away from the abyss. But there will undoubtedly be some who might, if the comfort of belonging elsewhere genuinely exists.
As far as the Democratic Party's concerned, it looks like the jig's up on playing footsie with lobbyists (that is if legislators are serious about averting disaster). The process of policy-making should be clear and honest, the laws created both plainly healthy for the country and enforceable. The quirk of obedience among these followers will override, however begrudgingly, their aggression - provided those factors are in play. Any other tack appears likely to ensure a continued ramping up of fear and self-righteous outrage that can spill over into a real threat with massaging by their leaders.
You don't need to be a genius to see that Republicans understand these dynamics and are actively working to disrupt the process by which Democrats can ratchet down the anxieties that keep these people in shock-troop mode and working to cripple our common government.
We need to fix that.
A few final words
I would have loved to have written the perfect diary on this exceptionally important material. I didn't. But it's good enough to play host to a community's investigation and debate. Sometimes that's all that counts.
I regret that I have to step away and take care of other important business today, so I won't be around to join in conversation in the comments. Still, I invite you to settle in, chat amongst yourselves and expand on what's been written here.
Have a terrific afternoon and I'll be back later.