Joe Ferguson forever Posted October 23 Posted October 23 (edited) https://www.prri.org/press-release/survey-four-in-ten-americans-are-susceptible-to-authoritarianism-but-most-still-reject-political-violence/ 25% of Americans support it. Why? My guess is that they support authoritarians that they believe will take their side on issues. Also, as demographics change, they believe winning elections for far right politicians becomes very difficult. Thoughts? Edited October 23 by Joe Ferguson forever
K D Posted October 23 Posted October 23 They vote for the side that wants to ban the 1st and 2nd amendment. Authoritarian pieces of crap! FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!! -free speech -right to bear arms -no vaccine mandates -less government It's pretty clear who are against the establishment should vote for! 1 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted October 23 Author Posted October 23 (edited) 11 minutes ago, K D said: They vote for the side that wants to ban the 1st and 2nd amendment. Authoritarian pieces of crap! FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!! -free speech -right to bear arms -no vaccine mandates -less government It's pretty clear who are against the establishment should vote for! For authoritarians? According to the survey, support for authoritarian views are strongest among Republicans (particularly those who hold favorable views of former President Donald Trump), supporters of Christian nationalism, white evangelical Protestants, and weekly churchgoers. While most Americans reject political violence, those scoring high on authoritarianism scales and Christian nationalist measures are significantly more likely to support it — as are Republicans who hold favorable views of Trump. Why? Clearly they're angry with their current lot. Authoritarianism and political violence are radical responses. Why do you think they find them necessary? Edited October 23 by Joe Ferguson forever 1
K D Posted October 23 Posted October 23 2 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: For authoritarians? According to the survey, support for authoritarian views are strongest among Republicans (particularly those who hold favorable views of former President Donald Trump), supporters of Christian nationalism, white evangelical Protestants, and weekly churchgoers. au·thor·i·tar·i·an adjective favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom. "the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic regime" Which side does that sound like? I'm for PERSONAL FREEDOM. The government can F off! Leave us alone and stop taking our money and pushing your beliefs on us. Less government, follow the Constitution, everyone worry about themselves and leave me alone. 2 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted October 23 Author Posted October 23 3 minutes ago, K D said: au·thor·i·tar·i·an adjective favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom. "the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic regime" Which side does that sound like? I'm for PERSONAL FREEDOM. The government can F off! Leave us alone and stop taking our money and pushing your beliefs on us. Less government, follow the Constitution, everyone worry about themselves and leave me alone. See, there's this thing called data in studies. To get it they define the terms, in this case authoritarianism. The survey uses the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWAS), which was first developed in The Authoritarian Personality (1950) in the wake of the horrors of fascism in the Second World War, and the Child-Rearing Authoritarian Scale (CRAS), an alternative measure of authoritarianism that uses preferred childhood traits. PRRI finds that while most Americans do not hold highly authoritarian views, a substantial minority does: 43% of Americans score high on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWAS), while 41% score high on the Child-Rearing Authoritarianism Scale (CRAS). Be interesting to see how posters here score.
Irv Posted October 23 Posted October 23 23 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: https://www.prri.org/press-release/survey-four-in-ten-americans-are-susceptible-to-authoritarianism-but-most-still-reject-political-violence/ 25% of Americans support it. Why? My guess is that they support authoritarians that they believe will take their side on issues. Also, as demographics change, they believe winning elections for far right politicians becomes very difficult. Thoughts? 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted October 23 Author Posted October 23 From Wiki Bob Altemeyer, the Canadian-American social psychologist who first coined the term and its meaning in 1981, defined the right-wing authoritarian as someone who exhibits:[4] a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. In his writings, Altemeyer sometimes refers to right-wing authoritarians as "authoritarian followers". This is to emphasize that he is not speaking of authoritarian leaders, which is the more commonly understood meaning of "authoritarian".[5] Altemeyer refers to authoritarian leaders by the term "social dominator", and he has written extensively on the relationship between authoritarian followers and social dominators. Submissiveness Right-wing authoritarians tend to accept what their leaders say is true and readily comply with their commands. They believe that respecting authority is an important moral virtue that everyone in the community must hold. They tend to place strict limits on how far the authorities can be criticized, and believe that the critics are troublemakers who do not know what they are talking about. RWAs are extremely submissive even to authority figures who are dishonest, corrupt, and inept. They will insist that their leaders are honest, caring, and competent, dismissing any evidence to the contrary as either false or inconsequential. They believe that the authorities have the right to make their own decisions, even if that includes breaking the rules that they impose on everyone else.[6] Sound familiar?
wnyguy Posted October 23 Posted October 23 3 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: From Wiki Bob Altemeyer, the Canadian-American social psychologist who first coined the term and its meaning in 1981, defined the right-wing authoritarian as someone who exhibits:[4] a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. In his writings, Altemeyer sometimes refers to right-wing authoritarians as "authoritarian followers". This is to emphasize that he is not speaking of authoritarian leaders, which is the more commonly understood meaning of "authoritarian".[5] Altemeyer refers to authoritarian leaders by the term "social dominator", and he has written extensively on the relationship between authoritarian followers and social dominators. Submissiveness Right-wing authoritarians tend to accept what their leaders say is true and readily comply with their commands. They believe that respecting authority is an important moral virtue that everyone in the community must hold. They tend to place strict limits on how far the authorities can be criticized, and believe that the critics are troublemakers who do not know what they are talking about. RWAs are extremely submissive even to authority figures who are dishonest, corrupt, and inept. They will insist that their leaders are honest, caring, and competent, dismissing any evidence to the contrary as either false or inconsequential. They believe that the authorities have the right to make their own decisions, even if that includes breaking the rules that they impose on everyone else.[6] Sound familiar? Yeah it sounds familiar. it sounds exactly like the Democrat party. Look in the mirror, red hawk. 2 1 1
K D Posted October 23 Posted October 23 2 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: From Wiki Bob Altemeyer, the Canadian-American social psychologist who first coined the term and its meaning in 1981, defined the right-wing authoritarian as someone who exhibits:[4] a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. In his writings, Altemeyer sometimes refers to right-wing authoritarians as "authoritarian followers". This is to emphasize that he is not speaking of authoritarian leaders, which is the more commonly understood meaning of "authoritarian".[5] Altemeyer refers to authoritarian leaders by the term "social dominator", and he has written extensively on the relationship between authoritarian followers and social dominators. Submissiveness Right-wing authoritarians tend to accept what their leaders say is true and readily comply with their commands. They believe that respecting authority is an important moral virtue that everyone in the community must hold. They tend to place strict limits on how far the authorities can be criticized, and believe that the critics are troublemakers who do not know what they are talking about. RWAs are extremely submissive even to authority figures who are dishonest, corrupt, and inept. They will insist that their leaders are honest, caring, and competent, dismissing any evidence to the contrary as either false or inconsequential. They believe that the authorities have the right to make their own decisions, even if that includes breaking the rules that they impose on everyone else.[6] Sound familiar? Yes sounds familiar. They told them you have to take a fake vaccine or lose your job. Meanwhile they were out to dinner or at parties. And if anyone spoke out, including DOCTORS, they were cancelled or silenced. It was the most authoritarian time in American history. Have some self awareness! 1 3 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted October 23 Posted October 23 1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: From Wiki Bob Altemeyer, the Canadian-American social psychologist who first coined the term and its meaning in 1981, defined the right-wing authoritarian as someone who exhibits:[4] a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. In his writings, Altemeyer sometimes refers to right-wing authoritarians as "authoritarian followers". This is to emphasize that he is not speaking of authoritarian leaders, which is the more commonly understood meaning of "authoritarian".[5] Altemeyer refers to authoritarian leaders by the term "social dominator", and he has written extensively on the relationship between authoritarian followers and social dominators. Submissiveness Right-wing authoritarians tend to accept what their leaders say is true and readily comply with their commands. They believe that respecting authority is an important moral virtue that everyone in the community must hold. They tend to place strict limits on how far the authorities can be criticized, and believe that the critics are troublemakers who do not know what they are talking about. RWAs are extremely submissive even to authority figures who are dishonest, corrupt, and inept. They will insist that their leaders are honest, caring, and competent, dismissing any evidence to the contrary as either false or inconsequential. They believe that the authorities have the right to make their own decisions, even if that includes breaking the rules that they impose on everyone else.[6] Sound familiar? What are the survey questions?
Joe Ferguson forever Posted October 23 Author Posted October 23 4 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: What are the survey questions? Logical question and response Right-wing authoritarianism is measured by the RWA scale, which uses a Likert scale response. Subjects are given a questionnaire with 22 statements, and for each statement on the questionnaire, they must express how far they agree with the statement with one of these ratings: "very strongly disagree", "strongly disagree", "moderately disagree", "slightly disagree", "completely neutral", "slightly agree", "moderately agree", "strongly agree", and "very strongly agree". The examiner will then score each response according to how authoritarian it is, ranging from 1 to 9.[14] Some of these statements are authoritarian in nature while others are liberal, so the examiner scores them differently. If the subject "very strongly agrees" with question #4, the examiner will give him 1 point because it is a liberal statement, and if he "very strongly agrees" with #3, the examiner will give him 9 points because it is an authoritarian statement. This mixture of authoritarian and liberal statements is designed to prevent test subjects from succumbing to acquiescence bias. The established authorities generally turn out to be right about things, while the radicals and protestors are usually just "loud mouths" showing off their ignorance. Women should have to promise to obey their husbands when they get married. Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us. Gays and lesbians are just as healthy and moral as anybody else. It is always better to trust the judgment of the proper authorities in government and religion than to listen to the noisy rabble-rousers in our society who are trying to create doubt in people's minds. Atheists and others who have rebelled against the established religions are no doubt every bit as good and virtuous as those who attend church regularly. The only way our country can get through the crisis ahead is to get back to our traditional values, put some tough leaders in power, and silence the troublemakers spreading bad ideas. There is absolutely nothing wrong with nudist camps. Our country needs free thinkers who have the courage to defy traditional ways, even if this upsets many people. Our country will be destroyed someday if we do not smash the perversions eating away at our moral fiber and traditional beliefs. Everyone should have their own lifestyle, religious beliefs, and sexual preferences, even if it makes them different from everyone else. The "old-fashioned ways" and the "old-fashioned values" still show the best way to live. You have to admire those who challenged the law and the majority's view by protesting for women's abortion rights, for animal rights, or to abolish school prayer. What our country really needs is a strong, determined leader who will crush evil, and take us back to our true path. Some of the best people in our country are those who are challenging our government, criticizing religion, and ignoring the "normal way things are supposed to be done." God's laws about abortion, pornography and marriage must be strictly followed before it is too late, and those who break them must be strongly punished. There are many radical, immoral people in our country today, who are trying to ruin it for their own godless purposes, whom the authorities should put out of action. A "woman's place" should be wherever she wants to be. The days when women are submissive to their husbands and social conventions belong strictly in the past. Our country will be great if we honor the ways of our forefathers, do what the authorities tell us to do, and get rid of the "rotten apples" who are ruining everything. There is no "ONE right way" to live life; everybody has to create their own way. Homosexuals and feminists should be praised for being brave enough to defy "traditional family values." This country would work a lot better if certain groups of troublemakers would just shut up and accept their group's traditional place in society.
All_Pro_Bills Posted October 23 Posted October 23 7 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Logical question and response Right-wing authoritarianism is measured by the RWA scale, which uses a Likert scale response. Subjects are given a questionnaire with 22 statements, and for each statement on the questionnaire, they must express how far they agree with the statement with one of these ratings: "very strongly disagree", "strongly disagree", "moderately disagree", "slightly disagree", "completely neutral", "slightly agree", "moderately agree", "strongly agree", and "very strongly agree". The examiner will then score each response according to how authoritarian it is, ranging from 1 to 9.[14] Some of these statements are authoritarian in nature while others are liberal, so the examiner scores them differently. If the subject "very strongly agrees" with question #4, the examiner will give him 1 point because it is a liberal statement, and if he "very strongly agrees" with #3, the examiner will give him 9 points because it is an authoritarian statement. This mixture of authoritarian and liberal statements is designed to prevent test subjects from succumbing to acquiescence bias. The established authorities generally turn out to be right about things, while the radicals and protestors are usually just "loud mouths" showing off their ignorance. I'm not sure. I'd have to evaluate the situation on a case-by-case basis and understand motives and self-interest of the participants. Women should have to promise to obey their husbands when they get married. Marriage is a two-way street, so no. Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us. It depends on what they mean by destroy but any violation of a persons constitutional or legal rights should be off the table. In general, I'm against the concept of centralized power and control. Gays and lesbians are just as healthy and moral as anybody else. Based on my personal experience with LGBTQ people I would say yes. It is always better to trust the judgment of the proper authorities in government and religion than to listen to the noisy rabble-rousers in our society who are trying to create doubt in people's minds. Its hard to say. Debate, disagreement, and different perspectives are essential to defining better solutions and policies. Atheists and others who have rebelled against the established religions are no doubt every bit as good and virtuous as those who attend church regularly. Its none of my business what God, if any people believe in and I don't think adherence to a specific religious belief makes a person automatically virtuous. So I would say yes. The only way our country can get through the crisis ahead is to get back to our traditional values, put some tough leaders in power, and silence the troublemakers spreading bad ideas. It could be a combination of new and old that provides the solution. Ideas should be evaluated based on the specific circumstances. And "bad ideas" is highly subjective. There is absolutely nothing wrong with nudist camps. I can't say since I've never been to one. Our country needs free thinkers who have the courage to defy traditional ways, even if this upsets many people. I would say yes. Our country will be destroyed someday if we do not smash the perversions eating away at our moral fiber and traditional beliefs. I think morality is not an absolute concept and absent any harm or involuntary or forced action to make people obey some standard its not my business. Everyone should have their own lifestyle, religious beliefs, and sexual preferences, even if it makes them different from everyone else. As long as nobody is directly harmed and I'm not affected why should I dictate to others? The "old-fashioned ways" and the "old-fashioned values" still show the best way to live. The best? Not so sure as society evolves as do people's behavior and needs as time moves forward. Some "old fashioned values like "honor killings" might not be the best thing. You have to admire those who challenged the law and the majority's view by protesting for women's abortion rights, for animal rights, or to abolish school prayer. I don't know about admire but in a society with rights and freedoms its their right to do so. What our country really needs is a strong, determined leader who will crush evil, and take us back to our true path. This sounds a "culty" to me so I need more details about what "evils" were talking about. Some of the best people in our country are those who are challenging our government, criticizing religion, and ignoring the "normal way things are supposed to be done." There's nothing wrong with independent thinking as long as its constructive. Many times the only way to improve the system is to view it from outside-the-box. God's laws about abortion, pornography and marriage must be strictly followed before it is too late, and those who break them must be strongly punished. I don't think God directly provided any laws. All of it is what people over time wrote down, remembered, or made up as they went. If anybody wants to believe this stuff go ahead. Also, I don't attend church on a regular basis, rather usually for an event like a funeral, conformation, etc. But my answer is no. There are many radical, immoral people in our country today, who are trying to ruin it for their own godless purposes, whom the authorities should put out of action. There are some immoral people, sure, but most are not. A "woman's place" should be wherever she wants to be. The days when women are submissive to their husbands and social conventions belong strictly in the past. I would tend to agree except in areas where physical strength is a requirement and lowering the requirement will endanger others. Our country will be great if we honor the ways of our forefathers, do what the authorities tell us to do, and get rid of the "rotten apples" who are ruining everything. We need to address our current issues with a current approaches while adhering to the founding principals of freedom. There is no "ONE right way" to live life; everybody has to create their own way. I would tend to agree. Homosexuals and feminists should be praised for being brave enough to defy "traditional family values." I wouldn't say praised but how they live is their choice, not mine. This country would work a lot better if certain groups of troublemakers would just shut up and accept their group's traditional place in society. Everyone has the right to express their views but please just don't play the victim. I gave it my best shot to answer these questions from my perspective. Most of my answers are non-committal and that's because I interpret most of the questions as highly subjective without being provided any context or details.
Roundybout Posted October 23 Posted October 23 1 hour ago, K D said: au·thor·i·tar·i·an adjective favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom. "the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic regime" Which side does that sound like? I'm for PERSONAL FREEDOM. The government can F off! Leave us alone and stop taking our money and pushing your beliefs on us. Less government, follow the Constitution, everyone worry about themselves and leave me alone. Go look up a “negative externality” and maybe you’ll realize that “leave me alone” is not applicable in 2024
wnyguy Posted October 23 Posted October 23 4 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I gave it my best shot to answer these questions from my perspective. Most of my answers are non-committal and that's because I interpret most of the questions as highly subjective without being provided any context or details. The questions are tainted. I could find myself agreeing with part of the questions but then disagreeing with the other part of the same question. These are not to be taken seriously IMO.
K D Posted October 23 Posted October 23 4 minutes ago, Roundybout said: Go look up a “negative externality” and maybe you’ll realize that “leave me alone” is not applicable in 2024 Nobody wants government oversight for every little thing. Things run smoother with less government. It's out of control. It leads to authoritarianism. To say that is somehow only a Right wing thing is completely nuts when it's the Left doing this stuff currently. They are in control of all of the media, corporations, celebrities and have politicized every aspect of federal and local government. 2
Orlando Buffalo Posted October 23 Posted October 23 Within the past 4 years we went through the most authoritarian version of our country since the civil war and the side that forced everyone to stay inside and get shots along with carry papers with medical info is actually now pretending the people who did none of these things are authoritarians? Which side turned to violence and had the media lie about the peaceful riots? This post is the definition of lack of ability to provide any meaningful thoughts to a topic, all he does spew back what he is told. I just took the test and it is an hilarious attempt to act like liberals are better while ignoring proven facts- a child raised by two well adjusted parents is more likely to be successful by a huge margin but here is the question "Human nature is so diverse that, with regards to dating, sex, child-rearing, and marriage there is no ONE correct way to live." The question is not asking if you have a right to live a bad lifestyle, it is pretending being a single mom with 6 baby daddies who goes out every weekend and leaves the kids alone is an equal choice to my choices. 2
OrangeBills Posted October 23 Posted October 23 Just more cluelessness from America's Modern Leftist Marxists In EVERY case before history, outside of a random Junta military takeover of a not real country in Africa, the "Right Wing Authoritarian" takeovers have occurred from the LEFT...in EVERY case I realize our Leftist Marxist friends never studied probably, but the word Socialist appears in both the USSR and NAZI acronyms, and LEFTIST behaviors were used to corrall and ultimately destroy those societies There will be the usual decries from Leftist Marxists on here that I don't know what I'm talking about, but they haven't studied how the means of production were confiscated and other Rights denied via Leftist activities. It's actually how civilizations die, throughout history. And since our current Leftist Marxists are on record as hating the United States of America, that's exactly what they want to do, destroy this civilization. We've probably got one more chance to repel the Leftist Marxists, of whom there are several on this board, who are either Evil or Delusional, or both. But certainly not virtuous. 1 1
Roundybout Posted October 23 Posted October 23 45 minutes ago, K D said: Nobody wants government oversight for every little thing. Things run smoother with less government. It's out of control. It leads to authoritarianism. To say that is somehow only a Right wing thing is completely nuts when it's the Left doing this stuff currently. They are in control of all of the media, corporations, celebrities and have politicized every aspect of federal and local government. Incorrect. Less government oversight leads to E. Coli outbreaks and tainted meat, as recent examples. Everything else you posted is nonsense. 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 23 Posted October 23 1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: From Wiki Bob Altemeyer, the Canadian-American social psychologist who first coined the term and its meaning in 1981, defined the right-wing authoritarian as someone who exhibits:[4] a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. In his writings, Altemeyer sometimes refers to right-wing authoritarians as "authoritarian followers". This is to emphasize that he is not speaking of authoritarian leaders, which is the more commonly understood meaning of "authoritarian".[5] Altemeyer refers to authoritarian leaders by the term "social dominator", and he has written extensively on the relationship between authoritarian followers and social dominators. Submissiveness Right-wing authoritarians tend to accept what their leaders say is true and readily comply with their commands. They believe that respecting authority is an important moral virtue that everyone in the community must hold. They tend to place strict limits on how far the authorities can be criticized, and believe that the critics are troublemakers who do not know what they are talking about. RWAs are extremely submissive even to authority figures who are dishonest, corrupt, and inept. They will insist that their leaders are honest, caring, and competent, dismissing any evidence to the contrary as either false or inconsequential. They believe that the authorities have the right to make their own decisions, even if that includes breaking the rules that they impose on everyone else.[6] Sound familiar? It sounds like you, tbh. 1
Recommended Posts