WEBVTT - Andrew on the Authoritarian Follower

0:00:01.720 --> 0:00:09.800
<v Speaker 1>All media.

0:00:08.440 --> 0:00:11.200
<v Speaker 2>Welcome, TA could happen here? I'm Andrew Sage of the

0:00:11.240 --> 0:00:14.920
<v Speaker 2>YouTube channel Andraism, and I'm here with James.

0:00:15.040 --> 0:00:16.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's me and Andrew again.

0:00:16.880 --> 0:00:21.000
<v Speaker 2>Yes, once again. So I recently dropped a video on states,

0:00:21.239 --> 0:00:23.639
<v Speaker 2>or more pointedly, a video that sought to define the

0:00:23.640 --> 0:00:27.400
<v Speaker 2>state and its functions, synthesize its critique by anarchists, and

0:00:27.600 --> 0:00:32.000
<v Speaker 2>basically understand the ways that states fail both society and nature,

0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:35.239
<v Speaker 2>so we can let go of status inevitability and think

0:00:35.280 --> 0:00:38.360
<v Speaker 2>outside of it to realize the freedom and power of

0:00:38.400 --> 0:00:43.559
<v Speaker 2>all the people. Most people aren't anarchists, unfortunately, but I've

0:00:43.560 --> 0:00:47.640
<v Speaker 2>noticed that generally speaking, some folks are more receptive to

0:00:47.680 --> 0:00:51.360
<v Speaker 2>anarchist ideas and others just seem to shut down without

0:00:51.560 --> 0:00:55.480
<v Speaker 2>engaging with it earnestly or meaningfully. You get a mix

0:00:55.520 --> 0:00:58.720
<v Speaker 2>of those reactions in my comments, so overwhelmingly toward the

0:00:58.760 --> 0:01:02.600
<v Speaker 2>receptive side, because I mean, that's the kind of intellectual

0:01:02.640 --> 0:01:07.160
<v Speaker 2>curiosity I tried to attract my space, But the more

0:01:07.160 --> 0:01:09.760
<v Speaker 2>hostile reactions had me thinking about a book that I

0:01:09.760 --> 0:01:13.040
<v Speaker 2>read many years ago, and their video on years after

0:01:13.240 --> 0:01:17.479
<v Speaker 2>that was called The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer. So, once

0:01:17.560 --> 0:01:19.920
<v Speaker 2>taking another look at the ideas in that book, because

0:01:19.959 --> 0:01:23.440
<v Speaker 2>even though Ultimid doesn't land and any truly radical conclusions,

0:01:24.080 --> 0:01:26.720
<v Speaker 2>his scholarship, in my opinion, gets us closer to understanding

0:01:26.720 --> 0:01:32.520
<v Speaker 2>the psychology of both authoritarian followers and authoritarian leaders. Also

0:01:32.880 --> 0:01:35.080
<v Speaker 2>Rest in Peace. I found out that he died when

0:01:35.120 --> 0:01:39.800
<v Speaker 2>I was preparing this just this year in February. But yeah,

0:01:39.880 --> 0:01:42.200
<v Speaker 2>that aside. We'll be talking about the former first, and

0:01:42.240 --> 0:01:47.240
<v Speaker 2>that is what's up with authoritarian followers. Let's get into

0:01:47.240 --> 0:01:50.200
<v Speaker 2>it first. We need some context. So in the wake

0:01:50.240 --> 0:01:52.960
<v Speaker 2>of wil Wards, two social scientists sought an explanation for

0:01:53.040 --> 0:01:55.680
<v Speaker 2>the evils perpetuated by the Nazi government during the war.

0:01:56.280 --> 0:02:01.120
<v Speaker 2>Theodore W. A'dno Els, Frankel Brunswick, Daniel Evanson, and Nevit

0:02:01.120 --> 0:02:05.880
<v Speaker 2>Sandford published The Authoritarian Personality in nineteen fifty, proposing a

0:02:05.880 --> 0:02:10.680
<v Speaker 2>personality type for the fascist follower ranked on an F scale.

0:02:11.240 --> 0:02:15.400
<v Speaker 2>They particularly concentrated on prejudice within the psychoanalytic and psychosocial

0:02:15.400 --> 0:02:20.480
<v Speaker 2>frameworks of Freudian and Fromian theories. Their work was highly critiqued,

0:02:20.760 --> 0:02:23.560
<v Speaker 2>but it was also highly influential in laying the groundwork

0:02:23.600 --> 0:02:28.040
<v Speaker 2>forile understanding of authoritarian personalities. In the aftermath of Adorno

0:02:28.120 --> 0:02:31.520
<v Speaker 2>and Company's book, Social scientists will continue to tweak, develop

0:02:31.560 --> 0:02:35.800
<v Speaker 2>and expand our understanding of authoritarian psychology. Most notably, the

0:02:35.840 --> 0:02:39.240
<v Speaker 2>concept will be refined by Bob Altemeyer, a Canadian American

0:02:39.240 --> 0:02:43.160
<v Speaker 2>psychology professor, proposed the right wing authoritarian personality in nineteen

0:02:43.240 --> 0:02:47.880
<v Speaker 2>eighty one. After numerous studies, Oltimin presented his findings in

0:02:47.919 --> 0:02:50.920
<v Speaker 2>his free book The Authoritarians in two thousand and six.

0:02:51.840 --> 0:02:54.040
<v Speaker 2>I had to clarify, though right wing here is not

0:02:54.080 --> 0:02:56.760
<v Speaker 2>being used in the context of the political spectrum, which

0:02:56.840 --> 0:03:00.000
<v Speaker 2>is a concept that its own scrutiny. In this context,

0:03:00.240 --> 0:03:02.280
<v Speaker 2>Ultimate uses the word right in the sense of the

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:06.640
<v Speaker 2>old English writ, an adjective for lawful and proper. Ultimate

0:03:06.800 --> 0:03:11.639
<v Speaker 2>defines authoritarianism as quote, something authoritarian followers and authoritarian leaders

0:03:11.720 --> 0:03:15.040
<v Speaker 2>cook up between themselves. It happens when the followers submit

0:03:15.120 --> 0:03:17.679
<v Speaker 2>too much to the leaders, trust them too much, and

0:03:17.760 --> 0:03:19.799
<v Speaker 2>give them too much leeway to do whatever they want,

0:03:20.120 --> 0:03:25.320
<v Speaker 2>which often is something undemocratic, tyrannical, and brutal unquote. I

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:29.720
<v Speaker 2>find this definition of authoritarianism lacking, but am anarchist, so

0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 2>of course I would to me if authority is defined

0:03:33.520 --> 0:03:37.000
<v Speaker 2>as the recognized right above others in a social relationship

0:03:37.080 --> 0:03:41.120
<v Speaker 2>to give commands, make decisions, and enforce obedience. Then I

0:03:41.120 --> 0:03:45.040
<v Speaker 2>would define authoritarianism as a matter of degree to which

0:03:45.040 --> 0:03:48.160
<v Speaker 2>you uphold the principle of authority. I think many people

0:03:48.160 --> 0:03:52.320
<v Speaker 2>are at least authoritarian light because that's the status go unfortunately.

0:03:52.800 --> 0:03:56.240
<v Speaker 2>But more specifically, I think the people we call authoritarians

0:03:56.520 --> 0:03:59.960
<v Speaker 2>are those which are especially invested in the enforcement or

0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:03.480
<v Speaker 2>advocacy of strict obedience to authority at the expense of

0:04:03.480 --> 0:04:07.640
<v Speaker 2>freedom and plurality. So right wing authority and followers or

0:04:07.760 --> 0:04:12.360
<v Speaker 2>r WA's are those which overwhelmingly support the established authorities

0:04:12.360 --> 0:04:15.440
<v Speaker 2>in their society, like government officials, arms of the state,

0:04:15.640 --> 0:04:19.800
<v Speaker 2>and traditional religious leaders. In North America and elsewhere, r

0:04:19.960 --> 0:04:23.240
<v Speaker 2>WA's tend to be or other I should say high

0:04:23.400 --> 0:04:26.760
<v Speaker 2>r was because the RWA thing is a scale, but

0:04:26.800 --> 0:04:30.799
<v Speaker 2>the high r was tend to be political conservatives. However,

0:04:30.880 --> 0:04:34.400
<v Speaker 2>that doesn't mean the authority and personality is exclusive to conservatives,

0:04:35.560 --> 0:04:38.320
<v Speaker 2>not as exclusive to North America, but the scale is

0:04:38.360 --> 0:04:41.440
<v Speaker 2>definitely tailored to a North American and English speaking audience

0:04:41.920 --> 0:04:45.479
<v Speaker 2>lend into its documented issues that translate into other regions.

0:04:46.000 --> 0:04:48.600
<v Speaker 2>But with effort, I could definitely see it being adapted

0:04:48.640 --> 0:04:52.039
<v Speaker 2>to other cultural contexts as well, and as also my argues,

0:04:52.400 --> 0:04:55.119
<v Speaker 2>the concept of the right wing authoritarian could equally apply

0:04:55.240 --> 0:04:58.400
<v Speaker 2>to society with the established authorities claim to be represent

0:04:58.480 --> 0:05:04.040
<v Speaker 2>in the left. So what defines the right wing authorityian personality?

0:05:04.360 --> 0:05:11.480
<v Speaker 2>Psychologically speaking? They feature three primary traits or attitudes. For one,

0:05:11.600 --> 0:05:14.599
<v Speaker 2>a high degree of submission to authorities we perceived to

0:05:14.600 --> 0:05:17.640
<v Speaker 2>be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.

0:05:18.680 --> 0:05:22.599
<v Speaker 2>Two a general aggressiveness directed against various persons that is

0:05:22.640 --> 0:05:28.000
<v Speaker 2>perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities, And three a

0:05:28.080 --> 0:05:30.960
<v Speaker 2>high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are

0:05:31.000 --> 0:05:35.000
<v Speaker 2>perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities.

0:05:36.520 --> 0:05:39.760
<v Speaker 2>These traits are measured with the right Wing Authoritarianism Scale

0:05:39.880 --> 0:05:43.680
<v Speaker 2>or r A scale for short. It's readily accessible online,

0:05:43.760 --> 0:05:45.560
<v Speaker 2>so I'm not going to go through the entire scale

0:05:45.600 --> 0:05:48.640
<v Speaker 2>point by point, but basically includes a mixed series of

0:05:48.680 --> 0:05:51.719
<v Speaker 2>statements that folks can indicate their level of agreement or

0:05:51.720 --> 0:05:55.480
<v Speaker 2>disagreement with statements like our country will be great if

0:05:55.480 --> 0:05:58.440
<v Speaker 2>we on other ways of our forefathers. Do the authorities

0:05:58.440 --> 0:06:00.520
<v Speaker 2>tell us to do? And get rid of the naples

0:06:00.560 --> 0:06:04.280
<v Speaker 2>who are ruining everything, or what our country really needs

0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:07.080
<v Speaker 2>is a strong, determined leader who will crush evil and

0:06:07.120 --> 0:06:09.839
<v Speaker 2>take us back to our true path. And just to

0:06:09.839 --> 0:06:12.880
<v Speaker 2>mix things up. A woman's place should be wherever she

0:06:12.960 --> 0:06:15.359
<v Speaker 2>wants to be. The days when women were submissive to

0:06:15.360 --> 0:06:18.520
<v Speaker 2>their husbands and social conventions belong strictly in the past.

0:06:19.600 --> 0:06:21.800
<v Speaker 2>As you could imagine, the degree to which you agree

0:06:21.920 --> 0:06:25.839
<v Speaker 2>or discree these statements would place you somewhere along the scale.

0:06:26.000 --> 0:06:28.680
<v Speaker 2>The lowest total possible score and ultimized version of the

0:06:28.720 --> 0:06:31.480
<v Speaker 2>test would be twenty and the highest one hundred and eighty,

0:06:31.920 --> 0:06:34.640
<v Speaker 2>but most people will hit either extreme. A sample of

0:06:34.680 --> 0:06:37.240
<v Speaker 2>one thousand Americans in two thousand and five found that

0:06:37.279 --> 0:06:42.280
<v Speaker 2>the average score was ninety. Technically speaking, high RWAs are

0:06:42.360 --> 0:06:45.680
<v Speaker 2>just people who score higher than the average population, so

0:06:45.720 --> 0:06:50.479
<v Speaker 2>it's really a relative to Also another disclaimer, in the

0:06:50.480 --> 0:06:54.360
<v Speaker 2>context of psychological studies, personality tests can definitely make mistakes

0:06:54.360 --> 0:06:58.279
<v Speaker 2>about individuals, so it's not a diagnostic tool for individuals

0:06:58.320 --> 0:07:01.400
<v Speaker 2>to determine if they'd make a good storm trooper. However,

0:07:01.440 --> 0:07:06.960
<v Speaker 2>the scale can reliably identify levels of authoritarianism in groups. Also,

0:07:07.040 --> 0:07:09.400
<v Speaker 2>keep in mind that stuff like the interpretation of wording

0:07:09.520 --> 0:07:11.280
<v Speaker 2>and fore knowledge of what the test is trying to

0:07:11.280 --> 0:07:15.520
<v Speaker 2>measure can definitely influence results. Still, this tool has been

0:07:15.600 --> 0:07:19.360
<v Speaker 2>used for most of Altemeier's research authoritarianism, so it's good

0:07:19.360 --> 0:07:21.720
<v Speaker 2>to be familiar with it. So now you may be

0:07:21.800 --> 0:07:25.640
<v Speaker 2>wondering how well does the RWA skill's measurement of submission, aggression,

0:07:25.680 --> 0:07:31.400
<v Speaker 2>and conventionalism map onto people's reality. So for submission, higher

0:07:31.440 --> 0:07:34.960
<v Speaker 2>RWs tend to believe that people should submit authority in

0:07:35.040 --> 0:07:38.240
<v Speaker 2>almost all circumstances, So they put a lot of trust

0:07:38.280 --> 0:07:41.680
<v Speaker 2>in the law and the authorities. Maybe not all authorities

0:07:41.680 --> 0:07:44.480
<v Speaker 2>in every single circumstance, but they definitely brought into the

0:07:44.560 --> 0:07:48.640
<v Speaker 2>concept itself. For the types who trusted Nixon during and

0:07:48.720 --> 0:07:51.640
<v Speaker 2>even after the War to Gaate crisis, likely the ones

0:07:51.720 --> 0:07:54.280
<v Speaker 2>in Germany in nineteen forty five who refuse to believe

0:07:54.280 --> 0:07:57.200
<v Speaker 2>that Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust, the type to

0:07:57.280 --> 0:08:00.920
<v Speaker 2>rapidly support anti terrorist initiatives, no matter to how invasive.

0:08:01.840 --> 0:08:05.240
<v Speaker 2>Throughout his research, Altimore found that higheres are far more

0:08:05.320 --> 0:08:09.680
<v Speaker 2>likely to tolerate police burglaries, drug rades without warrants, police

0:08:09.720 --> 0:08:14.480
<v Speaker 2>crackdowns on peaceful protests. Subversion via Ajan's provocateurs and so on.

0:08:15.320 --> 0:08:19.440
<v Speaker 2>As far as they're concerned, Father knows best. Their favorite

0:08:19.440 --> 0:08:23.720
<v Speaker 2>authorities are above the law, But like I said, they

0:08:23.720 --> 0:08:26.920
<v Speaker 2>don't always submit. Their blind support can be trumped by

0:08:26.960 --> 0:08:29.920
<v Speaker 2>other concerns. But most times they're not big fans of

0:08:29.960 --> 0:08:34.000
<v Speaker 2>holding officials accountable for their actions. They really don't care

0:08:34.080 --> 0:08:36.839
<v Speaker 2>if a cop kills someone in broad daylight or someone

0:08:36.920 --> 0:08:41.960
<v Speaker 2>drives through a crowd of protesters on the street. In

0:08:42.040 --> 0:08:45.760
<v Speaker 2>terms of aggression, higher wees aggress when they believe right

0:08:45.880 --> 0:08:49.480
<v Speaker 2>and might on their side. Right meaning their hostility is

0:08:49.520 --> 0:08:53.680
<v Speaker 2>authority approved might meaning they have a physical, tactical, or

0:08:53.760 --> 0:08:57.840
<v Speaker 2>numerical advantage over their target. They don't fight far, and

0:08:57.960 --> 0:09:00.520
<v Speaker 2>just like they go easier on authorities who commit crimes,

0:09:01.000 --> 0:09:03.760
<v Speaker 2>they go easier on anyone who attacks people they're prejudiced against.

0:09:04.520 --> 0:09:07.040
<v Speaker 2>But they definitely don't go easy on the people they hate.

0:09:07.200 --> 0:09:10.120
<v Speaker 2>They seek to sentence criminals to longer terms and average

0:09:10.320 --> 0:09:13.160
<v Speaker 2>And there's some of the loudest supporters of capital punishment.

0:09:13.720 --> 0:09:17.320
<v Speaker 2>And if they hate one group, bet your bottom dollar

0:09:17.320 --> 0:09:20.400
<v Speaker 2>they probably hate other groups too. You could call them

0:09:20.640 --> 0:09:24.559
<v Speaker 2>equal opportunity bigots. Chances are if they hate immigrants or

0:09:24.640 --> 0:09:27.560
<v Speaker 2>trans people, those are not going to be the only

0:09:27.640 --> 0:09:30.480
<v Speaker 2>targets of their ire. Their prejudice has more to do

0:09:30.520 --> 0:09:36.160
<v Speaker 2>with their own personality and their targets actual attributes. Still,

0:09:36.240 --> 0:09:38.960
<v Speaker 2>they don't always aggress when they think the proper authorities approve,

0:09:39.559 --> 0:09:42.240
<v Speaker 2>just like they don't always submit. They are always more

0:09:42.280 --> 0:09:45.680
<v Speaker 2>factors that play in any given situation, including a fair

0:09:45.720 --> 0:09:50.439
<v Speaker 2>of counter aggression or consequences that may hold their hostilities.

0:09:52.120 --> 0:09:56.400
<v Speaker 2>Regarding conventionalism, higher was believe that everyone should live by

0:09:56.440 --> 0:10:01.480
<v Speaker 2>the norms that their authorities have decreed. Multiculturalism, plurality, diversity,

0:10:01.880 --> 0:10:04.120
<v Speaker 2>those things clash with what they consider correct and what

0:10:04.160 --> 0:10:08.200
<v Speaker 2>they consider wrong. They usually get their ideas from fundamentalists religions,

0:10:08.320 --> 0:10:11.000
<v Speaker 2>so you'll find that higher WA's are strong advocates for

0:10:11.040 --> 0:10:15.679
<v Speaker 2>the traditional family structure, with patriarchal husbands, submissive wives, and

0:10:15.720 --> 0:10:19.400
<v Speaker 2>obedient children. They're also far more likely to support their

0:10:19.400 --> 0:10:24.880
<v Speaker 2>governments patriotic version of various historical narratives. Most interestingly, their

0:10:24.920 --> 0:10:29.280
<v Speaker 2>conventionalism even influences their response to the high RW test itself.

0:10:30.240 --> 0:10:32.599
<v Speaker 2>If they were totally average response for a statement on

0:10:32.640 --> 0:10:35.480
<v Speaker 2>the test, they were far more likely to adjust their

0:10:35.480 --> 0:10:38.480
<v Speaker 2>answers to the mean than most When asked what they

0:10:38.480 --> 0:10:42.080
<v Speaker 2>would like their own RWA score to be. Low, rbs

0:10:42.120 --> 0:10:44.880
<v Speaker 2>said they would like to be low. RWs middle or

0:10:45.040 --> 0:10:48.080
<v Speaker 2>W said they'd like to be low w's, but higher

0:10:48.200 --> 0:10:51.760
<v Speaker 2>ws said they want to be middles, not lows or highs.

0:10:52.600 --> 0:10:56.600
<v Speaker 2>Why because they tend to rank being normal very highly

0:10:56.840 --> 0:11:00.199
<v Speaker 2>in values tests. Also, just because they were to be

0:11:00.240 --> 0:11:02.040
<v Speaker 2>normal does means they don't want to be richer or

0:11:02.080 --> 0:11:04.920
<v Speaker 2>smarter than others not doesn't mean they're necessarily going to

0:11:05.040 --> 0:11:09.000
<v Speaker 2>drop their prejudices. They may get tugged slightly, like with

0:11:09.080 --> 0:11:11.920
<v Speaker 2>the somewhat decrease in prejudice against gay people after the

0:11:12.080 --> 0:11:17.120
<v Speaker 2>legalization of gay marriage. But their normal is often a

0:11:17.160 --> 0:11:19.839
<v Speaker 2>measure of what's normal in their in group. So if

0:11:19.840 --> 0:11:23.600
<v Speaker 2>it's still normal in their in group to be violently homophobic,

0:11:23.880 --> 0:11:27.120
<v Speaker 2>more than likely they will still be violently homophobic.

0:11:27.600 --> 0:11:30.720
<v Speaker 1>The conformity is the value rather than specific bigotry or

0:11:30.720 --> 0:11:35.240
<v Speaker 1>what have you. Yeah, talking of conformity, Andrew, we have

0:11:35.320 --> 0:11:37.640
<v Speaker 1>to conform to the needs of sponsors of this show

0:11:37.880 --> 0:11:44.680
<v Speaker 1>right now, and we're back.

0:11:45.400 --> 0:11:45.600
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:11:45.720 --> 0:11:48.960
<v Speaker 2>So, Alse my husband lightly critiqued for rendering r W

0:11:49.280 --> 0:11:53.520
<v Speaker 2>as the dominant psychological account of authoritarianism. Of course, it

0:11:53.600 --> 0:11:56.680
<v Speaker 2>makes sense that our has been the focus, considering the

0:11:56.679 --> 0:11:59.400
<v Speaker 2>study of authoritarian personality was born out of post World

0:11:59.400 --> 0:12:03.120
<v Speaker 2>War two study of fascists. Right wing authoritarians often fever

0:12:03.400 --> 0:12:08.040
<v Speaker 2>established absolutist forms of government and weaponize that presently dominates

0:12:08.040 --> 0:12:13.240
<v Speaker 2>in hierarchy to facilitate said absolutism. But there are authoritarians

0:12:13.280 --> 0:12:17.679
<v Speaker 2>who also fever absolutist forms of government with slight differences

0:12:18.120 --> 0:12:21.080
<v Speaker 2>believe n that the presently dominates in hierarchy should be

0:12:21.160 --> 0:12:27.160
<v Speaker 2>overthrown and replaced with their own. These have potentially been

0:12:27.200 --> 0:12:31.160
<v Speaker 2>called left wing authoritarians, even though the right and right

0:12:31.200 --> 0:12:34.560
<v Speaker 2>wing authoritarians didn't have anything to do with the political spectrum.

0:12:34.880 --> 0:12:38.960
<v Speaker 2>Let's keep pushing. In chapter nine of The Authoritarian Inspector,

0:12:40.400 --> 0:12:46.319
<v Speaker 2>Altemaier conceptualizes left wing authoritarianism or LWA, as also composed

0:12:46.320 --> 0:12:51.480
<v Speaker 2>of submission, aggression, and conventionalism, So essentially LWA is a

0:12:51.520 --> 0:12:56.800
<v Speaker 2>subcategory of RWAs. He's also quick to point out not

0:12:56.840 --> 0:13:01.760
<v Speaker 2>all leftists are lws, but as he describes them, l

0:13:01.880 --> 0:13:06.280
<v Speaker 2>ws are revolutionaries who one submit to movement leaders who

0:13:06.360 --> 0:13:10.720
<v Speaker 2>must be obeyed aka submission. Two have enemies who must

0:13:10.720 --> 0:13:16.679
<v Speaker 2>be ruined from capitalists to counter revolutionaries aka aggression, and

0:13:16.920 --> 0:13:20.800
<v Speaker 2>three have rules and party discipline that must be followed

0:13:21.120 --> 0:13:28.280
<v Speaker 2>aka conventionalism. In essence, authoritarianism is psychological r ways support

0:13:28.320 --> 0:13:32.560
<v Speaker 2>the established authorities elders oppose them in favor of their own,

0:13:33.040 --> 0:13:38.200
<v Speaker 2>but the underlying dispositional core is still authoritarianism. But the

0:13:38.240 --> 0:13:41.880
<v Speaker 2>focus is on ar debas in general. Here concerning these

0:13:41.920 --> 0:13:45.520
<v Speaker 2>trade submission, aggression, conventionalism, it's clear that people with right

0:13:45.559 --> 0:13:49.400
<v Speaker 2>wing authoritarian and personalities are rather dangerous. They find it

0:13:49.440 --> 0:13:53.560
<v Speaker 2>easier to bully, harass, punish, mame, torture, eliminate, and exterminate

0:13:53.600 --> 0:13:57.199
<v Speaker 2>their victims than most people do. They're more willing to

0:13:57.280 --> 0:14:00.640
<v Speaker 2>join mobs and militias, more likely to blame victims for

0:14:00.679 --> 0:14:03.960
<v Speaker 2>their misfortune, and more likely to condemn common criminals to

0:14:04.080 --> 0:14:08.000
<v Speaker 2>long brutal sentences in jail. They seem to have a

0:14:08.000 --> 0:14:11.360
<v Speaker 2>lot of hostility boiling away inside them that their authorities

0:14:11.400 --> 0:14:15.760
<v Speaker 2>can easily unleash. So we have to ask what causes this?

0:14:16.440 --> 0:14:21.840
<v Speaker 2>Why are they like this? According to Albert Bandura's social

0:14:21.920 --> 0:14:27.120
<v Speaker 2>learning theory of aggression, aggression occurs after two conditions are met. Firstly,

0:14:27.440 --> 0:14:32.560
<v Speaker 2>some feelings like anger or envy meet us to a hostility. Secondly,

0:14:32.920 --> 0:14:37.080
<v Speaker 2>inhibitions or contextual restraints against release in that hostility would

0:14:37.080 --> 0:14:40.720
<v Speaker 2>have to be overcome. Only then can the aggression erupt

0:14:40.760 --> 0:14:45.000
<v Speaker 2>and flow. So let's discuss the instigator and releaser of

0:14:45.040 --> 0:14:52.880
<v Speaker 2>authoritarian aggression. High days are highly motivated by fear like

0:14:53.160 --> 0:14:55.440
<v Speaker 2>they have an extra dose of fair response in their

0:14:55.480 --> 0:14:58.440
<v Speaker 2>genes more than most people. They probably learn to be

0:14:58.480 --> 0:15:04.280
<v Speaker 2>fearful from their parents about all kinds of things you know, radicals, atheists, kidnappers,

0:15:04.360 --> 0:15:06.920
<v Speaker 2>queer people, et cetera, et cetera. They grew up in

0:15:06.960 --> 0:15:09.440
<v Speaker 2>a scarier world than modes, which is probably why they

0:15:09.440 --> 0:15:13.480
<v Speaker 2>tend to score so highly on the Dangerous World scale.

0:15:13.680 --> 0:15:17.880
<v Speaker 2>That scale, like previous scales, provides statements and measures levels

0:15:17.880 --> 0:15:20.960
<v Speaker 2>of agreement or disagreement with stuff like quote. If our

0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:23.800
<v Speaker 2>society keeps degenerating the way it has been lately, it's

0:15:23.840 --> 0:15:26.320
<v Speaker 2>liable to collapse like a rotten dog, and everything will

0:15:26.320 --> 0:15:30.160
<v Speaker 2>be chaos and quote any d now, chaos and anarchy

0:15:30.160 --> 0:15:32.880
<v Speaker 2>could erupt around us. All the signs are pointing to it,

0:15:33.440 --> 0:15:37.600
<v Speaker 2>and code everything to them is a sign of the times.

0:15:37.840 --> 0:15:41.800
<v Speaker 2>A perversion corrupt in society in peaceful times and in

0:15:41.840 --> 0:15:46.760
<v Speaker 2>generally dangerous ones. Hired luys feel threatened. But what releases

0:15:46.800 --> 0:15:50.200
<v Speaker 2>that aggressive impulse to act? Also, I have found, more

0:15:50.240 --> 0:15:55.400
<v Speaker 2>than anything else self righteousness. Of course, almost everyone thinks

0:15:55.440 --> 0:15:58.880
<v Speaker 2>they're a bit more moral than average, but higher luys

0:15:59.400 --> 0:16:02.120
<v Speaker 2>they tend to think they're the holy ones, the chosen,

0:16:02.400 --> 0:16:08.440
<v Speaker 2>the righteous. That empowers them to isolate, segregate, humiliate, persecute, harass,

0:16:08.600 --> 0:16:13.280
<v Speaker 2>beat and kill. That self righteousness, combine with their high

0:16:13.280 --> 0:16:17.160
<v Speaker 2>scores on the dangerous world scale, is what empowers their prejudice,

0:16:17.280 --> 0:16:20.600
<v Speaker 2>their heavy handedness, their means spiritedness, and their eagerness to

0:16:20.680 --> 0:16:26.880
<v Speaker 2>crusade against the other. So how do high ars become

0:16:27.040 --> 0:16:32.720
<v Speaker 2>high ws? Are they born that way? Possibly? Do their

0:16:32.760 --> 0:16:36.960
<v Speaker 2>parents make them that way? Somewhat but not completely? See

0:16:37.000 --> 0:16:45.200
<v Speaker 2>no one's a complete cobon copy of their parents. It's

0:16:45.240 --> 0:16:50.560
<v Speaker 2>what determines a person's position on the art of wa experience.

0:16:51.800 --> 0:16:54.680
<v Speaker 2>Our life experiences teach us lessons that our parents and

0:16:54.720 --> 0:16:58.640
<v Speaker 2>payers may not. Our experiences with authorities shape or perception

0:16:58.680 --> 0:17:02.640
<v Speaker 2>of authority. Especially when someone hits adolescence, they tend to

0:17:02.720 --> 0:17:06.480
<v Speaker 2>chafe against authority, even if they submitted to authority as children.

0:17:07.160 --> 0:17:11.440
<v Speaker 2>Those hormonal urges, desires for astronomy and new experiences could

0:17:11.480 --> 0:17:17.040
<v Speaker 2>shake up their early lessons completely. Experiences could either end

0:17:17.119 --> 0:17:22.040
<v Speaker 2>up reinforcing their authorities teachings or contradicting them entirely. Naturally,

0:17:22.119 --> 0:17:25.400
<v Speaker 2>it's easier for kids from authoritarian homes to remain authoritarian

0:17:25.640 --> 0:17:30.159
<v Speaker 2>and vice versa, but ultimately experiences do most of the shape.

0:17:30.640 --> 0:17:33.520
<v Speaker 2>Middle r was have some mix of experiences and upbringing

0:17:33.840 --> 0:17:37.520
<v Speaker 2>that keeps them in the middle. When it comes to

0:17:37.600 --> 0:17:42.879
<v Speaker 2>Higher was, their experiences were probably very controlled. Authoritarian followers

0:17:42.960 --> 0:17:46.600
<v Speaker 2>usually live in a homogeneous bubble of patriotic traditional people,

0:17:47.200 --> 0:17:50.360
<v Speaker 2>an echo chamber apart from the evils of the world,

0:17:50.600 --> 0:17:53.440
<v Speaker 2>safely kept on a short leash for most of their lives.

0:17:54.160 --> 0:17:57.760
<v Speaker 2>But there's hope yet. Otomi's research has shown that higher

0:17:57.880 --> 0:18:02.240
<v Speaker 2>was can change if they have some life experiences. That's

0:18:02.240 --> 0:18:04.800
<v Speaker 2>why university can be such a game change of people.

0:18:05.640 --> 0:18:10.520
<v Speaker 2>It's just meeting new people, leaving that small, enclosed world

0:18:10.640 --> 0:18:14.600
<v Speaker 2>and developing relationships with people of different walks of life,

0:18:14.760 --> 0:18:18.520
<v Speaker 2>and that makes a big difference. There are a couple

0:18:18.520 --> 0:18:23.359
<v Speaker 2>of traits that make Higher Ways such good followers for

0:18:23.440 --> 0:18:28.720
<v Speaker 2>would be dictators. In short, those traits are illogical thinking,

0:18:29.280 --> 0:18:35.360
<v Speaker 2>highly compartmentalized, minds, double standards, hypocrisy, a lack of self awareness, ethnocentrism,

0:18:35.640 --> 0:18:43.159
<v Speaker 2>dogmatism in long will consider syllogism. All fish live in

0:18:43.200 --> 0:18:49.320
<v Speaker 2>the sea, sharks live in the sea. Therefore sharks are fish.

0:18:49.640 --> 0:18:54.760
<v Speaker 2>Logically speaking, the conclusion doesn't follow. Even if sharks are fish,

0:18:54.960 --> 0:18:59.240
<v Speaker 2>and they are the premises don't support the conclusion. But

0:18:59.280 --> 0:19:01.919
<v Speaker 2>if higher w were asked if the reasoning was correct,

0:19:02.440 --> 0:19:04.480
<v Speaker 2>they were more likely than most to say that it was.

0:19:05.560 --> 0:19:11.160
<v Speaker 2>When asked why, they'd answer because sharks are fish, in essence,

0:19:11.520 --> 0:19:15.600
<v Speaker 2>because they agreed with the conclusion they assumed for reasoning

0:19:15.760 --> 0:19:19.280
<v Speaker 2>was right. That simple test shows that if authority and

0:19:19.280 --> 0:19:24.719
<v Speaker 2>followers like the conclusion, the logic involved is fairly irrelevant.

0:19:25.440 --> 0:19:28.040
<v Speaker 2>Reasoning is what should justify the conclusion, but as far

0:19:28.040 --> 0:19:33.560
<v Speaker 2>as they're concerned, the conclusion validates the reasoning. Of course,

0:19:33.800 --> 0:19:36.280
<v Speaker 2>let me not overstate a lot of people have trouble

0:19:36.320 --> 0:19:40.240
<v Speaker 2>with logistic reasoning. Higher was just happened to be slightly

0:19:40.320 --> 0:19:44.160
<v Speaker 2>more likely to make such mistakes, But higher WA's generally

0:19:44.200 --> 0:19:46.359
<v Speaker 2>have more trouble than most people do realize in a

0:19:46.440 --> 0:19:49.640
<v Speaker 2>conclusion as false. They have a harder time determine whether

0:19:49.680 --> 0:19:53.840
<v Speaker 2>empirical evidence proves or doesn't prove something. They more easily

0:19:53.880 --> 0:19:57.639
<v Speaker 2>fill gaps in science with supernatural forces, and they have

0:19:57.680 --> 0:20:00.840
<v Speaker 2>trouble being critical of anything unless they already gotten their

0:20:00.880 --> 0:20:06.800
<v Speaker 2>talking points from their authorities. Regarding the highly compartmentalized minds,

0:20:07.080 --> 0:20:10.679
<v Speaker 2>I mean, we all have some inconsistencies not thinking, but

0:20:11.040 --> 0:20:13.960
<v Speaker 2>their minds as be like oil and water. One second

0:20:13.960 --> 0:20:16.159
<v Speaker 2>they say in free speech, next they say in ban

0:20:16.359 --> 0:20:19.800
<v Speaker 2>critical race theory. One moment they're talking about individual freedom,

0:20:19.840 --> 0:20:22.399
<v Speaker 2>and next their basically throat in the boots of the state.

0:20:23.480 --> 0:20:26.200
<v Speaker 2>They don't merge files in their brain to really see

0:20:26.200 --> 0:20:29.080
<v Speaker 2>what fits. They centily just pick up whatever their demogogues

0:20:29.200 --> 0:20:33.119
<v Speaker 2>are saying. And if your mind is such a massive contradiction,

0:20:33.320 --> 0:20:34.480
<v Speaker 2>so you're going to end up with a lot of

0:20:34.520 --> 0:20:38.000
<v Speaker 2>double standards easily justify for whatever idea you hold, it's

0:20:38.040 --> 0:20:43.680
<v Speaker 2>most convenient in the moment. Principles are really irrelevant. Keep

0:20:43.680 --> 0:20:45.639
<v Speaker 2>in mind the excuses they make for those in power

0:20:45.720 --> 0:20:49.240
<v Speaker 2>and how hard they are in victims. Classic example is

0:20:49.240 --> 0:20:51.160
<v Speaker 2>the difference between how they treat a prisoner who beats

0:20:51.240 --> 0:20:53.919
<v Speaker 2>up another prisoner versus a police officer who beats up

0:20:53.920 --> 0:20:56.600
<v Speaker 2>a prisoner. The d de B is usually don't have

0:20:56.680 --> 0:21:02.480
<v Speaker 2>such stark double standards hypocrisy. I'm going to keep using

0:21:02.480 --> 0:21:05.760
<v Speaker 2>this example because you know it's still somewhat topical critical

0:21:05.880 --> 0:21:09.000
<v Speaker 2>race theory. As much as authoritarians accuse the left of

0:21:09.040 --> 0:21:12.680
<v Speaker 2>being anti free speech politically correct types, RBA is a

0:21:12.800 --> 0:21:15.680
<v Speaker 2>far more likely to report a desire to censor ideas

0:21:15.720 --> 0:21:18.760
<v Speaker 2>they don't like. This is also because they tend to

0:21:18.840 --> 0:21:22.159
<v Speaker 2>lack basic self awareness. If presented with a list of

0:21:22.160 --> 0:21:24.679
<v Speaker 2>things right between, authoritarians are likely to do like be

0:21:24.760 --> 0:21:27.520
<v Speaker 2>prejudiced to conform us, et cetera, and then ask how

0:21:27.560 --> 0:21:29.879
<v Speaker 2>true it is of themselves compared to most other people.

0:21:30.320 --> 0:21:33.120
<v Speaker 2>They really have no idea how different they actually are,

0:21:33.640 --> 0:21:35.879
<v Speaker 2>and that's partially because of the bubble they tend to

0:21:35.920 --> 0:21:40.040
<v Speaker 2>exist in. Us versus them is a very hard line

0:21:40.040 --> 0:21:43.359
<v Speaker 2>in the sand for authoritarians. Humans as a whole do

0:21:43.520 --> 0:21:47.159
<v Speaker 2>have a tendency sometimes to fall into tribal patterns of thinking,

0:21:47.920 --> 0:21:51.280
<v Speaker 2>but authoritarians see the world far more sharply in terms

0:21:51.320 --> 0:21:54.320
<v Speaker 2>of their in groups and our groups. And most we

0:21:54.359 --> 0:21:56.439
<v Speaker 2>do tend to associate with people who agree with us

0:21:56.440 --> 0:21:59.479
<v Speaker 2>in many issues, but authoritarians really do stick to their

0:21:59.480 --> 0:22:04.960
<v Speaker 2>bubble and ethnocentric reinforcement. That's why they don't realize how presudiced,

0:22:05.080 --> 0:22:08.040
<v Speaker 2>or aggressive or submissive they are to compare to most people.

0:22:09.320 --> 0:22:12.760
<v Speaker 2>By avoiding challenges to their beliefs and holding faster their authorities,

0:22:13.240 --> 0:22:16.280
<v Speaker 2>they remain stuck in a circular logic of I'm right

0:22:16.480 --> 0:22:20.120
<v Speaker 2>because the people I agree with say I'm right. Finally,

0:22:20.280 --> 0:22:25.919
<v Speaker 2>in terms of dogmatism, higher was holds a unchangeable, unjustified certainty,

0:22:26.760 --> 0:22:30.440
<v Speaker 2>righteousness beyond a shadow of a doubt. They're more likely

0:22:30.480 --> 0:22:33.040
<v Speaker 2>than most people to agree with statements like the things

0:22:33.080 --> 0:22:35.560
<v Speaker 2>I believe in are so completely true, I could never

0:22:35.600 --> 0:22:38.680
<v Speaker 2>doubt them, and there are no discoveries or facts that

0:22:38.720 --> 0:22:40.760
<v Speaker 2>could possibly make me change my mind about the things

0:22:40.800 --> 0:22:44.040
<v Speaker 2>that matter most in life. I am absolutely certain that

0:22:44.280 --> 0:22:48.639
<v Speaker 2>ideas about the fundamental issues in life are correct. Meanwhile,

0:22:49.000 --> 0:22:51.879
<v Speaker 2>they're more likely than most people to disagree with statements

0:22:51.960 --> 0:22:55.159
<v Speaker 2>like it's best to be open to all possibilities and

0:22:55.280 --> 0:22:59.280
<v Speaker 2>ready to re evaluate all your beliefs. And flexibility is

0:22:59.280 --> 0:23:02.000
<v Speaker 2>a real virtual and thinking since you may very well

0:23:02.040 --> 0:23:06.679
<v Speaker 2>be wrong when you receive or absorb rather than contemplate

0:23:06.720 --> 0:23:09.639
<v Speaker 2>your beliefs, you have no basis upon which SHO determine

0:23:09.640 --> 0:23:12.720
<v Speaker 2>whether or not they're true. So you avoid challenges by

0:23:12.760 --> 0:23:15.880
<v Speaker 2>staying in the bubble as much as possible. When that

0:23:15.880 --> 0:23:19.160
<v Speaker 2>can't be avoided, threaton out whatever talking points you got

0:23:19.200 --> 0:23:22.959
<v Speaker 2>from wherever, and if that dialogue tree fails, you can

0:23:23.000 --> 0:23:26.679
<v Speaker 2>always fall back in your group's assurance that you are right. Now,

0:23:26.760 --> 0:23:30.159
<v Speaker 2>you could challenge your beliefs, or you could insist you're

0:23:30.240 --> 0:23:34.159
<v Speaker 2>right and retreat. What option do you think higher was tend.

0:23:34.040 --> 0:23:36.920
<v Speaker 1>To choose, Yeah, the double down exactly.

0:23:37.680 --> 0:23:42.160
<v Speaker 2>Dogmatism is by far the best fallback defense, but it's

0:23:42.200 --> 0:23:45.399
<v Speaker 2>also the most blatant, that giveaway that the person doesn't

0:23:45.480 --> 0:23:50.120
<v Speaker 2>know why they believe what they believe. Alas hired was,

0:23:50.320 --> 0:23:54.359
<v Speaker 2>are only one side of the authoritarian coin, then nothing

0:23:54.400 --> 0:23:58.280
<v Speaker 2>without their leaders. So next time we'll be talking about

0:23:58.720 --> 0:24:04.879
<v Speaker 2>those leaders, those social dominators. Until then, all power to

0:24:04.960 --> 0:24:06.760
<v Speaker 2>all the people peace.

0:24:07.400 --> 0:24:11.879
<v Speaker 3>Yes, I knew it could happen here as a production

0:24:11.960 --> 0:24:14.960
<v Speaker 3>of cool Zone Media. For more podcasts from cool Zone Media,

0:24:15.080 --> 0:24:17.719
<v Speaker 3>visit our website cool Zonemedia dot com, or check us

0:24:17.720 --> 0:24:20.520
<v Speaker 3>out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

0:24:20.600 --> 0:24:23.200
<v Speaker 3>listen to podcasts. You can find sources for It could

0:24:23.200 --> 0:24:27.240
<v Speaker 3>Happen Here, updated monthly at cool zonemedia, dot com, slash sources,

0:24:27.359 --> 0:24:28.200
<v Speaker 3>thanks for listening.