Right-wing authoritarianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a psychological personality variable or "ideological attitude".

It is defined as the convergence of three attitudinal clusters in an individual:

  1. Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. "It is good to have a strong authoritarian leader."
  2. Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. "It is acceptable to be cruel to those who do not follow the rules."
  3. Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. "Traditional ways are best."

High scorers on the RWA scale (High RWAs) tend to have a rigid, often fundamentally religious, view of morality tending toward homophobic, racist and patriarchal beliefs. High RWA scorers tend to support authority figures, such as the government, taking action to censor certain social groups — often those they view as physically or morally threatening.

It is not an ideological measure, but a social psychological one that, in spite of its name, is not necessarily associated with right-wing political views. The nature of the RWA scale leads to predictions that High RWAs will tend to support the current political authority, regardless of the ideology expounded by those in power. For example, it was predicted, and confirmed that in the old Soviet Union, high RWAs were supporters of the Communist Party because it represented the established authority even though it would be described as a left wing Party. (The Authoritarian Specter)

Contents

[edit] History of the RWA Theory

The RWA construct was developed by Robert Altemeyer, drawing on Adorno's post-WWII research on the concept of an authoritarian personality — based on Freudian theory — which contained conservative, pro-fascist, prejudiced and ethnocentric beliefs. Taking an empirical approach based on statistical analysis and disregarding the theoretical construct, Altemeyer found that just three facets of this authoritarian personality were statistically significant and cross-correlated: conventionalism, authoritarian aggression and authoritarian submission. Conventionalism is the tendency to accept and obey social conventions and the rules of authority figures. Authoritarian aggression is characterised by an aggressive attitude towards individuals or groups disliked by authorities, and authoritarian submission is submission to authorities and authority figures. (The Authoritarian Specter)

Altemeyer developed the RWA scale to measure this cluster of beliefs, asking subjects to rate their agreement (or disagreement) with statements such as "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." This example contains all three facets of RWA:

  • "honor the ways of our forefathers" — conventionalism/traditional values
  • "do what the authorities tell us to do" — authoritarian submission
  • "get rid of the ‘rotten apples’ who are ruining everything" — authoritarian aggression

Although he made some minor adjustments to the scale, the original construct has not been changed. However, its relationship to other attitudinal scales and theories has been the subject of empirical research, and theorizing about how different attitudinal factors interact.

[edit] Significant Correlations

Altemeyer discovered a wide range of correlations over the years, which can be organized into four general categories. (The Authoritarian Specter)

1: Faulty reasoning — RWAs are more likely to:

  • Make many incorrect inferences from evidence.
  • Hold contradictory ideas leading them to ‘speak out of both sides of their mouths.’
  • Uncritically accept that many problems are ‘our most serious problem.’
  • Uncritically accept insufficient evidence that supports their beliefs.
  • Uncritically trust people who tell them what they want to hear.
  • Use many double standards in their thinking and judgements.

2: Hostility Toward Outgroups — RWAs are more likely to:

  • Weaken constitutional guarantees of liberty such as the Bill of Rights.
  • Severely punish ‘common’ criminals in a role-playing situation.
  • Admit they obtain personal pleasure from punishing such people.
  • Be prejudiced against racial, ethnic, nationalistic, and linguistic minorities.
  • Be hostile toward homosexuals.
  • Volunteer to help the government persecute almost anyone.
  • Be mean-spirited toward those who have made mistakes and suffered.

3: Profound Character Attributes — RWAs are more likely to:

  • Be dogmatic.
  • Be zealots.
  • Be hypocrites.
  • Be absolutists
  • Be bullies when they have power over others.
  • Help cause and inflame intergroup conflict.
  • Seek dominance over others by being competitive and destructive in situations requiring cooperation.

4: Blindness To One’s Own Failings And To The Failings Of Authority Figures whom They Respect— RWAs are more likely to:

  • Believe they have no personal failings.
  • Avoid learning about their personal failings.
  • Be highly self-righteous.
  • Use religion to erase guilt over their acts and to maintain their self-righteousness.

RWA is also correlated with political conservatism — not so much at the level of ordinary voters, but with increasing strength as one moves from voters to activists to office holders, and then from lower to higher-level officeholders. (The Authoritarian Specter)

In one part of his summation, Altemeyer wrote that RWAs are more likely to: "Be conservative/Reform party (Canada) or Republican Party (United States) lawmakers who (1) have a conservative economic philosophy; (2) believe in social dominance; (3) are ethnocentric; (4) are highly nationalistic; (5) oppose abortion; (6) support capital punishment; (7) oppose gun-control legislation; (8) say they value freedom but actually want to undermine the Bill of Rights; (9) do not value equality very highly and oppose measures to increase it; (10) are not likely to rise in the Democratic party, but do so among Republicans." (The Authoritarian Specter)

Altemeyer's own statement about this may be worth noting (From p. 239 of "Enemies of Freedom"): "right-wing authoritarians show little preference in general for any political party" and their prevalence in the Republican party reflects the long term effects of point (10) above.

[edit] Early Development of RWA

Duckitt has suggested a model of attitude development for RWA in which punitive socialisation causes social conformity. This leads to a view of the world as a dangerous, dog-eat-dog place. This fits with RWA beliefs, which influence ingroup and outgroup attitudes.

[edit] Double-High Right Wing Authoritarianism

A person who scores highly on both the Social Dominance test and Right-Wing Authoritarian test would be classified as a "double-high Right-Wing authoritarian." These individuals more often than not turn out to be leaders of other Right-Wing Authoritarians. More so than other Right-Wing Authoritarians, these individuals behave in a manner comparable to individuals with anti-social personalities.

[edit] Connection with Social Dominance Orientation

RWA has been found to correlate moderately with Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). Together they are strong predictors of a variety of prejudiced beliefs such as sexism, racism and anti-homosexual attitudes. The two measures can be thought of as two sides of the same coin: RWA provides submissive followers, and SDO provides power-seeking leaders. ("The other ‘authoritarian personality.’")

[edit] Further reading

[edit] See also

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/i/g/Right-wing_authoritarianism.html"