RWA and the single Republican
I don’t think I’m the only one who looks at what has happened to the US in the last six years and feels we’re trapped in a nightmare. A slow-moving Kafka play where fundamental values are trampled every day, and no one in politics or the media seems to care, or even to notice.
There are lots of overlapping reasons for this—things like consolidation of media ownership into a few gigantic corporations, the rise of media “stars” in sycophantic relationship to those in power, the escalating costs of elected office resulting in politicians spending all their time fundraising instead of learning how to govern, the dominance of the military-industrial complex and its hydra-headed sister, Big Oil. Those all tend to explain why it’s been so difficult to stop the Bush Administration from doing whatever the hell it wants to do. But it doesn’t explain why the administration does what it’s doing in the first place.
I mean, I don’t know how many times I read statements from the President or administration officials or right-wing politicians, and find myself asking out loud, “What fucking planet are these people on?” And it’s a serious question, not just an expression of frustration.
[This is going to be long, and maybe kinda dry, so for those of you who just want to hear what my cats have been up to, I’ll have mercy and continue this discussion after the jump.]
A number of writers have made a persuasive case—persuasive to my way of thinking, anyway—that the Republican party has become dominated by authoritarianism.
You may not be familiar with authoritarianism, which in this context is frequently referred to as Rightwing Authoritarianism or RWA. The authoritarian personality type has been studied for more than half a century, and tends to display a distinct cluster of characteristics:
- 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.
- Authoritarian aggression: A general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities.
- Conventionalism: A high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities.
Sound like anybody you’ve read about in the papers lately? More to the point, does this sound like the kind of person to whom George Bush or Dick Cheney seem to be speaking, every single time they speak?
The guy who truly seems to be the expert in the study of RWA is a Canadian social scientist named Bob Altenmeyer. He has been doing this for decades, and his research makes fascinating reading. His scientific methods are first-rate, but he knows how to explain himself in a non-technical and entertaining way. An entire book of his on this subject is online in PDF form, and I can’t recommend it enough. If you would rather read a hard copy, you can order it for under $10.
I’m no expert on authoritarianism (though I did study it briefly as a psych major in college). What brings it all together for me, as an explanation for so much of the insanity around us, is the way everything in the RWA world comes down to fear. As Altenmeyer is quoted by Paul Rosenburg, “High RWAs stand about ten steps closer to the panic button than the rest of the population,” he concluded, “They see the world as a more dangerous place than most others do, with civilization on the verge of collapse and the world of Mad Max looming just beyond.”
I just know the more I read about this stuff, the more things start to make sense. Here are a few places you can read about RWA if you’re interested:
Wikipedia entries on Right-wing Authoritarianism and Social dominance orientation.
As I’ve already quoted from it twice, Paul Rosenburg has an excellent series of blog posts on this topic:
- Conservatism as identity politics—Some introductory remarks
- Conservatism as identity politics—Pt. 2: Hard Core Data
- Rightwing Authoritarianism and Conservative Identity Politics (Pt. 3 in the series)
The third of the series is the most directly related to what I’m talking about; the second is compelling if you are willing to work through a lot of statistical data, while the first is probably best left to hard-core sociologists. If you’re interested in this subject, probably the best place to start is here: Rosenburg’s series was originally inspired by a Glenn Greenwald post from early 2006: Do Bush followers have a political ideology? Greenwald has commented (brilliantly, IMHO) on this theme a number of times since. He is now a featured columnist at Salon.com, and if you can put up with a 15-second commercial to access Salon’s content, he’s well worth reading.
So there you go. Really, these people are much more interesting writers than I am (except maybe for Wikipedia). So, shoo now.
Comments
Speaking as a self-identified RWAer, I'd say that, yeah - fear it pretty much the issue here. Perhaps you like fear. What is the opposite of a RWAer? One who lives in reckless abandon? And that is good because.......? Are you daily practicing methodologies of fear - gotta get more fear in my life?
Nope - you're just like me. We like security. If not, then you would drink that milk that's just a few days past the good date, go ahead and pull out in front of that truck - it can probably stop in time, etc. And with this war, one of two eventualities will occur - we will fear or they will fear. The last time I checked, a terrorist was one who illicts terror. Maybe you want these guys living next door to you (since I'm way out here in Virginia - I'd just read the newspaper account of your sad demise at the hands of some guy just sprung from gitmo), but I'd really rather not have them around my family.
It's a sad fact. The world is a dangerous place - But happily a little less dangerous when defended by well armed, well intentioned American soldiers.
Sorry to not find the time to check out the (what I am sure are) excellent links. Us RWA types ain't got the brainpower 'o you all anyway. Reckon instead, I'll just finish cleanin' this here rifle and check to see how the young un's are doing on memorizing the Declaration of Independence.
Posted by: Allan | July 31, 2007 12:17 PM
Allan, thanks very much for your comment.
However, I'm not sure you actually got the point of my post, which has to do with a particular personality type dominating a political party. I am not advocating any particular response to terrorism.
I'll just respond to two of your points. First, "what is the opposite of an RWAer?"
I'm not sure there is an exact opposite, but someone who scores low on the RWA profile would tend to be egalitarian (that is, not seeing strict hierarchies of authority), tolerant towards those different from oneself, and likely not condemning lifestyles somewhat at odds from mainstream society.
Second, "with this war, one of two eventualities will occur - we will fear or they will fear."
I couldn't disagree with that more. I think we all reap a harvest of fear (and anger, and sorrow, and all kinds of things) from any war. FWIW, I suspect that, at its most basic level, terrorism is a reaction to living in constant fear of what a foreign (or domestic) power may decide to do to you. Not that living in that situation would in the least excuse terrorist acts--but I don't think you can separate fear and war.
In any case, I appreciate your taking the time to comment, Allan.
Posted by: pat | July 31, 2007 12:59 PM