The Authoritarians [Bob Altemeyer] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Authoritarians summarizes the research of Dr. Robert Altemeyer. Click here to order a printed, bound copy of The Authoritarians from for $ plus shipping. Bob Altemeyer has a new book out, Sex and Youth $ Robert Anthony “Bob” Altemeyer (born 6 June ) is a retired Professor of Psychology at the University of Manitoba. He produced the test and scale for ” RWA” or right-wing authoritarianism.
|Published (Last):||10 September 2012|
|PDF File Size:||2.57 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.18 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read authoritadians. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem? Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer. The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer. Bob Altemeyer—author of Atheists and The Authoritarian Specter —gives a readable analysis of the nature of authoritarianism and its current impact on American politics.
Full text available at theauthoritarians. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about The Authoritariansplease sign up.
Current site is wrong? Tim Ponygroom From http: When I inadvertently lost …more From http: When I inadvertently lost this domain authoritraians it was pounced on by an outfit that offered to sell it back to me for lots and lots of money. The book was instead made available at home. See 1 question about The Authoritarians….
Lists with This Book. May 30, Manny rated it really liked it Recommends it for: People worried by the religious right. Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile. He starts with the followers. What kind of person wants to support a leader like Hitler or Stalin? Altemeyer started investi Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile.
Alteeyer started investigating this question during the Nixon era. He developed a simple questionnaire, which he scores to produce what he calls “the Right Wing Authoritarian scale” RWA authoritariana. The only way our country authoritarins 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. Our country needs free boh who have the courage to defy traditional ways, even if this upsets many people.
The “old-fashioned ways” and the “old-fashioned values” still show the best way to live. The bon seem laughably transparent, and I am indeed a little surprised when Altemeyer says that the RWA score has a great deal of predictive value. It correlates well with other ways of testing submission to established authority and also with tendency to xenophobia and bigotry. If you want to compute your own RWA score, you can find an online version here.
It takes a few minutes to complete.
Most interestingly, the RWA score correlates very well with fundamentalist religious beliefs. Altemeyer has developed a second scale to measure this, based on a similar type of questionnaire. Typical questions on the Religious Fundamentalism scale look like the following: The basic cause of evil in this world is Satan, who is still constantly and ferociously fighting against God. When you get right down to it, there are basically only two kinds of people in the world: Whenever science and sacred scripture conflict, science is probably right.
You can find an online version of the Religious Fundamentalism test here.
Altemeyer’s rather shocking conclusion is that the core type of person susceptible to unquestioning belief in right-wing authority is the believer in a fundamentalist faith, which in modern North American society overlaps strongly with the religious right.
He presents evidence supporting his claim that these people have, on average, substantially impaired abilities to follow logical or fact-based reasoning. I liked his methodology here. Clearly, a refusal to belive in evolution or other scientific theories may be contentious, as are various political beliefs a surprising number of members of the religious right apparently think that WMDs actually were found in Iraq.
Much more interestingly, Altemeyer shows how hard the religious right find it to reason about the Bible, which logically ought to be their home territory. The experiment I found most convincing authooritarians him showing subjects altemeyed passages from the four Gospels describing the events of Easter Morning. As is well known, the four accounts differ in many particulars, some of them quite important. Altemeyer asks students what they consider the best explanation for these internal contradictions and inconsistencies.
Astonishingly, to me at least, the most common response from people with high Fundamentalist scores was that there were no inconsistencies; even after subjects were given a week to discuss the issue with other members of their community, very few changed their minds.
Incidentally, I should mention that Altemeyer is focussing on the American religious right mainly because they are the group he finds easiest to study. He authoritqrians studies carried out by Russian researchers which show very similar belief patterns among old hardline followers of Marxist-Leninism. Altemeyer then goes on to examine the other side thd the question: Here, he uses a third score, which he calls Social Dominance.
Typical questions look like these: It’s a mistake to interfere with the “law of the jungle”. Some people were meant to altemeyeg others. It would bother me if I intimidated people, and they worried about what I might do next. One of the most useful skills a person should develop is how to look someone straight in the eye and lie convincingly. Although one’s first impression is that the personality types associated with high RWA and high Social Dominance are completely dissimilar, Altermeyer was surprised to discover that the intersection of altemeysr two groups does contain a small group, whom he calls Double Highs.
They are, by definition, people who both believe that the citizens around them are in need of a strong leader, and want to become that leader; they are, moreover, willing to lie and dissemble to whatever extent is needed. There are obvious difficulties associated with collecting authorjtarians about Double Highs, but Altemeyer has been creative.
Authroitarians describes some nice experiments with multi-player role playing games, where Double Highs do indeed rush to seize power in exactly the a,temeyer his theory predicts, often using underhand methods.
The overall picture Altemeyer paints is disturbing. My first reaction was that his analysis was surely too simplistic: On the other hand, he’s been doing this work for a long time and published an impressive number of books and scholarly articles. He says that only two people have made a serious attempt to prove him wrong, and that their counterarguments were not convincing.
I will try to check the papers he refers to. On the positive side, he claims aauthoritarians other researchers have adopted his methods. A quick search on Google Scholar shows he’s widely cited; this guy is not a crank. If you’re at all worried by the American religious right, you might want to download his book and check him out. View all 81 comments. Jun 11, Whitaker rated it really a,temeyer it Recommended to Whitaker by: Update 26 January The Atlantic had a very troubling report on Trump that started: During his sole press conference as president-elect, on January 11, Donald Trump seemed to promise more favorable treatment for states that had voted for him in the election.
Taken together, he is essentially threatening political retaliation for voting against him. I am flabbergasted that there is not authoriyarians outrage about this from voters of ALL sides of the political spectrum in the US. Even if you are a registered Republican, this attack on the fundamentals of US democracy should upset you. Actions, as they say, speak louder than words, and it should–if you truly believe in the premise of the US as a authoritarianz democratic nation–upset you enough for you to call and threaten your authoritariana and senator that you WILL vote against them at the next elections if they do not stop this.
The principles of democracy that Americans autjoritarians to love should trump political affiliation. Unless, of course, you’re authoritarian and you don’t really believe in democracy. We shall see whether they have only been paying lip service to these principles that they have claimed to love and uphold If this turns out to be a durable trend for, say, a decade then it seems to be only a matter of luck and time before a double authoritatians wins the American elections for president.
And as for such a person’s followers, well, this apparently is what they want: Authoritarians generally and Trump voters specifically, we found, were highly likely to support five policies: However, bear in mind, if history is any guide, that this is probably only the beginning.
What first starts off as unthinkable rapidly becomes the thinkable once a tipping point is reached.
Bob Altemeyer – RationalWiki
If that happens, we will certainly be in for a very interesting experiment: The article above refers to the following further reading material: Hetherington and Jonathan D. Apparently, the the best predictor of support for Trump is where a person falls on the scale for authoritarianism. The greater an authoritarian i. It might be a good time to dust off this book and reread it. Update 24 August An interesting study, “Cultures of the Tea Party”, purports to break down the cultural attitudes of Tea Party loyalists, through a mix of polling data and interviews with tea partiers at a gathering in eastern North Carolina.
This was reported in The Atlantic Monthlyand the study itself is available on the Talking Points Memo website here.
I thought the overlap between this study and Altemeyer’s work was very interesting. Original Review Altemeyer discusses the fruits of 20 over years of research into two types of personalities: He discusses the typical characteristics that zltemeyer persons have, as well as how damaging a tie-up between such persons would be.