New Dividing Line Between the Parties: Authoritarianism

[Frodo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The three authors use a long-established authoritarian scale — based on four survey questions about which childhood traits parents would like to see in their offspring — that asks voters to choose between independence or respect for their elders; curiosity or good manners; self-reliance or obedience; and being considerate or well-behaved. Those respondents who choose respect for elders, good manners, obedience and being well-behaved are rated more authoritarian.

(...) Federico, Feldman and Weber conclude that

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

It is an opinion piece, not an article, but is definitely worth the read.  

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

[RINO Tom]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

Excellent, in depth analysis ... as we’ve all come to expect.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

Excellent, in depth analysis ... as we’ve all come to expect.

The argument I made is an argument that I've seen a lot of Libertarians make. I think it's very valid. You have to be insecure to think the government should protect you from almost anything that has any potential whatsoever to harm you. Free will exists for a reason, and people should be allowed to do harmful things so long as they're only harming themselves and not others. Sometimes you have to dare to be stupid in order to truly enjoy life. Some say you never feel more alive than when you're dead, and I think they have a point.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

It's especially ironic since the right was screaming about "big government" for eight years under Obama. Then again hypocrisy is almost a requirement to identify with the Republican Party.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

It's especially ironic since the right was screaming about "big government" for eight years under Obama. Then again hypocrisy is almost a requirement to identify with the Republican Party.

Then again, the tea party/libertarians and the alt-right are actually different on economic issues.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

It's especially ironic since the right was screaming about "big government" for eight years under Obama. Then again hypocrisy is almost a requirement to identify with the Republican Party.

Then again, the tea party/libertarians and the alt-right are actually different on economic issues.

Sure, but the overlap now seems to be all about loyalty to Trump and it seems like the libertarian faction of the party is less significant than ever.

[darklordoftech]

it seems like the libertarian faction of the party is less significant than ever.

The libertarian faction is strong when a Democrat is President (see: Clinton, Obama) and weak when a Republican is President (see: Bush II, Trump).

[Progressive Pessimist]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

It's especially ironic since the right was screaming about "big government" for eight years under Obama. Then again hypocrisy is almost a requirement to identify with the Republican Party.

Then again, the tea party/libertarians and the alt-right are actually different on economic issues.

Sure, but the overlap now seems to be all about loyalty to Drumpf and it seems like the libertarian faction of the party is less significant than ever.

The libertarian faction is strong when a Democrat is President (see: Clinton, Obama) and weak when a Republican is President (see: Bush II, Drumpf).

That's a good way of putting it. I still think it reflects poorly on them when their party is in power though.

[darklordoftech]

Basically, weak, insecure people want Big Daddy Government to protect them from any and every perceived threat. Especially brown people and Godless liberals.

It's especially ironic since the right was screaming about "big government" for eight years under Obama. Then again hypocrisy is almost a requirement to identify with the Republican Party.

Then again, the tea party/libertarians and the alt-right are actually different on economic issues.

Sure, but the overlap now seems to be all about loyalty to Drumpf and it seems like the libertarian faction of the party is less significant than ever.

The libertarian faction is strong when a Democrat is President (see: Clinton, Obama) and weak when a Republican is President (see: Bush II, Drumpf).

That's a good way of putting it. I still think it reflects poorly on them when their party is in power though.

Agreed. It seems like they overestimate the President's power to control what the government does and doesn't do and are blinded by partisanship and conspiracy theories ("Kenyan Muslim socialist Obama is going to take our guns", etc.) to the point that they forget their ideology. In 2001, Bush II removed one of Clinton's environmental regulations and all the Republicans were happy about it. In 2003, Bush II reinstated this regulation and nobody objected.

[Mr. Smith]

it seems like the libertarian faction of the party is less significant than ever.

The libertarian faction is strong when a Democrat is President (see: Clinton, Obama) and weak when a Republican is President (see: Bush II, Trump).

Well that's true no matter what, look at all the civil libertarian activity now and under Bush II that was oddly silent during Obama within the Democratic Party.

[darklordoftech]

it seems like the libertarian faction of the party is less significant than ever.

The libertarian faction is strong when a Democrat is President (see: Clinton, Obama) and weak when a Republican is President (see: Bush II, Trump).

Well that's true no matter what, look at all the civil libertarian activity now and under Bush II that was oddly silent during Obama within the Democratic Party.

Very true. I've been thinking about creating a thread about this.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Yep, that's a big reason why I've not felt at home in my party lately.

But to be fair, I'm disappointed to see no calls from Democrats to rein in the power of the presidency after seeing what can happen when someone they don't like is in power.

[HillGoose]

i hate how authoritarian the alt-right are. i don't care what they believe is "moral" or "right for society" I don't have to listen to them, and I won't live my life based on what anyone else says!

[Blue3]

New?

This was also prevalent during the Bush years.

[PragmaticPopulist]

Nothing really new, though the piece touches on a few interesting points.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's these issues that I wish weren't so prominent in the political discussion. While they are predominantly what appears to motivate Trump voters, I do know of a few anti-Trump conservatives who are unwilling to compromise on some of these.

When I get into a debate on these issues, I lay out my position and why I take it. For example, on abortion, I'm in the "safe, legal, and rare" camp, where I believe it should be legal in order to avoid the rise of illegal and unsafe abortion clinics, and in cases of rape, incest, and the mother's life, but abortion should generally be avoided if possible. Maybe even that sounds unacceptable to some people who are very ideological about it, but simply giving a "no" answer without any explanation other than "a life is a life" strikes me as someone who is too close-minded, and authoritarian.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Yep, that's a big reason why I've not felt at home in my party lately.

But to be fair, I'm disappointed to see no calls from Democrats to rein in the power of the presidency after seeing what can happen when someone they don't like is in power.

I don't think that's the issue though. Trump himself has really only directly affected things through his personality and very existence or through his cabinet. If anything it's the Republican Congress that is making the bad decisions on behalf of Trump and his signatures. Of course, more recently with the tariffs and his strike on Syria, it may indicate that he does need to be reigned in more than thought. We'll have to see how he does if the Democrats take the House (and/or Senate) and how Trump will handle himself them. Maybe the American President does need to be weaker.