The Psychology of Authoritarianism
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 พ.ค. 2024
- A deep dive into the minds of both authoritarian followers and authoritarian leaders.
The list of artists used is in the outro.
Introduction - 0:00
What is Right-Wing Authoritarianism? - 1:49
Sidenote: Left-Wing Authoritarianism - 9:22
The Roots of Authoritarian Aggression - 13:08
The Mind of the Authoritarian Follower - 18:22
The Mind of the Authoritarian Leader - 24:26
The Roots of Social Domination Orientation - 31:05
Milgram's Experiments - 35:32
Now What? - 42:07
Outro - 47:54
=
Support me on Patreon!
/ saintdrew
=
Follow me on Twitter!
/ _saintdrew
=
Follow me on Medium.com
/ saint-drew
=
My website:
saint-drew.carrd.co
=
Follow my music producer, salmon the ghost:
/ salmontheghost
=
Music:
Sun (prod. salmon the ghost)
Rodeo days (prod. Zeus The God x Greg Sekeres)
=
Sources & Resources:
King Geedorah - Fazers
The Authoritarians by Bob Altemyer: www.evcforum.net/DataDropsite...
RWA Scale: openpsychometrics.org/tests/R...
The Authoritarian Specter by Bob Altemyer
Clarifying the Structure and Nature of Left-wing Authoritarianism by Thomas H. Costello
Summary of Authoritarian Types and Traits: issuepedia.org/The_Authoritar...
![เปิดบ้าน เปิด Supercar อั๋นโอกิ เคยเอา rolls Royce เเลกพระ องค์ละ 100 ล้าน l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FeGwJwXauZ0/mqdefault.jpg)
I like the art that was used in this video. Usually, we unintentionally glorify authoritarians by depicting them in clean uniforms or showing mass conformity to a leader. This is the image they want us to see, as powerful, orderly forces to be reckoned with. The art in this video reveals them as bizarre, incohesive, contradictory, and disturbing. I hope that more people continue to use this kind of depiction.
If you're wondering, the most striking art is by Jean-Michel Basquiat
Authoritarianism isn't a thing, they made it up, it's pure BS they just mean anyone with a Christian world view. you are Authoritarian if you are not okay with the world being in a constant state of chaos and think there should be a natural order to things, is essentially what it can be summed up to which is dumb. with that logic taken to the extreme they are implying you are a bad person if you don't think we should allow women to get married to dolphins instead of humans and if you think order should exist and try to implement order in your own life and the world you are the bad guy. see how dumb it is, the argument for the authoritarian personality is sooooo dumb it can be summed up as "if you don't like randomness then you are the bad guy" which is the logic of a 10 year old on youtube in 2011 who would watch nothing but random videos like nyan cat.
@@mangakatanaka3067 Found the authoritarian.
So true! It was such a shock to see them portrayed that way, but it made total sense as soon as Andrewism presented their minds that way.
I usually listen more than watch - thank you for the heads-up!
alot of mainstream anti-authoritarianism seems to create a false binary of fascism or liberalism. like arguing that the reason fascism is wrong is that oppressed ppl arent a threat to the status-quo
Read this sooo many times before realizing it wasn't something for me to get triggered at! >_< Understanding what the direct references are, I think this hits a lot harder as articulated and just makes me wish i could keep up.
I feel like there's a widely shared zoomer/late millenial thought-process that can economize with overstanded premises or phenomena which would otherwise need to be spelled out for Boomer-esque audiences with more splintered, past/model-referencing views of what the world is doing atm.
First of all, is there really any "mainstream" anti-authoritarianism? I would argue that there isn't, "mainstream" inherently connotates "centrist" and anti-authoritarianism is not an ideological component of centrist politics (and because centrists naturally support the status quo and incrementalism, they are inherently conservative or at least aid conservative forces). Liberals and Democrats (in America) are centrists, NOT leftists, and do everything they can to condemn ANY action that challenges authority, particularly the Democratic Party's desire to be the sole voice and outlet for any grevience against the state (this is why liberals and Democrats always condemn any protest or resistance that evolves beyond ineffective sign waving and "peaceful protest", because it challenges their power and their position as well). To even begin entering anti-authoritarian politics, you have to enter the field of leftist politics, and the bare minimum requirement to even be classified as "leftist" is to explicitly call for the abolition of capitalism, and by this definition, not a single "mainstream" element even gets remotely close to fulfilling this requirement.
That said, thorough anti-authoritarianism requires something far deeper than traditional leftist politics (i.e. that orthodox, "workerist" leftism born from the 19th century) because the traditional leftist ideologies (the different flavors of socialism, communism and anarcho-communism) still inherently and implicitly support at SOME form of coercion and refrain from critiquing ALL hierarchies...speciesism, the domination of nature, these are almost entirely left unquestioned by the traditional left and the vast majority of self-identified leftists, you can also add how most of these same people completely lack any critique of technology and actually worship at the alter of technology as any centrist, right-winger, and capitalist as they do not challenge technological hegemony in any way and in fact, 99% of self-described leftists, for example, have a completely unshakeable, religious-like faith in the belief that technology will miraculously solve the environment crisis despite having absolutely no empirical evidence to support such an assumption.
Or the example I always bring up to a traditional leftist is: if a socialist/communist MASS society (because they nearly all assume mass society and mass civilization would continue after capitalism unquestioned) is truly free, how would it compel these free individuals to work the soul crushing and dangerous jobs REQUIRED to maintain mass society without some form of coercion? How would they get people to work in the mines, the smelters, the foundries, the assembly lines, without coercing them somehow? Because in a truly free world, I'd NEVER willingly work those jobs, or any job to maintain the mass technological society ever again, and there's no amount of "Hero of the Revolution" medals they could give me to make me feel otherwise....and here's the sad truth....not a single leftist has EVER been able to give a real answer to that question without resorting to a completely cowardly answer like "automation"...to which I always reply: So a truly free socialist society isn't possible right now and the only way we could achieve it is by having completely blind faith in technology to some day deliver that freedom? Excuse me, but the fact that the whole arc of technological development has been one of fewer and fewer freedoms and ever greater degrees of control down to the DNA level, and you're expecting me to take it on faith that some day it'll miraculously deliver freedom?
Point is, deep, thorough, and expansive anti-authoritarianism is even absent from the traditional left, so it DEFINITELY does not exist in the "mainstream" in any meaningful way.
@@post-leftluddite Reframing is how we would do it. We wont coerce anyone because we wont have to. We will look and try to reframe the outlook on those jobs, we wont lie or omit what they entail. What I mean is that we will make the jobs worth doing by taking away the negative external pressures outside and integrated to those kinds of jobs. Those pressures being why thise jobs are currently unfavorable. Whetherit be the pay, too many hours, it stinks, dirty, alienation, its for the poors and the losers. These kinds of stigmas are what will also change as we look towards socialist progress. In true socialism, concepts like money, class and status shouldn't be things we will need to concern ourselves with so out goes most stigma. The jobs conditions will be mended the best it could be. Apart from that, people will be less decentivized when we remove problematic elements to jobs that are enabled by current capitalist society.
The only real coercion we can't remove is the reality of personal necessity. As we will empower people to fulfill their potential, people likely might step up to make resources and services for themselves including others out of cooperative selflessness. If everyone thrives the individual does so too.
@@melelconquistador You will get people to do dangerous and unpleasant work voluntarily by removing stigmas? You are delusional. “The work is dangerous and unpleasant but if we force people to see it as NOT dangerous and unpleasant, they will be lining up to do it.” Do you seriously believe that? I wish Communists would just admit that they are authoritarian. You can’t force a communist “utopia” on people who do not want it without being authoritarian. And there are always people who do not want it, usually the most productive people.
Lemme preface this minor critique by saying I LOVE THIS VIDEO!!! It’s an amazing and very accessible contribution to the study of the psychology of authoritarianism, and I’m deeply grateful for it.
That said, here’s my critique:
When it comes to the Milgram shock experiment, the research was * so * skewed and over-exaggerated that I’d argue it was more of a farce than real science. I won’t get into all the details here, but it’s very telling, for example, that a decade after he published the study alongside a rhetoric of “””the thinly-veiled evils of human nature”””, Milgram finally admitted that the results of a post-study questionnaire showed that only 56% of the subjects actually believed the shocks were real, and the vast majority of people resisted considerably and/or called it quits if they really did think they were inflicting harm on the learners. Nonetheless, the results of the experiment as well as of studies conducted by Milgram wannabes later down the line are quite worrying, even if over-exaggerated. I think Andrew got at part of the reason why people are capable of things like that in his video, that being that we have been socialized into believing that obedience is a virtue and to respect authority, but there’s also one key aspect that he missed: a primary reason the participants committed such horrendous acts was because they truly believed they were contributing to science and the betterment of humanity. They were manipulated by the experimenters into thinking their actions would lead to a net positive for the world.
I guess my main two points are these:
1. Things aren’t as bad as they seem. Even if we can sometimes be misled, have faith in the intrinsic good-heartedness of your fellow human beings!
2. The trick is not only getting people to question authority, but also to question the underlying assumptions of utilitarianism and other value systems and principles that underpin our day-to-day actions.
Brilliantly put! That works quite well with something Stirner said, which went along the lines of "police are protected by morality far more than the government"; that is, people's entrenched beliefs and values are more dangerous than simple power.
Edit: ^power and violence
I once ended up a spoiled subject in a psych study because I figured out that a part of the test wasn't real. I think I know at least one other person who's had a similar experience. Whenever the word "actor" comes up in the methodology of a behavioral study, I assume the term is being used loosely lol
1) If we take your number, 56% of the subjects thought it was real, then "vast majority" of total participants is an overstatement when the majority did believe it was real; even if you assume all 44% went to the end, a significant majority of the believers went there too (by your numbers, so I'm saying your qualitative wording doesn't match quantitative data presented). 2) Incredulity, "it can't be real", "it can't happen here" is another dangerous way of thinking that while not supporting Milgram's hypothesis specifically is still a problem. 3) Utilitarianism is a blight and the tool of authoritarians; believing there is a greater good to your misdeeds, when often there isn't but also even if there were, is a problem. The fact they thought hurting people "for science" made it okay changes their motives but not the problem. I would argue that Milgram's "farce" is extremely valuable in demonstrating that, even if it didn't demonstrate his own hypothesis as formulated.
Good intentions are the road to hell is a saying that we have collectively understood for a long time as a species. So, being naively well intended, without having intrinsic moral wisdom to reject these ideologies is a problem. It is hard for me to grant the premise that being capable of harming another person doesn't exclude you from being a good natured person who cares about others, but I am granting you that already if you didn't realize because I don't want to argue about ethics and morality; the conversation is about authority bending will. That might as well be the same as kowtowing in fear to authority, and only by freeing people from the need to have an authority direct their good intentions are we going to get anywhere.
Whether or not Milgram matches the overall theory about RWA's/LWA's etc being presented over the video is beyond my scope and should not be inferred as supported or unsupported from anything I have said or have not said.
I definitely agree with the idea of a need for role models; just getting rid of authority won't be enough. We also need the framework for how people know what a good role model is, though, because right now horrors like utilitarianism and obedience are seen as virtues as we have already agreed as being problems.
I will note that a similar study that is a complete farce that you might be lumping Milgram with would be the Stanford prison experiments, which were essentially a hoax.
@@masondeross the Milgram study was definitely debunked and shown to be BS, as well.
Both for you and for @Saint Andrewism I highly, highly recommend Rutger Bregman's "Humankind: A Hopeful History." Not only does he cite, summarize and discuss these studies and their debunkings, but the book overall supports most of the ideas on this channel, directly or indirectly.
What are some good criticisms of utilitarianism?
I grew up in a homeschooling Christian fundamentalist home. I was a sistermom, and where I grew up "thinking for yourself" was memorizing the strawmen. Now I'm a solarpunk socialist. Don't give up on them. You are right, it is expansion of social networks that changes minds. Putting faces to that which has always been "Other", and recognizing their humanity in a normal, everyday interaction level, is what opens doors. It takes time. It took me the better part of two decades to reach where I am now, and I am still learning every day. Thank you for what you do.
Out of curiousity, what’s your stance on the LGBTQ+ community?
@@fdsajfldaskjf well, I also ultimately learned that I am queer myself, so... Yeah.
That really is terrible - what the controlling forces of this world have created (or at least allowed) is horrific in so many extents, we must end these old worlds.
@@AleshaM30 _"Now I'm a solarpunk socialist. "_
So you just went from experiencing religious authoritarianism to supporting a political one. Nice. 🤦♂
@@Historia.Magistra.Vitae. not sure if you are missing the definition of solarpunk or socialist, but you absolutely missed something. Probably the part where anyone asked for your pizza cutter opinion.
Alright just in case people started questioning whether or not sharks are fish like me, they are. They're a part of a special class of fish called elasmobranch - thank you NOAA
Yeah for a second there I was thinking that calling sharks fish was authoritarian of me
There is a question about 'What Are Fish?'... Thus is a legitimate debate, not all 'animals' that are considered fish are the same...
For anybody who has seen a 'whale shark', there is an oblivious difference from standard 'shark behavior'
Further explanation: The example was about the evidence presented, not the “truth” of the statement. All fish live in the sea, was a false statement and was used as evidence of sharks being fish because sharks live in the sea. Even if the evidence itself was correct “all fish live in the sea” it would not provide sufficient proof that sharks are fish.
But also, sharks are sharks.
This message brought to you by earth -1
in the end, all sets exist arbitrarily.
KEvron
Thank you for this answer I will now proceed to fixate on learning more shark facts for the next half hour
"...and it's very hard to break that conditioning, but not impossible." Can confirm. Really appreciate this.
Clearly difficult when even self described anarchists can’t tell that big pharma “experts” are corruptible like any other authorities.
@@gelidsoul not sure what conversation you think I'm having but that isn't it
@@silversam Introducing it to the convo because of how unconscionable it is that the video doesn't bring up the biggest authoritarian acts spreading across the globe all involve vaccine mandates and passports. Instead he just dunks on "anti-vaxxers".
@@gelidsoul great, but maybe start your own comment instead? This isn't about that.
@@silversam It is when the video can't break his own conditioning to see he's perpetuating authoritarian stereotypes by claiming people who want bodily autonomy are "The real authoritarians".
I do find where you live really effects you too. I grew up in a very “right wing” (for lack of a better term area) but as an adult moved for work to an area which is the complete opposite side. Living with people these more “left” leaning views pulled me across the spectrum and changed how I see the world. Probably similar to what people experience at Universities.
Marx something something material conditions
Late reply but...
Glad to hear, you basically just got to meet alot of the so called degenerates, sinners or whomever else you were told was bad or even evil people and realized after meeting them in person that, *"hey these are just human beings like me, and they don't seem all bad at all"!*
In the same boat as you. Grew up in the most southern state with alienated view points... basically put my head down to survive, but have met wonderful people with different lives than me that really changed my perspective.
University experience did it for me. The usual fear is the the professor would be the ones influencing or telling student how to think or politically "indoctrinate" them (liberal/leftist), but that never happened. The professors at the universities did not state their political leanings or rather talked about political issues (if it were necessary) as an impersonal narrative account. In the rare case in which a professor did profess their political views, it was usually centre right. What changed things for me really was just interacting with others from different backgrounds. That's it. It changed my whole view on women, LGBTQIA+, the disabled, poorer people and even harmful thoughts I had about my own race (I'm black). It is to say, we should touch grass, bruv😂.
It seems like double-highs could also simultaneously rank high in submissiveness (RWA) and low in it (social dominator) if they viewed themselves as an agent of God; God would be the authority they saw themselves as submitting to, and people would be who they dominated.
I think there is an odd intersection of submission from surrendering to a God, but also superiority from fracturing the mind by creating a God identity and identifying with it a bit too much.
In the criminal psych discipline, the magic ingredient on top of narcissism and sadism that makes one psychopathic (guaranteed to get caught eventually), as opposed to a sociopath (probably able to hide in plain sight indefinitely), is lack of self-awareness.
I don't think I worded that very well. I was trying to speak to the humility and subjugation of relenquishing autonomy of self to a deity but also creating a mind God or concept of a God whiles also creating a false relationship with that mind God and believing that the mind God is the same thing as the self God. Good Lord this is hard to when try to form words around.
Exactly. And I'd add:
- "God" can be any entity: for example for the dictators of the 20th century, their god was the ethnic nation, an idea in their head.
- In a certain way, this is an explaination for the invention of god by the humanity. And we have to thank some "saint people" that managed to shape God as a benevolent entity mostly. Just as king's job should be protect the people from vassals, God's job should be protecting the people from dominators.
Song at the beginning is Fazers by MF DOOM, album is King Geedorah, that shit is absolute fire
damn king ghidorah makes music on the side?
@@deceseze haha sorry, that’s the album, the artist is MF DOOM
Right is was like when did I start playing this.
@@user-xr3cx9lh4j all caps when you spell the man name
The part where you say that higher RWA's would like to be middle, because they value being "normal" explains why so many right-wingers call themselves centrists.
Another fantastic video! I work in healthcare with minors and I wanna say that youth liberation with regards to healthcare is super crucial. I am careful at work not to break any actual rules or policies (I'm not out here trying to get unemployed) but I've been spreading little "dangerous ideas" like the fact that they deserve autonomy, respect, compassion, and that their self knowledge cannot be usurped by the judgement of a professional. I encourage them to advocate for themselves, even and especially when it runs counter to what someone in a position of authority wants for them. Youth liberation is absolutely essential, and would advance not only the physical conditions of these kids lives, but the quality of the healthcare they receive as well.
I actually recommended your channel to one of our clients, and had him watch the youth liberation video. He loved it :)
Youth liberation is one of the most essential elements of any liberationary action - childhood is the foundation of all of life, and we despseratly need to break apart this world's tyrannical structures imposed on children, from genital mutilation, to brutal heteronormativity, assaults on the lives of trans kids, destruction of childhood creativity, brutal bullying (which almost universally comes from systems), the destructive impacts of our poor education systems which are meant more for control than growth, and generally most of society needs to ripped apart. Even many leftists fail to recognize the essential element of childhood liberation, and its extensions, which is a bedrock of any good world.
@@blessedandbiwithahintofmagic Also, when 9 year-olds are being placed on sex offender registries - sometimes for life - for playing doctor, and teenagers suffer incarceration and a lifetime on a registry for consensually "raping" each other, you know there is something deeply wrong here. Every generation grows up knowing less and less freedom. Shit, back in late colonial America, under the tyranny of the English Empire, Ben Franklin had completed a self-initiated graduate level education and had sailed to Europe and back at least a couple of times all on his own before the age of 18. Thomas Edison was running his own business at 12, and George Washington - considered of average mental proficiency - took his first school lesson, trigonometry, at age 11 and was the chief surveyor of Culpeper County at age 16. Early America used to be very age-egalitarian; young and old working together to bring progress to humanity. How times have changed.
I think this video has a lot of insights, but I would be hesitant referring to RWAs and Social Dominators as types of people rather than as types of thought. As you mentioned in the video, these patterns of thought *can* be broken, even if it is hard. People are fluid, and changing your morality for the better is possible for everyone. These people are not bad because of some inherent evil inside of them, marking them an RWA or a Social Dominator, they just have been subjected to capitalist propaganda and had it work, which it is obviously designed to do. I still liked the video generally, but I find that immoral actions are never the result of some quintessential evil essence in the soul, but rather the result of what someone has experienced in their life, and that they can and will become better people if given the ability to do so and helped along the way. Not saying you denied this or that we should be focusing on how to help fascists become better people, just pointing out that defining these as archetypes of people rather than thought can be damaging. Thanks, love your vids!
True, he is criticizing that their ideologies divide humans into us and them. Then proceeds to categorize and divide us even more!
@@neroadam9851 "No u"
Weak. Try harder next time.
It's not all nurture, and definitely not unique to capitalism. I think there will always be "assholes" we'll have to keep in check. And there will also always be "followers", that hopefully can find better authorities to submit to, and more systems that keep them from empowering those authorities above what's good for the rest of society.
I think of it in terms of patterns of behavior, which may not be all that's makes us up, but it's what forms people's perception of us and dictates what our impact in the world will be. If someone is behaving in this way they are "being" an RWA. It's like calling someone a bigot. It's not meant to imply that's all they ever can be, but that they hold bigoted views or display bigoted behavior.
I think Altemeyer's scale has definitely managed to hit on something very real in human psychology, but I think it bears a LOT more research to isolate the traits and the neurological components amidst a larger diversity of socio-political environments.
Altemeyer is kind of a lib. But I very much respect his research, even if it calls for perhaps more scientific rigor than he could have achieved with his limited resources and lack of institutional support.
If you've actually read the authoritarians, his book, he's not really a liberal....and by liberal, do you mean the ACTUAL definition of a liberal? As in, liberal economics (pro-capitalist), and centrist, status quo politics? Or are you thinking of the fake definition of "liberal" used by conservatives in the U.S. where they label everyone left of fascist a "liberal"? Because, if you were to take the American Democratic party and transplant it into any other Western, Parliamentary Style democracy, the Democratic party would be classified as a "center-right" party, and justifiably so....liberals are really centrists, and the bare minimum to be a "leftist" is to oppose capitalism to the extent that you believe it must be abolished, this is the pretty much the definition held around the world, and by this definition, not a single elected official at any level of government in the United States is a "leftist"
@@post-leftluddite Yes, I know what "liberal" means. And I've read the book. And I've seen no indication that Altemeyer is against liberal democracy and capitalism as such.
If I were to guess his exact political leaning (he doesn't specify) I'd peg him as a social democrat. But socdems are still libs.
The second DOOM played I knew this was gonna be good
Which DOOM song is it?
@@wedgewizard5429 fazers
@@yibabel Oh thanks. I should start listening to DOOM again.
It’s scary how accurately some of these traits describe certain people I know 😬
This is gonna insult some people but the most authoritarian people I've met are the r*dneck Trumpist types. You know. The types of people who love dumb leaders (like Trump) but hate smart scientists (like Fauci). The types of loud obnoxious ignoramuses who don't know when it's time to shut up.
They make up conspiracy theories about Fauci but they know the real reason they hate him. Because he's smart and skeptical and mild mannered. He's everything they're not. He's their opposite.
Are you going to mention Mormons in that potential video on fundamentalist religions, if you decide to make that video? Because, man. Oh, man. There is a lot to unpack in that cult. Oh man.
Yes, Mormonism is quite a freaking doozy to say the least. American here, witnessing what's going on with the right-wing authoritarian (attempted) takeover of the country, and this video is 100% spot on. Couldn't be any more correct. Many people I know buy whole-heartedly into the lies and the BS they are fed on a daily basis and they can't see what the hell is going on right under their noses. Their brains are fried after decades of right-wing conservative media pumping garbage into their minds.
Great video on the psychological core of authoritarianism. Social systems and constructs tend to be continuing churning the basis of authoritarian statism, the individualist social darwinian leader, and the following herd complacency in perceived security and order. The collectivism of the majority, the hierarchy of the leaders.
you are saying things I was desperately telling myself over a decade ago as I was being ground through the machine of American schooling and workplace as a queer, autistic kid, just seeing this, seeing someone else say it out loud what I've been called crazy and unrealistic for saying since I was 12... it's, it's unimaginable
I almost killed myself just a few days ago, thank you for starting a world I want to live in
thank you so much
*hugs if wanted* felt
people are out there making a better world. as a queer autistic myself, there are people out there we can connect with. it's been a while since your comment. I hope you've found more connection in this time.
Stand strong - we can get through this now. Your experience is horrific - we still have so much of the old world to rip through, but we can do it.
Same, mate. It's wild how for most of my life I never bothered to get informed on politics and its terminology, out of pure fatalism, yet in the past few years I've discovered that there's actually legions of people out there that agree with me on pretty much every aspect of society, called 'leftists' in general and more specifically 'anarchists', and that everything that in my youth I could only vaguely describe as "the absurd and oppressive fantasy world in which modern humans choose to live" turns out to have the highly specific term 'capitalism' dedicated to it.
Although I haven't been able to fully abandon my fatalism, and sadly still find myself unable to conceptualise the possibility of society ever actually changing towards the direction we want it to, online communities like these have at the very least been therapeutic in that they serve as a reminder that I'm not 'the only reasonable person on Earth', as I (goofy as it may sound) used to believe before I discovered all this stuff.
The increasingly progressive attitudes of younger generations give me some shadow of hope, though. We may get there yet, one day, in spite of the abject pessimism of a boomerish old '90s kid like me.
I'm glad you're still here! The more of us are alive and breathing, the less hopeless it all feels to me.
Yes please a video on fundamentalists religions!
Christian fundamentalist are the main leaders of facism in America. We already see it with Muslim fundamentalist in the Middle East especially Afghanistan.
Of course evangelicals are inherently fascist. They're taught to blindly follow and never question anything, they have black and white thinking, and are shameless bigots. It's the perfect setup.
@@guiden1954 authoritarianism is something used to attack Christians, but you never see it pointed towards attack BIG TECH,zionism,satanism, atheism, etc. it only becomes a thing when people want to talk about Christians but some of these tech guys are more authoritarian than any Christian could ever be but you don't see people claiming we should shut down big tech, that wants to control and order everything. order is not a bad thing or wanting it doesn't make you the bad guy, it just depends on what type of order you are talking about because you can have immorality be rampant but it be orderly and you can have morality be rampant and it be orderly. so it all comes down to morality not order. even a serial killer has order to how he attacks his victims most of the time so the problem is not order.
@@lisazoria2709 also if we are all space dust atoms, according to the big bang model of the world everyone pushes and not made in the image of God what does it matter why care about Christians or Authoritarianism?? we are supposedly just monkeys on a rocket in space according to the whole world.
The urge to punish and exclude people different from us runs deep. It's something that I often struggle with. On an intellectual level I'm opposed to retributive justice but emotionally when I see people saying things that seem to be drawing the world in a dangerous direction I can get so angry and that anger scares me at times.
Thank you for this Andrew. My mother is an RWA. Fill in the blanks for all that this entails in our current political climate. Ouch. This is just a lovely presentation. So well done. I'm a full grown adult, but let me tell you that being raised in an RWA household requires so much self compassion to live a life with your heart and love intact. Loving this.
Mi reach, bwai 🙏🏾 this a long one so I have to heat up some milo and kick mi feet up to watch this one
Another thing this brings to mind is the way schools are run.
There's a lot of teaching children and young people to be obedient for no real reason other than encouraging obedience that goes on. Having to closely adhere to a schedule you don't control, needing to ask to go to the bathroom, (drink water, take medication, eat, etc) just a lot of focus on showing proper respect and deference to authorities. Never speak out of turn, raise your hand and wait until you have permission, if you don't get it then you must keep your thoughts to yourself.
A lot of practicing doing what you're told because you were told that doesn't have anything to do with learning math or grammar.
I've heard a lot of criticism of this the last few years... along the lines of the education system is designed to fail most students. People saying its focus is not making sure students graduate highschool equipped to pursue higher education or high-paying professional careers, its on making sure the students who don't are well-conditioned to be obedient little menial laborers who accept the authority of their supervisors and bosses without a lot of rabble rousing about pay and conditions.
But it also conditions them to press the "shock" button.
I was definitely raised to become RWA. (White Male US-Southern Bourne presenting CIS no matter how hard I try).. But yet I am so damn lucky to find a different childhood than expected to have at least enough gall to follow this video..
It took several teachers, principles, and multitudes of childhood friends to break my programming to make me understand what they suffered, and yet I myself was too sacred to appear at any BLM/leftist/feminist protest due to the privelidge of my 'blood' ( I can at least claim Native American heritage, but obviously I am white)....
I realize my need to change, but I need to build my strength to help make a better future for everyone
Huh?
white privilege doesnt exist
im white and im more oppressed than native americans
Really glad to see an inquiry of this type.
The authoritarian structure/mindest/personality is one of those missing pieces when it comes to at least even trying to understand what drives masses of people who often seem to be uh... idiot-simps? The types who routinely vote against their own class interests in favour of bigotry and obvious absolute lies, who seem to believe in "own the libs" far above everything, including the continuation of their own lives.
I'm actually waiting on the Adorno et All books to be delivered, I'm keen to read them myself.
It's so refreshing hearing these really indepth video essays from a Trini like myself. Great video again ! Stay amazing king
I was raised in a very conservative and evangelical household. The day after the Kent State Massacre, I realized I was lied to. I was instantly a "liberal" person. As I grew, I gave up religion altogether. As I grew even more, I realized left-wing politicians were equally liars. At my advanced age I feel that "authoritarianism" has nothing to do with anything but evil. And evil is one thing: Domination of others, period. So, without naming it, I am an anarchist, but most anarchist communities are not really anarchist and behave as a different form of authoritarianism to me. Interesting channel, hope you end up figuring it out and writing your own book synthesizing more and more and traveling towards the truth.
Interesting origin story.
This channel is so good for trying to navigate all the things that I feel have been hidden from standard education most of my upbringing. Like how come Hollywood got to decide what picture of an Anarchist was to be painted in my mind while my history teachers all essentially mimicked the one from Candide, saying "we sure are living in the best of all possible worlds"
Great job as always, new patron incoming
Man I have a friend exactly like this. He can't think outside of what he "knows" to already be true, he always presupposes his answers to political or moral questions by deferring to the bible etc. If you confront him on his beliefs it's always in the form of "you can't just do that" or something or other. Very deferential to percieved normality and reactionary.
Also your voice is amazing btw.
I've considered myself a left anarchist for a long time... but listening to this makes me hold up a mirror & I'm uncertain if I've eliminated the psychological pitfalls st. drew is bringing up here...
I love this so much! I read this book in my senior year in highschool and I am astonished at how few people know about it. You are doing a service to the world by reporting on it.
Holy wow! I love, love, love this video. It's really nice to hear someone discuss that book. I was starting to think I was the only one who had ever heard of it!
I just subbed and did the bell thing, and now I'm off to binge listen to your channel 🥰
Excellent essay. Thank you for bringing Altemeyer's work, like the work of so many others to my attention. I've shared this vid with a few friends, ad appreciate your perspective and all you do.
I am so glad JD signifier pointed me to you. Your analysis is fantastic, deep yet straightforward. The composition of your videos really raises the level of comprehension and engagement, at least for me. The art is fantastic.
Also, your background music reminds me of Spyro 2, and it makes me unreasonably happy.
Anyway, thank you, have a nice day.
I read this audio book last month! It was super interesting. Thanks for covering. I really appreciate your breakdowns.
Love this video so much. Your channel has quickly become one of my favourite anarchistic channels on youtube
I subscribed to you a couple days before you were on It Could Happen Here and had some whiplash when you were on the pod! Keep pumping out the QC.
Thank you SO SO much for this video. It kinda helped me personally, convinced and motivated even more to stand out even if its hard to do, thank you again
Your channel is so underrated. Amazing work, I love your style as well as essays.
From what I've read, Ayn Rand was probably a good example of a Double High, or at least some sort of "Right Libertarian Authoritarian" version (yes, I know that phrase doesn't make any sense - Objectivism is kind of a mess).
Her writing shows lots of both a "law of the jungle" style desire for individual power and a "dangerous world" dogma (and she was most definitely a true believer). She became a highly authoritarian, almost cult-like leader among her Objectivist followers - yet was also, infamously, a sexual submissive. That latter part SHOULDN'T matter, but she was also a hack writer, so it ends up making its way into her work more than it should. Where it matters here are in her creations of fictional dominant ubermensch characters like Howard Roark and John Galt, who are, essentially, her idealized, perfect dominators whom others should naturally obey. And whom her own fictional female stand-ins (Dominique Francon and Dagny Taggert, respectively) fall in love with and righteously transform from dominant characters in their own right into utterly submissive followers. However, in real life, Rand seemed to have been too much of an authoritarian leader herself to ever find a man perfect enough to be her master.
@
Icearstorm theorizes that Double Highs may be both dominant and submissive, by viewing themselves as agents of a higher power. I think that's correct (this was originally a reply to them, but got a little out of hand). Rand was an atheist, but still saw the world as structured into natural hierarchies, with some people being naturally superior to others, and a rare few being immensely competent great men (and women) that were responsible for most of civilization's ability to advance and function. She saw herself as one of these "great men", but seemed to be pining for an even more superior ubermensch to be obedient to, and to set the world right.
For an excruciatingly detailed yet fascinating takedown of Rand and her works: www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/series/atlas-shrugged/
This was another great video. Thank you.
I've asked several people in the military how they are preventing the mistakes of Nuremberg from occuring again. Theyll usually explain that there are punishments for following unlawful orders. But it still doesn't answer the how. If one hasn't been taught how to stand up to authority, then there's no guarantee that they will even if they recognize it.
There's also this branch of psychology called Liberation Psychology out of Latin America that's really helpful in regards to dealing with authoritarian societies. You mentioned Fannon, who was pretty pivotal in it's development. There are some really helpful understandings and praxis I've not found almost anywhere else
Every video I have watched from you so far has been such an eye opening experience! Thank you to you and your team for all the hard work that y'all do!
I really enjoyed this video, SA. It's interesting how much of an effect we can have on each other and making a change, just with one individual, can spark a domino effect. I've felt like giving up because of there being so many horrible things but I have hope things can get better & I'll keep trying to learn and spread help as I can/want. I used to be more corrupt/evil than I am now and something that helped me would the act of being shown love & humanity-- so I'm glad you included that. Keep the good work up!
This was one of the best talks on yt. Hats off to you mate.
Great video, as always! Thanks so much for your hard work!
So true that we need to liberalize youth, teaching them to not let anyone disrespect them because of their youth. Authoritarianism is never going to do that. Believe it or not a variation of the experiment described in this video continued to be administered in the 1990's. I know because I volunteered to participate in one. At the end of the experiment the experimenter told me that compared to the average person I am an extreme passivist only because i refused to give another student in another room a shock ever. After that I decided that I wanted nothing to do with learning how to become a psychologist since the experimenter had a negative attitude towards me the so called extreme passivist thought of as a radical way of being at the time. Thanks for confirming what I have suspected all along when it comes to the psychology of authoritarianism. In addition to how I understand that the underlying lack of trust in potential of positive experiences in the future while they are going through severe hardship; the way I understand it is that right wing or left wing authoritarianism have one thing most in common. That is the often held belief that offering unconditional love to loved ones and/or a neighbor while loving oneself at the same time is showing weakness not strength. As for all authoritarianists being brought up in a bubble with little opportunity to meet people from backgrounds while most of them are conservative I am not so sure. Instead I believe that right wingers and left wingers who are authoritarian believe loving oneself is following the law right to the letter to prove their superiority while the left wingers who are authoritarian believe loving oneself is doing whatever it takes to experience a steady supply of pleasure, most of all sexual pleasure, along with a never being interrupted supply of basic needs too and so anyone not seeking sexual pleasure on a regular basis is suspect of not being capable of real love. Both left and right wingers are at higher risk of becoming a violent Insel or a rapist while being quick to accuse people of being contradictory. For example authoritarians of any sexual preference who only act surprised after making a sexual advance towards a female [or a male] acquaintance when they are being rejected by the woman [or man] who is wearing less clothing than their mothers [or fathers] would in the same kind of weather. They will only act the role of being all innocent up until they believe in another situation with the same person who rejected them that they will get away with taking advantage of their target in that more convenient situation whenever they want to from then on after getting the person under their thumb.
Man, this was so good it brought tears to my eyes. Great, great work!
Yay I'm early. Love your long form vide essays. Alright let's get into it!
One of the brightest voices on the platform. Thank you for your work!
Your channel is a heavy bliss. Thank you!
The understanding of this has been amazingly accurate, spot on mate. Good information.
Bro this deserves waaaayy more views! So succinct for a topic so complex 👍
Ohoho. This’ll be a good one. Always want to know about the psychology of domination. Keep up the grind my fellow Caribbean king 🙌🏾
Thank you for all that you are doing. Much love my friend.
This was eye opening. Legit didn't know the finer details of this stuff. Disturbing, but interesting. Subscribed.
I love your drawings. I love this channel, I’m very glad I found it.
I'm really glad you also mention LWA, because I think this is a problem we as anarchists have to deal with often enough. Unofficial hierarchies happen a lot. You just have to be the one person to be willing to take on responsibility for a project and suddenly people come to you and ask you for permission to do things or wait for you to tell them what to do. It's super important to know how to make them make their own decisions. It's super important to know when you've accidentally switched from a teacher role to a leader role
This is my favorite video of yours so far.
I always feel more informed and ready to take on the world after watching one of your videos. Thank you!
Great video!
I sympathize with anarchism, but I have some struggles imagining a society where no one is forced to do anything.
Is there an anarchist answer for guaranteeing a common baseline standard for child welfare without forcing anyone to do anything?
What do you mean by a baseline standard for child welfare? Like in terms of abuse or in terms of nutrition? If the former, I feel the answer would be like, technically there is no guaranteed baseline standard in any society. Children are treated differently depending on their parents etc. There is little that can be done to prevent abuse except education, and punishment for abuse does not prevent the harm from occuring. An anarchist society, which emphasises the critical evaluation of social relations and power imbalances, including those between adults and children, would foster a less dichotomous relationship between the two. Children would not be taught to simply listen to adults because they are adults, their pedagogy would be based on critical thinking, and they would learn to value personal sovereignty and autonomy, whereas all members of a society would be incentivized to treat others as equals, not impede on another's autonomy, and not work one's will on another, even on children, to a degree. In a society in which everyone's needs are met, scarcity would not breed the kind of competitive nature that leads to communal violence. In a society in which women are armed and liberated, which places women's liberation at the vanguard of social revolution, we might see a lessening of spousal abuse, and thus a lessening of the cycles of trauma which perpetuate child abuse. Those who seek to harm children might also have more access to mental health services when they don't have to be afraid of violent retribution in prison or by the police, incentivizing those who demonstrate antisocial behaviors to actually seek the help that they need. If you just mean standards of nutrition, we already have that kind of information and can act with it in mind, but communities will be able to decide the way they feed children collectively. Certainly this is better than what we have now, in which nutrition is based largely on income. If you just mean, "if something occurs that harms a child, will there be an action that can be taken to rectify it?" unfortunately the answer is probably not simple. Different communities will have different and multitudinous ways in which they seek to prevent and deal with abuse. But certainly services would exist that emphasized the child's autonomy and health. You might also see baseline standards for many things voluntarily agreed upon within a fedaration, creating some uniformity. This is a lot of rambling from someone who has never actually done the work to look for an answer (which doubtless exists in many places). These are just kind of my semi-coherent assumptions. I think the idea that people must be coerced to not be cruel to each other is a bit of an illusion, since it's not like state authority does a great deal to prevent crimes to begin with, and acts of kindness and altruism make people feel good. People will act to protect children because it is something that they want to do, just as is the case now. These jobs arent forced upon people today (except in the sense that if you don't earn a wage, you will probably not be in good shape for long). I also think that "a society where no one is forced to do anything" sounds a bit simplistic for what anarchists are trying to describe. They are talking about societies based on communal agreement and free association. That doesn't mean that if one wants to piss in the middle of the street no one will mind or try to prevent it. It means installing more public bathrooms so that people do not feel like they have to piss on the sidewalk in the first place. Weird metaphor but you get the meaning. Anarchists emphasize preventing harm through communal action, not punishing harm after it has already occured.
If you really just mean, can we make sure that society in large blocks have agreed upon measures of things like health, nutrition, etc--if we can do things on a broad scale--the answer is yes, through federations of communities, which organize together based on mutual aid and mutual agreement. But the goal of anarchists is not necessarily to create legible and uniform standards all the time (though sometimes it might be convenient). Often this kind of thing obscures local knowledge and calcifies antiquated beliefs and practices, or favors one way of being over others. The book Seeing Like a State demonstrates this point in pretty much all of its pages. Anarchist ideology roots itself in the critique of all forms of domination and oppression, so any anarchist society would emphasize childhood wellbeing and safety from harm. The baseline would not simply be nutritious food and a household without abuse. It would be liberation and sovereignty (food, shelter, clothing, and a household without abuse included), even if that baseline manifests somewhat differently from commune to commune.
There's an excellent essay by the anarchist David Graeber that talks about the idea of coerced social behavior to a degree that I enjoyed: th-cam.com/video/-G19LwrJwkw/w-d-xo.html
People are naturally driven to work with others and improve their life. We all agree the work needs to be done and the people best suited do the work. People don't have to be forced at gunpoint to wash dishes to get the dishes clean. People mostly just want enough time to do their work.
@@turtle4llama it’s not so much about getting people to work or to get them to care.
My worry is more about what if someone has a world view of what is good which is extremely divergent from the populace and as a result they may bring harm to those they care over.
For example, some Jehova’s witnesses oppose the idea of taking blood from or giving away blood to anyone even if it’s medically necessary.
I’ve seen elderly people who’ve been under the care of family members who have been left to die from a treatable illness because the care taker opposed the treatment on religious grounds, and the elderly patient no longer have the capacity to communicate.
There are also cases of children dying because some parents view all medicine as an insult to god and only rely on “praying to Jesus”.
How should a community respond when loving family members endanger those they care for as a result of a warped world view?
Should there be red lines where force must be carried out to save the victim, or should we strictly rely on only persuasion, consequences be damned?
The best and applied use of basquiat I’ve seen :) love it
Just found this channel. I am delightfully impressed.
your accent is so interesting. i thought i heard welsh at first, but then all i could hear is Caribbean. im glad you put the Trinidad and Tobago flag in your bio. great videos by the way.
Very well researched and written video essay. I learned a lot here. also, great art and images
This is good stuff.
Up there with the Ian Danskin material.
Someone else brought it up but yeah iirc the Milgram stuff doesn't hold up too well.
Also, those surrealist-looking sketches, where are they from?
They remind me of Basquiat.
Edit: oh because they are
The solutions at the end of this one are really good ♡
I feel we can fight with these!
One of the best videos on this topic! Very accessible! Thanks.
Stumbled across this in the algorithm. Super fantastic stuff here
great video but at 22:47 I think the audio got messed up, it might be possible to snip it out without having to re-upload but it didn't really detract or cover up what you were saying so you could leave it and it would be fine. But in case you didn't already spot it, I thought you'd want to know. Again though great video, very thorough and well organized
But dude again on a rewatch. I commend the research and accuracy especially ur solution. Too often I feel as if social dominators and rwas can fester and justify their domination through a lack of proper responsibility on our part. Too often we fail to do so for the sake of our own ideological egos. 🔥🙌🏾
I was once in a college SGA meeting, and the vote came up for automatically forwarding leftover funding to Greek Row if any club/organization money was left at the end of a semester. Everyone, and I mean everyone, except me was all for it. I stood up, said it was a horrible idea, and proceeded to give my reasons why. No one argued against me and the legislation was dropped. I learned a pretty valuable lesson that day... Be the voice that isn't present y'all. A lot of educational clubs and organizations would make far better use of that funding than a bunch of partying Greek lifers.
I love this channel so much never stop what your doing watching your videos these past few days have been inspiring me to be a better human being
Thank you for talking about this, it's downright terrifying how many of these nuts are lurking in our government
Part of what makes Orthodoxy so uncomfortable for me is the strong emphasis on obediance to authority as a moral virtue, even when that authority is obviously wrong. They also are opposed to logic and advocate for the abandonment of reason. Their egregore is also pretty obnoxious when it gets in your head, trying to overwrite every rational thought process with pure dogma.
You have the MOST unique voice I've ever heard!
Gwagwan! love the content. subscribing!
The RWA test needs to have an atheist version. My father is more Authoritarian that his score because he doesnt believe in God. But even though in his mind his views of 'traditional values' about feminism, homosexuality and immigration aren't religiously based, they are still pretty right wing authoritarian owing to his upbringing in the Jim Crow South of the US and being a US Marine in Vietnam.
This is ridiculously informative thanks brother
I've noticed that RWA tend to be intellectually lazy. They don't like to think very hard about complicated things. A lot of people suffering from Dunning-Kruger turn out to be RWA, in my observation. I don't know if this means that RWA tend to be of limited intelligence, but it's hard not to come to that conclusion. RWA really hate it if intellectuals start to attain leadership, because that tilts the playing field into a configuration where they sense they will be at a distinct disadvantage.
Yeah, I'm coming back to this video so I don't remember if I'm restating a point Andrewism made int he video but: people who identify as conservatives tend to prefer what's called intuitive thinking over what's called reflective thinking. Or in other words: when making decisions or reaching conclusions, they like to go with their gut instead of thinking a bit more carefully. That preference does save on cognitive load (which is the value of intuition in day to day life) but in politics and other complex issues, it makes you stupid and, well, more likely to be right wing....after all, the two are connected :p
But tldr: yeah you're right, right wingers tend to be more intellectually lazy than left wingers. It's part of why they're right wing.
A comment sacrifice to the algorithm gods. Your videos are fantastic!
you had me at the King Ghidra track you opened with. RIP MF Doom
Great video again!
Great essay Andrew! Very interesting.
Would genuinely be interested in a video discussing LWAs. RWAs tend to take up the most focus understandably. But “left” wing authoritarians should get some attention I feel
You earned a subscriber, fantastic essay. Thank you ❤
Nice job with this one!
I took the RWA test and came back with a score of 26, which makes sense as I lean left politically. When I reflect on why I should score this way as I think it's interesting to tally up the influences. On the one hand I grew up in a white suburban neighborhood, but it was very safe (used to ride my bike to school and ride to my friend's houses). Then of course my family is not exactly religious and parents had a science oriented education. I did not travel to diverse places growing up, but I was into various sci-fi including Star Trek: TNG that really seeded my mind with diverse ideas. Even college was still fairly insular as it was a state college, but once I graduated and started working I met people from all over the world. I guess the conclusion is it's more like ideas than experiences that changes people's thinking.
New saint Andrew video, day instantly better
LMFAO The opening... I LOVE that film!
28:48 This is a circular explanation. You really have to try hard to interpret the Bible as saying that LGBTQ existence is bad. It's probably more true to say, "Religious fundamentalists oppose queer people because their preferred authorities tell them that the Bible does."
Loved that so much.
Why cant we just live in Dionysian splendor until we die?
That was brilliant. Thank you.
Loving this video! Gotta ask, are you Jamaican?
I was raised in a very abusive authoritarian home. I never did fit in. My mother called me overly sensitive, slut, disobedient....is it any wonder I'm an anarchist? Lol
Holy crap! This was soooooooooooooooooooooooo well done.
I *had* to take the RWA- I can't resist a test, loll. I found this test difficult to take, as I disagree with the premises of several of the questions. For instance, 'some of the best people...' I personally do not believe in good or bad people. In my conception, humans have no intrinsic value, certainly not one that can be quantified and measured against others. Our actions can be harmful or healing, destructive or creative, courageous or cowardly, but there is no innate, stagnant, scalable value to an individual human being.
While one could argue that this is a moot semantic point, that good and bad (or 'best') people isn't meaningfully different from 'those who's actions we agree with and those who's actions we disagree with'; I think the ideas of individuality and some kind of even, equitable baseline from which to judge people's actions as good or bad is detrimental to a clear-eyed and accurate conception of society.
Furthermore, an individual's actions are predetermined by so many factors that are our of the individual's control, even imagining that free will exists (which, IMO, it doesn't, in a literal sense, only as a helpful construct to adhere to.) Someone hard-pressed to survive might be forced to 'do bad' while someone economically and socially privileged generally has more opportunities to 'do good.'
Oy vey! The tribulations of having a literal and analytical relationship to language!
Why don't you think free will exists? What is free will in your mind?
For me it was the way that they would use the word moral with words like traditional. Like bold of you to assume that those are the same thing
what's the name of the song that is on the background of ur videos?
just hearing this for the first time and it's excellent. thank you andrewism :]
Your point that most people are not prepared to say no to authority is very well made.