Tag Archives: authoritarianism

black bar

The Disease of Authoritarianism

                                A.I. Image

[There is justified concern that the Trump Administration is descending into authoritarian rule.  Without functioning constitutional guardrails he is able to exercise unfettered dominance and control. The current makeup of the Congress essentially means that only the courts can stop him from seizing illegitimate power. Few of us imagined we would one day descend to the perilous level of electing a rogue president.

We speak of Trump as an “authoritarian.” But the term applies equally to people looking for the psychological comfort of an “all the answers” leader. ]

Second Thoughts Banner

German academic T. W. Adorno was the lead researcher of the first major analysis of social conditions that give rise to populations overly enamored with authority figures.1 The researchers, some of whom had escaped from Europe at the start of World War II, traced the origins of a multitude of personality traits, including anti-Semitism, “susceptibility to antidemocratic propaganda,” ethnocentrism (judging others by one’s own values), and predispositions toward fascism. The rise of the Nazi Party and its wide acceptance even among well-educated Germans was the puzzle they wanted to solve.

Their questions are still relevant. Are certain kinds of citizens susceptible to appeals based on authority, especially “official” sources? Are some types of audiences too willing to ignore the natural ambiguities of everyday life in favor of the rigid ideological certainties of a demagogue? And what psychological needs are satisfied by cult-like allegiance is given to a leader? Think of any leader who sees their position as allowing the extra-legal extension of laws or institutions to punish perceived enemies.  In this view, one can ignore  constitutional mandates that would limit powers. The perceived need to purge alleged enemies is greater.

The original concept of authoritarianism focused equally on followers who are predisposed to submissive attitudes that mesh well with a dominating leader. A paper and pencil questionnaire called the F-Scale inventory probing for signs of “authoritarian submission” and “uncritical attitudes toward idealized moral authorities.” It consisted of claims, such as the ones listed below, to which a respondent would agree or disagree. Agreement gave a person a high F (Fascism) score.

“Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn.”
“Every person should have complete faith in some supernatural power whose decisions will be obeyed without question.”
“What this country needs most, more than laws and political programs, are a few courageous, tireless, devoted leaders in whom the people can put their faith.”

The researchers found that anti-Semitism, rigidity, ethnocentrism, and undue respect for power tended to cluster within many of the same people. They theorized that the clustering was tied to styles of family life. They also learned that authoritarianism can be identified in segments of almost any population. Some people may be psychologically hardwired to seek a “place” in a clearly defined social order led by a dominating leader.  In Congress, for example, many GOP members seem happy to relinquish their constitutional responsibilities in favor of the President.  Right now, few committees led by Republican chairpersons are engaged in what is usually the routine work of oversight of executive actions.

As a researcher on the psychology of identification, it seems evident that–with exceptions–authoritarians tend to have a diminished capacity for social intelligence. Low social intelligence typically includes low levels of empathy for others, lower self-esteem, low self-monitoring (an inability to notice how one’s own presence effects others), attraction to charismatic individuals, and an aversion to social complexity and pluralism.

Our quickly atomizing culture unfortunately feeds some of these traits. Recent election results are a reminder that many among us want simple and magical answers to entrenched problems: all the better if the explanations include scapegoating others. We have lived through a seemingly endless number of false alternate narratives told and retold about stolen elections, pedophile Washington elites, dead voters who managed to cast ballots, or Social Security cheats. Presently the political right finds receptive citizens  with similar fears. Low-knowledge voters–and there are many–don’t have enough solid information to quell their imaginations. As a nation we need to get a whole lot smarter about weighing the claims of leaders who are willing to trade the complexities of modern life for dubious certainties.

1The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper and Row, 1950.
black bar

A Revealing Sign of Our Problem

Did no one in the Kremlin see the connotation of inaccessibility represented in this image?

Aleksey Nikolsky/Sputnik

It is hard to comprehend the scale of Russian Army atrocities committed in Ukraine. Most of the world has been shocked at this former superpower’s ruthless barbarism. But the signs of Vladimir Putin’s cruel and medieval view of politics now seem everywhere.

I keep going back to the above photo of Putin meeting with subordinates. The original image taken by Russian journalist Aleksey Nikolsky perhaps two weeks ago was put out by the Kremlin and the nation’s Sputnik news agency. Most news platforms ran this strange curiosity at some point, stunning many in the free world with what first seemed like a visual joke. But the photo is apparently all too real: a vivid representation of what it looks like to live in isolation. Only those in the Kremlin seemed to miss its tragic/comic absurdity. They had what Kenneth Burke called the “trained incapacity” to not notice.

Presumably Putin and his flacks at the other end of the enormously long table were still in the same time zones. But its sheer length makes it clear that this small man wishes to sit alone, communicating his need to remain separate, special, and not to be trifled with. The idea that he could have implicitly sanctioned the use of the image must have sent cold chills down the spine of anyone who understands the nature of leadership in contemporary terms, where the goal of managing others means appearing to be first among equals: someone willing to listen, but not the voice of God. No wonder online memes had fun with several outrageous backstories to explain the scene’s ludicrous proportions: perhaps Putin was at a very long sushi bar on a slow night, or perhaps he was seated at the front of an entire bowling lane that had been refurbished as a table. I imagine the space as a good representation of a waiting room outside one of the Circles of Hell.

It was funny when movie mogul L. B. Mayer set up his office desk on a platform a considerable distance away from where people entered. It is classic Hollywood lore that he apparently wanted actors seeking more money to be humbled by the long walk. But this is obviously more consequential and disturbing.

Pathetically, this seems to be how Putin understands the nature of his ‘leadership.’

Did no one in the Kremlin see the implication of inaccessibility represented in this image? Were they culturally blind to modern notions of leadership, which typically emphasize meeting peers in the same intimate space? Some wag suggested that the distance was intentional in case someone at the other end had a firearm. I suspect the truth is more mundane. Pathetically, this seems to be how Putin understands the nature of his ‘leadership.’ Mixing with others is clearly not his thing; nor does he apparently feel the need to share even a nominal public distance with others that interpersonal communication researchers tell us is about four feet. At times Donald Trump had the same creepy instincts, presumably to avoid having to touch another person.

True, in organizing meetings it is customary for a leader who wants to control the flow of information to sit at one of the two heads of the table. Leaders who wish to dominate will want to own the geography at one end. Notice that in this image, the bureaucrats have mostly seated themselves in the ‘inferior’ positions along the table’s length, and far away. It is easy to fantasize a trap door near Putin’s chair in case anyone dared to join him by sitting up close.

In short, the photo shows us how an authoritarian mind is blind to the ideas of inclusion and shared decision-making. What we see in the photo is the bureaucratic face of the men in the palace planning atrocities to be carried out on Ukrainian streets.