Altemeyer's Right Wing Authoritarianism Scale

77

 

I'm not taking the test, I don't want to end up on some FBI watch list.

 

Kind of ironic given the current right wing schtick about trans boogeymen and the nonsensical rhetoric on “woke”.

Both parties play that game. Only difference is the right wing party uses those social issues distractions to mislead the poorer elements of their base away from the fiscal malfeasance of the post-Reagan Republican Party. Part of what made it so easy to leave the GOP mid 2000’s was the realization there are no fiscal conservatives, they are unicorns. Even the hardliners who fancy themselves as fiscally conservative prove themselves to not be time and time again. So what are we left with? Trans boogeymen and attacks on diversity (as if seeking diversity and offering opportunity is a bad thing). It’s beyond laughable at this point.

 

I got a 38 back in July and a 31 just now.

 

No, if you believe in freedom for yourself and others you will probably have a low score.

 

58 for me

 

Define "freedom."

Funny how it chose "abortion" and "gay marriage" and not "freedom of association" or "guns" for example.

 

"Boogeyman?" "Nonsensical rhetoric on woke?"

All the right is doing is highlighting soundbites and writings from progressives and criticizing them.

Now, the right's just getting heat for noticing it and people like you pretend none of it exists, despite being shown repeated evidence to the contrary.

 

Now, if you want to suggest that the Republican Party is not fiscally responsible, I wouldn't take issue with that statement.

I would take issue that the Democratic Party IS fiscally responsible so I don't think harping on things like the budget really moves the needle for voters these days because you're losing no matter who you pick.

What does move the needle on fiscal policy is taxes, allocation of spending, and inflation, however.

 

Actually if you’re referring to the bible you’ve missed the second part of the verse which says the husband should do the same.

 

Just saw the thread and got an 80. Not sure if I’m considered a resident right winger however. Depends on who you ask I guess…

 

Freedom is being allowed to be who you want to be and do what you want to do as long as it doesn't harm others.

And different subjects for the questions shouldn't significantly change your score. If there were a statement that the authorities should confiscate all guns I would disagree. If there were a statement that the authorities should outlaw religion I would disagree.

 

I answered honestly and scored a 45, and was a bit surprised by that. The way I was answering the questions made me feel like I was headed to triple digits as I was taking the survey.

 

I got a 35. I think I took it before and scored higher but am not sure.

 

It’s not that they don’t exist, it’s that many think part of “freedom” is that the govt should have effectively no role regulating morality or bedroom issues. No govt dress codes. No govt approved hairstyles (suspending a black kid for having traditional hair? not much of a bridge from that to Iran demanding compliance on women covering theirs). No govt dictating who can marry. Who can live together. Who can adopt. Who can read to children in libraries. No govt lists of banned books. Etc. Etc. Etc. We don’t need overreaching big guv laws outside the most basic and common sense. Regulation on these issues should be de minimus. No secret morality police.

Guns are now the #1 killer of children in this country. That’s why you have some considering what can be done to curb gun violence and the crazed level proliferation and unsafe/criminal handling of guns (as well as the even more obvious toxic mix of mental illness and guns).

Trans issues on the other hand are basically a non issue. Nobody is saying those people don’t exist, it’s just that they have rights! There isn’t anything inherently dangerous about a person living their life as they prefer and any “law” that presumes as much is likely to violate their constitutional rights as a person. Let’s put it this way, after the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal it was found in a comprehensive study that something like 4% of clergy had abused a child. Most of those diddling little boys. Statistics wise, any law you would ascribe to a LGBTQ person would have equal or more rationale to limit the activities for clergy in the same way. But I’m guessing you wouldn’t be on board with a law banning priests from reading at public libraries or an evangelical preacher from adopting. I have no idea if trans rate of abuse is greater or lower than that 4% (I’d actually guess *alot* lower based on lack of position of power and overall marginalized status). But when you run the math on the sheer population of clergymen and preachers compared to # of trans, regardless of the rates of abuse, it’s not even close as an issue. It’s just a bizarre issue to focus on. On scale of actual real world dangers to children, it must rate somewhere between IKEA bookshelves and Panera lemonade (apparently those lemonades can be deadly).

 

The woke is the morality police.

They just happen to be against religion and tradition.

If you think the Republican Party generally cares about gay marriage, you’ve been living under a rock for the last decade and a half. Which happens to be around the same time as Obama campaigned as an anti-gay-marriage candidate.

Republicans care about neutrality in public schools, but that’s not gay marriage. That’s the right of parents to raise their kids as they see fit, and the obligation to protect the innocence of children and prevent the indoctrination of children.

If these things are non-issues then what’s your problem with them as legislation? If men aren’t using the women’s room, then what’s the harm in enacting policy that prohibits that?

Abortion kills more fetuses each year than guns kill children. Yet abortion is treated as a Constitutionally protected “freedom” by you despite being seen nowhere in the Constitution… while guns are seen as “not freedom” despite being explicitly referenced in the Constitution, and guns alone not actually killing anybody. Abortion itself implies the act of killing another human being, merely owning a gun does not.

A priest reading to a child is not inappropriate. A priest abusing a child is inappropriate. A man dressing in drag, presenting it as normal, and reading to children is inappropriate. None of this is complicated.

 

You have strong authoritarian tendencies.

 

Yeah, so much so I want responsible law-abiding citizens to have guns as a hedge against authoritarians.