On Trump: Intolerance and Authoritarianism

To make some sense of the chaos in the Republican Party during the primaries and to partially answer the question why conservatives are flocking to Trump to the extent that he won the 2016 US general election, the following:

Political scientist and expert on political authoritarianism Karen Stenner sees three different kinds of conservatism which will be at loggerheads about certain issues and under certain circumstances. The three, with their main representatives now in the US, are: authoritarian conservatism (Trump); status quo conservatism (Romney); and libertarian conservatism (Ron Paul).

Her research focuses on the dynamics which propel people into the authoritarian camp. Her hypothesis can be formalized as follows:

I = A x T.

Intolerance = Authoritarianism x Threat

One’s level of Intolerance is equal to the product of one’s Authoritarian predisposition and one’s experience or perception of real or imagined Threats.

In her own words:

“The impact of authoritarianism on intolerance of difference is conditional upon levels of collective (particularly “normative”) threat, such that this relatively stable and enduring predisposition yields more or less intolerant attitudes and behavior depending upon (the experience or perception of) threatening or reassuring conditions.”

Her tripartite differentiation of conservatisms together with the idea that intolerance increases with threat perception, might explain the current chaos in the Republican Party. And it’s quite simple.

Because of increased threat perceptions by conservatives, many of the status quo and libertarian conservatives with a higher than average authoritarian disposition are drifting into the authoritarian camp because that faction reflects better their new level of intolerance. Meanwhile those conservatives with a lower authoritarian disposition, especially the libertarians, are fighting back and denounce the leader of the authoritarian camp.

The threats Stenner identifies which trigger intolerance are big divisions in public opinions regarding political matters and political leaders perceived as untrustworthy. Again, in her own words:

“Nothing aggravates authoritarians more than feeling that leaders are unworthy of trust and respect, and/or that beliefs are not shared across the community (“normative threat”). And nothing lets down their defenses more than confidence in political leaders and widespread public consensus (“normative reassurance”).”

The big question is whether the perceived threats are real and if such threats justify an authoritarian answer, but that’s for another post.

Stenner, Karen. 2009. “Three Kinds of ‘Conservatism'”. Psychological Inquiry, 20: 142–159.

Originally posted on Facebook, March 7, 2016.