Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Authoritarians and Politics

  1. #1
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    6,877
    Mentioned
    796 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default Authoritarians and Politics

    A few years ago, I ran across an interesting essay on Authoritarians, by Bob Altemeyer, Associate Professor at the University of Manitoba.

    I'm interested in politics and political systems (everyone wants to know the future and everyone wants to rule the world; I just add Efficient Optimizer to that list), and I had read a number of books on the subject of politics and economics and war, but I had never read anything as illuminating as Altemeyer's essay on people whom he calls "Authoritarians".

    The whole thing is available for free here: https://theauthoritarians.org/Downlo...oritarians.pdf

    but the part that got my attention was when he, as a teacher, created the Global Change Game and let his students play it. He split the students into two groups; one with high Authoritarian leanings, and one with low Authoritarian leanings. Here is an excerpt from his essay in which he describes the results.

    .................................................. ..........................................

    Unauthoritarians and Authoritarians: Worlds of Difference

    By now you must be developing a feel for what high RWAs think and do, and also an impression of low RWAs. Do you think you know each group well enough to predict what they’d do if they ran the world? One night in October, 1994 I let a group of low RWA university students determine the future of the planet (you didn’t know humble researchers could do this, did you!). Then the next night I gave high RWAs their kick at the can.

    The setting involved a rather sophisticated simulation of the earth’s future called the Global Change Game, which is played on a big map of the world by 50-70 participants who have been split into various regions such as North America, Africa, India and China. The players are divided up according to current populations, so a lot more students hunker down in India than in North America. The game was designed to raise environmental awareness, and before the exercise begins players study upon their region’s resources, prospects, and environmental issues.

    Then the facilitators who service the simulation call for some member, any member of each region, to assume the role of team leader by simply standing up. Once the “Elites” in the world have risen to the task they are taken aside and given control of their region’s bank account. They can use this to buy factories, hospitals, armies, and so on from the game bank, and they can travel the world making deals with other Elites. They also discover they can discretely put some of their region’s wealth into their own pockets, to vie for a prize to be given out at the end of the simulation to the World’s Richest Person. Then the game begins, and the world goes wherever the players take it for the next forty years which, because time flies in a simulation, takes about two and a half hours.

    The Low RWA Game

    By carefully organizing sign-up booklets, I was able to get 67 low RWA students to play the game together on October 18th . (They had no idea they had been funneled into this run of the experiment according to their RWA scale scores; indeed they had probably never heard of right-wing authoritarianism.) Seven men and three women made themselves Elites. As soon as the simulation began, the Pacific Rim Elite called for a summit on the “Island Paradise of Tasmania.” All the Elites attended and agreed to meet there again whenever big issues arose. A world-wide organization was thus immediately created by mutual consent.

    Regions set to work on their individual problems. Swords were converted to ploughshares as the number of armies in the world dropped. No wars or threats of wars occurred during the simulation. [At one point the North American Elite suggested starting a war to his fellow region-aires (two women and one guy), but they told him to go fly a kite--or words to that effect.]

    An hour into the game the facilitators announced a (scheduled) crisis in the earth’s ozone layer. All the Elites met in Tasmania and contributed enough money to buy new technology to replenish the ozone layer.

    Other examples of international cooperation occurred, but the problems of the Third World mounted in Africa and India. Europe gave some aid but North America refused to help. Africa eventually lost 300 million people to starvation and disease, and India 100 million.

    Populations had grown and by the time forty years had passed the earth held 8.7 billion people, but the players were able to provide food, health facilities, and jobs for almost all of them. They did so by demilitarizing, by making a lot of trades that benefited both parties, by developing sustainable economic programs, and because the 32 Elites diverted only small amounts of the treasury into their own pockets. (The North American Elite hoarded the most.)

    One cannot blow off four hundred million deaths, but this was actually a highly successful run of the game, compared to most. No doubt the homogeneity of the players, in terms of their RWA scores and related attitudes, played a role. Low RWAs do not typically see the world as “Us versus Them.” They are more interested in cooperation than most people are, and they are often genuinely concerned about the environment. Within their regional groups, and in the interactions of the Elites, these first-year students would have usually found themselves “on the same page”--and writ large on that page was, “Let’s Work Together and Clean Up This Mess.” The game’s facilitators said they had never seen as much international cooperation in previous runs of the simulation. With the exception of the richest region, North America, the lows saw themselves as interdependent and all riding on the same merry-go-round.

    The High RWA Game

    The next night 68 high RWAs showed up for their ride, just as ignorant of how they had been funneled into this run of the experiment as the low RWA students had been the night before. The game proceeded as usual. Background material was read, Elites (all males) nominated themselves, and the Elites were briefed. Then the “wedgies” started. As soon as the game began, the Elite from the Middle East announced the price of oil had just doubled. A little later the former Soviet Union (known as the Confederation of Independent States in 1994) bought a lot of armies and invaded North America. The latter had insufficient conventional forces to defend itself, and so retaliated with nuclear weapons. A nuclear holocaust ensued which killed everyone on earth--7.4 billion people--and almost all other forms of life which had the misfortune of co-habitating the same planet as a species with nukes.

    When this happens in the Global Change Game, the facilitators turn out all the lights and explain what a nuclear war would produce. Then the players are given a second chance to determine the future, turning back the clock to two years before the hounds of war were loosed. The former Soviet Union however rebuilt its armies and invaded China this time, killing 400 million people. The Middle East Elite then called for a “United Nations” meeting to discuss handling future crises, but no agreements were reached.

    At this point the ozone-layer crisis occurred but--perhaps because of the recent failure of the United Nations meeting--no one called for a summit. Only Europe took steps to reduce its harmful gas emissions, so the crisis got worse. Poverty was spreading unchecked in the underdeveloped regions, which could not control their population growth. Instead of dealing with the social and economic problems “back home,” Elites began jockeying among themselves for power and protection, forming military alliances to confront other budding alliances. Threats raced around the room and the Confederation of Independent States warned it was ready to start another nuclear war. Partly because their Elites had used their meager resources to buy into alliances, Africa and Asia were on the point of collapse. An Elite called for a United Nations meeting to deal with the crises--take your pick--and nobody came.

    By the time forty years had passed the world was divided into armed camps threatening each other with another nuclear destruction. One billion, seven hundred thousand people had died of starvation and disease. Throw in the 400 million who died in the Soviet-China war and casualties reached 2.1 billion. Throw in the 7.4 billion who died in the nuclear holocaust, and the high RWAs managed to kill 9.5 billion people in their world--although we, like some battlefield news releases, are counting some of the corpses twice.

    The authoritarian world ended in disaster for many reasons. One was likely the character of their Elites, who put more than twice as much money in their own pockets as the low RWA Elites had. (The Middle East Elite ended up the World’s Richest Man; part of his wealth came from money he had conned from Third World Elites as payment for joining his alliance.) But more importantly, the high RWAs proved incredibly ethnocentric. There they were, in a big room full of people just like themselves, and they all turned their backs on each other and paid attention only to their own group. They too were all reading from the same page, but writ large on their page was, “Care About Your Own; We Are NOT All In This Together.”

    The high RWAs also suffered because, while they say on surveys that they care about the environment, when push comes to shove they usually push and shove for the bucks. That is, they didn’t care much about the long-term environmental consequences of their economic acts. For example a facilitator told Latin America that converting much of the region’s forests to a single species of tree would make the ecosystem vulnerable. But the players decided to do it anyway because the tree’s lumber was very profitable just then. And the highs proved quite inflexible when it came to birth control. Advised that “just letting things go” would cause the populations in underdeveloped areas to explode, the authoritarians just let things go.

    Now the Global Change Game is not the world stage, university students are not world leaders, and starting a nuclear holocaust in a gymnasium is not the same thing as launching real missiles from Siberia and North Dakota. So the students’ behavior on those two successive nights in 1994 provides little basis for drawing conclusions about the future of the planet. But some of what happened in this experiment rang true to me. I especially thought, “I’ve seen this show before” as I sat on the sidelines and watched the high RWAs create their very own October crisis.

  2. #2
    Socionics is a spook ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Gamma SF
    Posts
    14,896
    Mentioned
    825 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Can we have a summary? Seems vaguely interesting but tl;dr

  3. #3
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    6,877
    Mentioned
    796 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha View Post
    Can we have a summary? Seems vaguely interesting but tl;dr
    Authoritarians will wreck the world and non-authoritarians will try to fix it. It is basically what you've seen for the past forty years in US politics.

    Bush attacks the Middle East, Clinton makes trade deals, Bush II attacks the Middle East and Afghanistan, Obama tries to make trade and nuclear disarmament deals, Trump attacks the Middle East.

    It's a lot like the US deficit. Republican president lowers taxes on the rich while raising defense spending and reducing welfare benefits thus blowing up the deficit, Democrat does the opposite and gets a budget surplus, rinse, repeat.

    Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House roof as a symbol of his administration's efforts to reduce Global Warming, Reagan had them removed, citing "government over-regulation".

    It's pretty clear, I'd say.

    But I really do recommend reading the original reference.
    Last edited by Adam Strange; 01-05-2020 at 11:11 PM.

  4. #4
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,762
    Mentioned
    148 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    Authoritarians will wreck the world and non-authoritarians will try to fix it. It is basically what you've seen for the past forty years in US politics.

    Bush attacks the Middle East, Clinton makes trade deals, Bush II attacks the Middle East and Afghanistan, Obama tries to make trade and nuclear disarmament deals, Trump attacks the Middle East.

    It's a lot like the US deficit. Republican president lowers taxes on the rich while raising defense spending and reducing welfare benefits thus blowing up the deficit, Democrat does the opposite and gets a budget surplus, rinse, repeat.

    Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House roof as a symbol of his administration's efforts to reduce Global Warming, Reagan had them removed, citing "government over-regulation".

    It's pretty clear, I'd say.

    But I really do recommend reading the original reference.
    I find it amusing how badly the US has been blowing it's global lead through shitty politics. Just 20 years ago the US far above most of the world just about every metric, and know you can really start to see it's relative decline. Education's shit, infrastructure's crumbling, shitty healthcare, innovation's gone down the tubes, renewable energy is not being embraced as fast as it should, etc. The petro dollar and America's naval control over global trade gave it major economic advantages that allowed it get away with having piss poor leadership. When US global hegemony unravels it will have cascading effects and people are going to be in for rude awakening.

  5. #5
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Maizistan
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    915
    Mentioned
    75 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    Authoritarians will wreck the world and non-authoritarians will try to fix it. It is basically what you've seen for the past forty years in US politics.

    Bush attacks the Middle East, Clinton makes trade deals, Bush II attacks the Middle East and Afghanistan, Obama tries to make trade and nuclear disarmament deals, Trump attacks the Middle East.

    It's a lot like the US deficit. Republican president lowers taxes on the rich while raising defense spending and reducing welfare benefits thus blowing up the deficit, Democrat does the opposite and gets a budget surplus, rinse, repeat.

    Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House roof as a symbol of his administration's efforts to reduce Global Warming, Reagan had them removed, citing "government over-regulation".

    It's pretty clear, I'd say.

    But I really do recommend reading the original reference.
    Strange, I was interested by how people with RWA didn’t seem to much help others. While of course their game played out in average a lot better, my impression from your post was that they worked together due to self-interest rather than much altruistic motivation.

    I feel that “self-interested” is a relatively low bar to set, even if the alternative is active aggression. In politics we need a little better than that. The Obamas and Clintons of the world have been fucking normal people over too (and if you don’t agree, lemme know and I’ll duke it out with you), and even if it isn’t quite as bad as when a Bush starts a war in the Middle East, they don’t have to be the alternative.
    As a goatherd learns his trade by goat, so a writer learns his trade by wrote.

  6. #6
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    6,877
    Mentioned
    796 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman View Post
    Strange, I was interested by how people with RWA didn’t seem to much help others. While of course their game played out in average a lot better, my impression from your post was that they worked together due to self-interest rather than much altruistic motivation.

    I feel that “self-interested” is a relatively low bar to set, even if the alternative is active aggression. In politics we need a little better than that. The Obamas and Clintons of the world have been fucking normal people over too (and if you don’t agree, lemme know and I’ll duke it out with you), and even if it isn’t quite as bad as when a Bush starts a war in the Middle East, they don’t have to be the alternative.
    Freelance, the real world is more complicated than the Global Change game, and isn’t cleanly separated into Authoritarian and non-Authoritarian ranks of nearly-equal class status college students. In the real world, people of different economic classes war with each other, and can form mutually self-interested groups across political and national boundaries.

    The politicians in the US all represent the ruling class, and as such, have been screwing the middle class pretty consistently ever since the oil-and extraction industry-funded Republicans destroyed the unions, which were where the Democrats got most of their campaign money. Now, the Democrats get their money from the parasitic Finance industry, and the Middle class is left without any say in the economy at all. The economic decline of the Middle class is a direct consequence of this.

    But Altemeyer’s essay does illustrate the fact that Authoritarians will destroy the planet in the interest of their group. I’m absolutely certain that this kind of behavior has been selected for by evolution as being advantageous in certain situations, but those situations didn’t take into account the ability to end life on this planet.

    I wonder if this is why we don’t see any other civilizations in the galaxy? They have all hit this Great Filter.
    Last edited by Adam Strange; 01-06-2020 at 12:44 PM.

  7. #7
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Maizistan
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    915
    Mentioned
    75 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    The real world is more complicated than the Global Change game, and isn’t cleanly separated into Authoritarian and non-Authoritarian ranks of college students. In the real world, people of different economic classes war with each other, and can form mutually self-interested groups across political and national boundaries.

    But Altemeyer’s essay does illustrate the fact that Authoritarians will destroy the planet in the interest of their group. I’m absolutely certain that this kind of behavior has been selected for by evolution as being advantageous in certain situations, but those situations didn’t take into account the ability to end life on this planet.

    I wonder if this is why we don’t see any other civilizations in the galaxy? They have all hit this Great Filter.
    edit: to be clear, in my previous post I was referring to the way you described Republicans causing issues and Democrats fixing them. I was annoyed because I felt reality wasn’t that simple. The problems the Democrats “solve” are rarely bread-and-butter issues (what difference does it really make to me if the budget is balanced?), and that their policies inadvertently result in less mass dying than the Republicans’ doesn’t really inspire me to love them.

    You’re into sci-fi, aren’t you? I’ve read some (mostly Asimov (I read the entire Foundation series, at least most of the robot series, and various short stories), Arthur C. Clarke, and Herbert’s Dune series) but I’m not a sci-fi buff at all. My impression, though, is most sci-fi relating to interplanetary or interstellar travel relies on the invention of faster-than-light technology. Given the enormous advances in technology we’ve seen in the past two hundred years, I think a lot of people, especially the types who really like sci-fi, think that anything will be possible after enough time; that technological advancements are inevitable and will eventually let people do anything they put their mind to. But I wonder if the real reason we don’t see aliens is because FTL travel is simply impossible.

    Already we’re reaching physical limits for electronics parts; that is, no matter how efficient a CPU can be, there’s still a physical limit to how small it can possibly be made. There are obviously ideas about how to get around this problem, but it’s interesting to consider that there might be real limits on technological advancement, and that we might be about to hit them.
    Last edited by FreelancePoliceman; 01-06-2020 at 01:03 PM.
    As a goatherd learns his trade by goat, so a writer learns his trade by wrote.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    TIM
    LIE
    Posts
    121
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sounds like a big circlejerk of left wing politicians legitimizng their own (flawed) views by pseudoscience and giving other democrat like "liberals" the justification to adhere to their flawed believes while not being able to defend it on a rational basis.

    Most the left wing does today is based on pure lies, one of the biggest is egalitarism and western universalism.
    It shows itself by the very same notion that tried to colonize the world by hard means which now tries by soft means to turn black people into whites, middle-eastern people into westerners.
    This kind of cultural imperialism is mostly based on economic greed and wishful thinking, years of being guilt tripped for being superior (which in communism is the biggest sin, because its the worst form of inequality).

    We will never turn minorities into people like us because they are empirically proven a lot more aggressive, a lot less smart and function completely different.
    Ethnocentrism is the only legitimate kind of view and that's exactly why we all are racist, because racism helps you to feel empathy for the genetic makeup that is similar to your own and thus heightens your genetic fitness and chance for survival.

    Helping a genetic makeup that is so screwed and dangerous like the majority of Africans and people of African descent will lessen your chance of survival significantly.
    Authoritarianism is not good, it's a beta value i don't adhere to, but Racism and Ethnocentrism certainly is.

    People are becoming sicker and sicker, having a lot of mental health issues, because from birth on they get told, teached and indoctrinated that their most natural feeling, the love for the people who are wholesome for them selves and the disgust, hate and antipathy to people who are not is some kind of flaw.
    I'm not even right wing, and i am glad that we see what the 68s had with Baader, Ensslin and all of those who did not have to fight authoritarians by violent means, we have a giftet youth who emancipates themselves from the dogmas of their parents generation and questions the unquestionable.

    The smartest young people are becoming more and more racist and there is nothing anybody is able to do against it, because it's the only way forward, to a prosperous future and the survival of everything that was ever worthwile. When the white Race dies, everything of value will die.
    Africans will never make it, we had socrates and plato thousands of years ago, so don't tell me that time will fix them, evolution would fix them, but there has to be a lot of dying for this to take effect, the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Nearly every kind of cultural and scientific achievement has been made by whites, letting the white race die will kill the potential this genetic mixture has carried. It is not permissible under any circumstances.

  9. #9
    Socionics is a spook ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Gamma SF
    Posts
    14,896
    Mentioned
    825 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    The thread was about authoritarians and political strategy but it seems this racist outpouring was waiting for the earliest possible opening. Could have made a thread? Anyway, as for the liberal/conservative stuff you opened with, there is more leeway for racist expression for conservatives, I guess, with policies unfriendly towards immigrants or the disadvantaged, and more leeway for anti-racist posturing for liberals. But I think making a demarcation between racist conservatives and anti-racist liberals is a mistake.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    TIM
    LIE
    Posts
    121
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This thread did carry the Notion that "Right Wing Autoritarians" would certaintly ruin the world when ruling.
    I stepped out of the created circumstances and gave a real life example on why it is clearly left wing authoritarians who do it right now.

    When there is a post, disguised as science that holds the bottom line, the narrative that people with certain views would lead to misery, i think it is competely on topic to step out of the Frame that was given by the "scientist" who tries to transport his views in such a way and to ponder some real facts and arguments on why a big part of what is defined and understood nowadays as right wing authoritarianism is a requirement not to ruin the world irreversibly.

    For the other part, the US democrats play a lot on identity politics and minority issues, while the conservatives are at least trying to be racist in a positive way. But yes, both are racist, but healthy and positive racism is mostly tried by the conservatives from what i observed.
    Democrats are mostly anti-white which is a pretty stupid kind of racism and does not fulfill the evolutionary purpose of this notion, in the contrary, it is a freudian defense mechanism (reaction forming) used on a completely healthy feeling which turns it even more unhealthy than not feeling it at all.
    Last edited by Itsme; 01-06-2020 at 03:10 PM.

  11. #11
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    6,877
    Mentioned
    796 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    This thread has derailed from my original intent, and it is largely my fault for mentioning political parties, which I knew at the time was strictly inaccurate but seemed expedient when replying to @ashlesha. My bad.

    I think it would be constructive to read the original source material and discuss the nature of Authoritarianism as a set of beliefs. It might even be an intrinsic characteristic of some subset of humanity, rather than a learned or inherited belief system.

  12. #12
    Socionics is a spook ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Gamma SF
    Posts
    14,896
    Mentioned
    825 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    The existence of authoritarians is so absurd to me. These clowns must assume the rules would be in their favor.

  13. #13
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,449
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha View Post
    The existence of authoritarians is so absurd to me. These clowns must assume the rules would be in their favor.
    Perhaps it's useful in complicated natural environments
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  14. #14
    Glorious Member mu4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mind
    Posts
    8,099
    Mentioned
    650 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    Freelance, the real world is more complicated than the Global Change game, and isn’t cleanly separated into Authoritarian and non-Authoritarian ranks of nearly-equal class status college students. In the real world, people of different economic classes war with each other, and can form mutually self-interested groups across political and national boundaries.

    The politicians in the US all represent the ruling class, and as such, have been screwing the middle class pretty consistently ever since the oil-and extraction industry-funded Republicans destroyed the unions, which were where the Democrats got most of their campaign money. Now, the Democrats get their money from the parasitic Finance industry, and the Middle class is left without any say in the economy at all. The economic decline of the Middle class is a direct consequence of this.

    But Altemeyer’s essay does illustrate the fact that Authoritarians will destroy the planet in the interest of their group. I’m absolutely certain that this kind of behavior has been selected for by evolution as being advantageous in certain situations, but those situations didn’t take into account the ability to end life on this planet.

    I wonder if this is why we don’t see any other civilizations in the galaxy? They have all hit this Great Filter.
    I see it as a lot less black and white and we need to talk about real world interaction between groups rather than some experiment. Authoritarians engage in social conflict for their group which form for reasons usually related to geography, ethnicity and culture. The Russians and Chinese did not engage in social conflict within their society and against other societies because they were Authoritarian. The Authoritarians got power because they were willing to engage in social conflict. Authoritarians probably have the tendency see things was winning/losing/zero sum, which rationalizes the conflict but sometimes this is the enviroment which people live in. The west was very good for a period of time at sending their authoritarians to other parts of the world in order to use them and their lives to subjugate other groups, while largely being non-authoritarian with their own group. The British were especially good at this, however the authoritarians in the west eventually still got into conflict.

    Historically non-authoritarian modes of coexistence is not possible without sending your authoritarians on wars of conquest and subjugation. However doing so today is difficult and there is little political will or profit to this, the authoritarians stay home and engage in social conflict domestically which of course create social instability. Also without authoritarians fighting these social conflicts and fighting to win, it is largely impossible to overcome authoritarians of a more advanced society.

    I think it's also important to differentiate between forms of authoritarianism, as inverted totalitarianism which is rooted in very different ideas vs say Fascism or communism. This study is largely right wing authoritarianism which is of a fundamentally different character than LWA.

  15. #15
    Socionics is a spook ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Gamma SF
    Posts
    14,896
    Mentioned
    825 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Perhaps it's useful in complicated natural environments
    Complicated in what way? I'm not trying to challenge you, just not sure what you mean. I think our environment is currently complicated?

  16. #16
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,449
    Mentioned
    219 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha View Post
    Complicated in what way? I'm not trying to challenge you, just not sure what you mean. I think our environment is currently complicated?
    No now it's extremely uncomplicated! I mean environments where there's a real risk of starving to death or being killed either by other humans or animals.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  17. #17
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    ref to ptr to self
    Posts
    1,542
    Mentioned
    67 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Probably would have been less prone to idiotic objections if they had done 4 games with people with different combinations of low/high rwa and an lwa scale.

  18. #18
    Alonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    LIE (C) 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    769
    Mentioned
    102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sorry @Adam Strange for the tangent, but I have to address this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Itsme View Post
    Sounds like a big circlejerk of left wing politicians legitimizng their own (flawed) views by pseudoscience and giving other democrat like "liberals" the justification to adhere to their flawed believes while not being able to defend it on a rational basis.

    Most the left wing does today is based on pure lies, one of the biggest is egalitarism and western universalism.
    It shows itself by the very same notion that tried to colonize the world by hard means which now tries by soft means to turn black people into whites, middle-eastern people into westerners.
    This kind of cultural imperialism is mostly based on economic greed and wishful thinking, years of being guilt tripped for being superior (which in communism is the biggest sin, because its the worst form of inequality).

    We will never turn minorities into people like us because they are empirically proven a lot more aggressive, a lot less smart and function completely different.
    Ethnocentrism is the only legitimate kind of view and that's exactly why we all are racist, because racism helps you to feel empathy for the genetic makeup that is similar to your own and thus heightens your genetic fitness and chance for survival.

    Helping a genetic makeup that is so screwed and dangerous like the majority of Africans and people of African descent will lessen your chance of survival significantly.
    Authoritarianism is not good, it's a beta value i don't adhere to, but Racism and Ethnocentrism certainly is.

    People are becoming sicker and sicker, having a lot of mental health issues, because from birth on they get told, teached and indoctrinated that their most natural feeling, the love for the people who are wholesome for them selves and the disgust, hate and antipathy to people who are not is some kind of flaw.
    I'm not even right wing, and i am glad that we see what the 68s had with Baader, Ensslin and all of those who did not have to fight authoritarians by violent means, we have a giftet youth who emancipates themselves from the dogmas of their parents generation and questions the unquestionable.

    The smartest young people are becoming more and more racist and there is nothing anybody is able to do against it, because it's the only way forward, to a prosperous future and the survival of everything that was ever worthwile. When the white Race dies, everything of value will die.
    Africans will never make it, we had socrates and plato thousands of years ago, so don't tell me that time will fix them, evolution would fix them, but there has to be a lot of dying for this to take effect, the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Nearly every kind of cultural and scientific achievement has been made by whites, letting the white race die will kill the potential this genetic mixture has carried. It is not permissible under any circumstances.
    You’re proof positive that Te, and all cognitive functions by extension, is only as effective as the quality of the information it metabolizes > garbage in = garbage out. No matter how “smart” you think you are, if you consume the wrong data or not enough data, you will end up looking rather incompetent. At first, I was prepared to viciously rip you apart but then I decided to de-construct my anger/righteous indignation (at what I find to be your ignorance and gall), and underneath that, I found sadness, disappointment, and pity, for you.

    I pity you because your cognitive deficits prohibit you from seeing how tragic a figure you actually are. Took a gander through your post history and you talk about having endured all sorts of psychological trauma and abuse, in and out youth homes and psyche wards, and how you might have been dead or even a killer had you not received interventions by certain support structures. I deeply sympathize with that type of experience and would admire you for surviving and becoming a better (read: considerate, compassionate, empathetic) person, but, unfortunately, you’ve decided to not pursue the latter.

    What is so frustrating and devastating to me is that your own empathy blindness prohibits you from seeing the parallel between your experience and how an entire continent and its people were robbed of their potential and plundered for centuries by European, white supremacist oppression, forcing Africans into artificial, long lasting, generational poverty because their lands and resources were exploited and completely depleted to the benefit of the Europeans.

    You have the unmitigated gall to call Africans “dangerous” when Europeans would not be where they are today if not for wanton destroying, conquering, looting, pillaging, extorting, raping, slaughtering, enslaving and subjugating there way to preeminence. Africa is the most genetically diverse continent on earth, which means that both the lowest and highest IQs exist there–but studies have shown that environment is the most significant contributor to IQ, and that generations of undernourishment and poverty negatively impacted it. The majority of Africans haven’t been privy to the type of structured interventions that helped “save” your life, and oddly enough they are still capable of being engineers, scientists, entrepreneurs, politicians and scholars--funny that if they are somehow innately inferior.

    And you want to pat yourself on the back simply because Europeans got lucky? Lol Sheer luck and opportunity comprise the bulk of white people's success. In every group, there will always be a few innovators who think outside the box and do things that catapults the whole group forward. As people began leaving Africa, they kept encountering environments and circumstances, over thousands of years, that forced them to adapt and innovate. Cue "Guns, Germs and Steel" and voila--world conquerors.

    But answer this, what have YOU done? People like you love to say “we” and “us” and take ownership over accomplishments you had no part of. I don’t have to rely on the successes of my people because I am a success, myself. Just because Mozart and Edison were great, doesn’t mean you are. It’s sad when people must rely on others in order to find worth and feel good about themselves.

    I’ve seen you frequently speak to your “intelligence” but besides falling short in your primary form of intelligence (Te/accumulating facts/forming logical rationales/and knowing what the fuck you are talking about), you woefully lack another intelligence of vital importance > empathy.

    A pity.

  19. #19
    Glorious Member mu4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mind
    Posts
    8,099
    Mentioned
    650 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    No now it's extremely uncomplicated! I mean environments where there's a real risk of starving to death or being killed either by other humans or animals.
    I would say our current enviroment is complicated, just a different way. There is a reason why authoritarians are so prevalent among-st western political bodies.

    Multicultural society and globalization inherently create complex socio-economic situations which although isn't necessarily immediately existential, racial and ethnic struggle mask class struggle and social conflict, which are always creating tension in society.

    The rise of the right wing in the last 50 years isn't really a surprise.

    My view is that America exported right wing authoritarianism and kept those forces in power in proxy nation states thru it's foreign policy and programs which kept progressive(often leftist authoritarian) revolutions from succeeding. This occurred essentially everywhere in the world and has since America lost China and Cuba to Maoist revolutions.

    At the same time non authoritarians working hand in hand authoritarian implemented policies which kept western society functioning and cooperating. This however ended more or less in 2008. In my opinion, there is currently no stable cooperative structure to fuel the status quo and generate the demand necessary for growth. This is the reason so much cash is just being sat on.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Global_Minotaur

    The ethnocentric focus of RWA kept their eyes targeted against foreign powers while non-authoritarians tried to keep things going but it also required the continued exporting of RWA to foreign states. The US is losing it's capacity to export authoritarianism while maintaining the status quo, largely due to failed adventures in the Middle East, and with the target currently Iran, that is likely to continue. Also the demise of the finance mechanism and political will to engage in such activity has invested many RWA to domestic conflict over social values.

    It's almost inevitable in the short term the RWA will win in western society because LWA is largely asleep and untapped to resist RWA in a virtually inevitable and potentially existential conflict. This might not be violent but it will be determined by demographic changes(which might occur thru normal aging). Wide spread social oppression may certain occur like what occurred in Franco's Spain.

  20. #20
    Liberté coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Akliash
    TIM
    Dragon
    Posts
    3,283
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    Authoritarians will wreck the world and non-authoritarians will try to fix it. It is basically what you've seen for the past forty years in US politics.

    Bush attacks the Middle East, Clinton makes trade deals, Bush II attacks the Middle East and Afghanistan, Obama tries to make trade and nuclear disarmament deals, Trump attacks the Middle East.

    It's a lot like the US deficit. Republican president lowers taxes on the rich while raising defense spending and reducing welfare benefits thus blowing up the deficit, Democrat does the opposite and gets a budget surplus, rinse, repeat.

    Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House roof as a symbol of his administration's efforts to reduce Global Warming, Reagan had them removed, citing "government over-regulation".

    It's pretty clear, I'd say.

    But I really do recommend reading the original reference.
    That sounds more like Good Cop, Bad Cop to me. If Obama were fundamentally different, he'd change the entire system.

  21. #21
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,762
    Mentioned
    148 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    RWAs, destroying the planet so that they can make the libs cry.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •