14% of the population predisposed to far-left authoritarianism

[Pluvia]

14% of humanity is predisposed to far-left authoritarianism. 19% are predisposed to far-right authoritarianism.

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000y7sq

Very interesting (and scary) interview with political psychologist and behavioural economic Karen Stenner. It enabled me to understand a bit more about all the misogyist woke dudes who support transgender ideology and explains Billy Bragg.

@Pluvia Its funny that despite more people (19%) being predisposed to the far right, you chose to go with the smaller stat of 14% and the far left, as if the far right is actually ok.

So i imagine you fall into the 19% far right cohort? especially when you bat around Woke as an insult, in itself, a sign of your own intolerance.

If you think the far right will protect womens rights, perhaps look at recent history and see what the far right has actually done when in power.

fwiw, most all the progress in female rights has been achieved under more left wing Governments.

Obviously not far left, extremes of any kind are usually v bad for everyone.

If you believe Stalin was from the left, you haven't a clue.

Why did you choose to title your thread "far left authoritarianism" when your OP states that more people are predisposed to far right authoritarianism, out of curiosity?

There does seem to be an increasing agenda on this board to paint anything even slightly left wing or 'woke' (ie anyone who's against racism) as being authoritarian and wrong, while simultaneously painting right wing authoritarianism as a good thing.

Far right is just as scary, both extremes are a serious worry.

All those who think the far right approach to gender/sex is going to be a good thing are living in fucking cuckoo land. Look at women's rights in the US - that is where quite a few Tories would like to take us.

I am sick of these boards pretending the Tories care about women's rights. If you've fallen for the Tory bullshit, more fool you.

I don't think anyone here is against being "against racism" I think they are often opposed to the identity politics formulations around racism. Probably because they are informed by people's observations of the identity politics of gender - both are drawn from the same well.

And the reason it mentions the left is because many people have tended to mistakenly think that authoritarianism comes from the right, the podcast is making the point that actually it exists on both the right and left.

Stalin was absolutely a leftist, I'm not sure why anyone would think he wasn't.

No one is saying the far-right would.

The Tories aren't far right.

Some members of the Tory party abolsutely are far right, they want to limit abortion and birth control, they want to reintroduce the death penalty.

Not all of them but if you think the laws being introduced by the current Tory party are not at their heart moving in an authoritarian direction, you are a fool. I am not going to be polite about it, I am sick of reading supposedly intelligent women excusing authoritarian policies.

Do you think they want to come out of the ECHR but preserve your rights? No. They will burn your rights too.

*absolutely

Isn’t wanting to leave the ECHR related to the wishes of Brexit voters, including those of (former Labour) Red Wall voters who were Left wing but felt unlisted to?

This reminds me of the horseshoe theory of politics. It might not apply to the issues in politics, but I think it does apply to some of the approaches, such as authoritarianism, black-and-white thinking, and the very strong tribalist online bubbles which are all common at both extremes.

I also find it applicable to some issues, such as the gender identity ideology which shares with the traditionalist anti-feminists the view that gender roles and norms are indispensable, with the only difference being how those to perform the roles and obey the norms are defined.

AndreaC74, I'm a member of the Labour Party and have never voted Conservative. I'm mates with my Labour MP and we both struggle to explain the misogyny and aggression of the far left of our party and that's why I found this program interesting — and why I said it explained people like Billy Bragg.

I presume you're a mate of Billy's.

Oh, I see — a micro pile-on based on a false assumption. How embarrassing for the three of you.

Leaving the ECHR is about authoritarian politics and is advocated in government by the most right wing parts of the Tory party - Braverman, Rabb, Patel etc.

The idea of 'red wall voters who were left wing but felt unlistended to' is far too simplistic. Many red wall voters who support attacks on human rights (right wing) also support renationalising utilities (left wing).

The left/right split does not really fit well onto real people any more.

Tory party used to favour individual freedoms and limited laws - now they want to restrict freedom etc.

But (a) that tendency appears to be weaker on the left than on the right (14% vs 19%) and (b) the interview (which I only skimmed, so forgive me if I missed it) makes no mention of centrist authoritarianism, so we have nothing there to compare "far left authoritarianism" with. All in all, there's no evidence here that people on the left are any more likely to be authoritarian than anyone else.

In my experience (purely anecdotal, and unlike this report I'm not claiming it to be anything else) authoritarianism is a much stronger feature of the centre left than the far left. Blair was constantly criticised for "nanny state" tendencies like, for example, banning smoking in pubs. Starmer has run the Labour party like Stalin incarnate, and it's actually middle class metropolitan lefty liberals who wave the woke flag hardest re TWAW etc. The "far left" (stupid term, but I assume it means Corbynite momentum activists etc.) are much more insistant on reconfiguring power structures from the bottom up, and suspicious of anything trying to squash all the anarchic energy that comes from that by enforcing a too-simple narrative from the top down.

Brexit is a good example. It was Blairite metropolitan centre leftists who were most blinkered in their attachment to Remain and most likely to write off Leavers as stupid racists, whereas on the far left the debate was much more nuanced, with a considerable chunk of people supporting Leave but for left wing reasons.

carefullycourageous · Today 22:04
Leaving the ECHR is about authoritarian politics and is advocated in government by the most right wing parts of the Tory party - Braverman, Rabb, Patel etc

The idea of 'red wall voters who were left wing but felt unlistended to' is far too simplistic. Many red wall voters who support attacks on human rights (right wing) also support renationalising utilities (left wing)

Isn’t that idea - that sometimes one can also be the other, or both the same (authoritarian)- what this thread was about?

Brexit voters don’t like control from Europe so that would mean they don’t want the ECHR which would represent that; and they don’t want immigration, so are in favour of sending immigrants to Rwanda which the ECHR condemned, so making the ECHR even more objectionable to Brexit voters.

This government was voted in by a huge majority to get Brexit done, so it isn’t just those members Patel, Braverman, Raab who are authoritarian presumably but plenty of the country.

Those podcasts earlier stressed how authoritarian it can seem to people overwhelmed by complexities when they are not allowed a voice,( they’d be called racist bigots) and solutions relating to their lives are not discussed with them. Then they are pushed to an extreme reaction.

I agree with the part about IQ, up to a point. It's true that less intelligent people are more receptive to supporting authoritarian solutions to things, because those solutions are easier to understand than democratic or anti0authoritarian ones. But it misses the fact that some people also support authoritarianism for the simple reason that it serves their personal power agenda (ie, THEY'RE the "authority" that the "ism" is being attached to). Those people don't need to be stupid to do that. On the contrary, they may do it out of an advanced ability to analyse complex situations and conclude that that's what's best for them.

I don't believe Priti Patel or Paul Dacre are unintelligent. They're just evil.

Trying to oust people from the party for criticizing the effect of gender ideology, or making public discourse on topics like that impossible, is more authoritarian than smoking bans in pubs.

By a long shot, it attacks the roots of liberal democracy. Lots of rules can be problematic, very, but they aren't on the same level at all.

But it's not the far left who have gone ape shit on trying to oust people from the party.

This government was not voted in by a majority at all, it was voted in by a minority. This disgusting authoritarian and corrupt government, that has attacked so much of what makes Britain work, was voted in by just 43.6% of those who voted.

And no, most voters are not actually authoritarian. As the thread actually states in the OP.

The Brexit voters who don't want the ECHR because it includes the word Europe are the thickest ones of all as the ECHR has fuck all to do with the EU.

So who was it? And why hasn't Billy Bragg and pals stuck up for women's rights?

Do you think your contempt for ordinary people is a vote-winner?

And no, most voters are not actually authoritarian. As the thread actually states in the OP.

You are right, they can’t all be authoritarian really, but this government’s intention was Brexit, and for some people that was about control from outside the U.K., and for some it was about immigration - which as the ECHR condemned the Rwanda decision, increased irritation about its control.

You mentioned wanting to leave the ECHR was about authoritarian politics, but I think it is also linked to what plenty of people wanted. So are they authoritarian too, or not? Thinking about it, could it be more like being anti- vax/ anti- control for some outside the government?

Wasn’t it considered that the Conservatives had a landslide victory? A large mandate? That’s what I meant by a majority, but put it wrongly.

The Brexit voters who don't want the ECHR because it includes the word Europe are the thickest ones of all as the ECHR has fuck all to do with the EU

People probably feel angry by being dismissed as thick, however frustrating it all is. They may feel oppressed and powerless. I don’t know what the answer is.

It was the Labour party bureaucracy, who are overwhelmingly dominated by the right of the party doing everything they can (fair or foul) to prevent the "far left" from having power (see reports now circulating re the Forde report into exactly this). The process was then sent into overdrive when Starmer became leader and decided to use it as a brazen tool of factional warfare against the left.

As for your second question, I'm going to depart from the consensus of the thread here and say I don't see how the favouring of trans rights over women's rights (much as I oppose it) is particularly "authoritarian". People from the TWAW side of the fence would probably say exactly the same thing about the opposite.

Authoritarianism is defined by how happy you are to have a particular way of doing things forced on people, rather than arrived at by agreement; how happy you are to push through simple solutions based on exercise of power by one group over others rather than more nuanced ones based on negotiation and the sharing of power.

I don't see any evidence that Billy Bragg is particularly authoritarian in this respect. I disagree with him because I think he's wrong. But he's entitled to his opinion, and the way he lives his life and expresses his beliefs doesn't seem any more authoritarian than the way I do.

There's always power being exercised somewhere. I think the problem here is that what people call "authoritarianism" is often just the exercise of power they're unfamiliar with, by people they don't like doing things they don't agree with. Whereas a similar exercise of power by people they like doing things they agree with doesn't seem authoritarian at all.

Authoritarianism means undermining the basic processes of democracy. SO Billy Bragg having an opinion isn't authoritarian, but saying it's not a legitimate discussion is or trying to limit that discussion.

I've heard authoritarianism ia linked to belief in astrology also

After listening to the brown last night, It strikes me that you need to read about Stenner's research alongside an understanding of philosophy of debate.

There's a lot of parallels in this three part series:

Arguments: Rory Stewart on R4. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4593354-arguments-rory-stewart-on-r4