THE AUTHORITARIAN COSMOS: COMPLEXITY, ELECTIVE AFFINITIES AND THE ...

355 Pages·2010·2.93 MB·English

THE AUTHORITARIAN COSMOS:
COMPLEXITY, ELECTIVE AFFINITIES AND THE
“THERMODYNAMICS” OF THE SELF

By
TORALF ZSCHAU
Doctor of Philosophy
Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, Oklahoma
2010

Submitted to the Faculty of the
Graduate College of the
Oklahoma State University
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for
the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
July, 2010
THE AUTHORITARIAN COSMOS:
COMPLEXITY, ELECTIVE AFFINITIES AND THE
“THERMODYNAMICS” OF THE SELF

Dissertation Approved:

Dr. Riley Dunlap
Dissertation Adviser
Dr. Jean Van Delinder

Dr. David Knottnerus

Dr. Anthony Brown

Dr. A. Gordon Emslie
Dean of the Graduate College
Acknowledgements
A dissertation is nothing short of Homerian Odyssey into fairly unchartered
intellectual territory; a journey of self-exploration that takes one to the outer limits of
the self … and – at times – to the brink of insanity. But writing a dissertation reflects
more than a simple act of individual vanity; it documents the long and often productive
exchanges between great hearts and minds – be they in the guise of a real-life
discussion at the local corner pub, the uplifting AHA-effects in a graduate seminar or the
intimate dialogue with a dusty treatise on human nature. In short, a dissertation (and
this dissertation in particular) constitutes nothing but a fleeting shooting star on the
evermore elusive canvas of “knowledge”....
In the spirit and recognition of this collective enterprise, I would like to pay
tribute to all the wonderful hearts and minds that – through their real-life presence,
support, and guidance – have made this dissertation possible. It is certainly no
understatement when I say here that without the friendship, support and
encouragement of my chair Riley Dunlap, this exercise of intellectual apprenticeship
would never have materialized. It was his professional experience, emotional support
and encouragement that carried me through the darker stretches of this credentialing
marathon. It was also his razor-sharp analytical skills that often helped me to connect
seemingly disparate ideas and keep the project manageable. In addition to my chair, I
am also deeply indebted to the professional tutorage and friendship of my other
committee members Jean Van Delinder and David Knottnerus who – inside and outside
i
of class – not only helped me to gain a deeper appreciation of the socially-constructed
cosmos in which we all live or were willing to listen to my concerns but also guided me
with their professional advice through the different stages of denial. The dissertation
has also become much better thanks to the critical but supportive insights of my outside
committee member Tony Brown. It was his often “unorthodox” views (at least for a
newly initiated sociologist) that helped me to tighten many of my theoretical
arguments.
In addition to my committee members, I also feel deep gratitude toward Chris
Rabold who kept me “sane in an *often+ insane place”. While I feel a twinge of regret
for the many hours he had to put up with my incoherent rambles, the dissertation
wouldn’t be what it is today if it wasn’t for him. Many of the key insights in this
meandering treatise on authoritarianism are essentially joint productions – intellectual
crescendos that emerged in the most unlikely places (Panera at 3:35pm) and the most
ungodly hours (3:20am after having had one too many Bud Lights on his front porch). I
am also grateful to Joseph (Joe) Simpson for his useful comments on earlier drafts as
well as his willingness to discuss chapters 5, 6 and 7 of the dissertation. His critical
comments on the postulated structure-agency processes, in particular, were crucial in
improving the overall parsimony of the model. I also would like to thank my friends Rich
Ellefritz and Jan Meij for their comments on earlier drafts as well as their help with the
laborious task of proofreading. I am also indebted to Beth Caniglia who made me aware
of the cultural biases in my earlier frameworks and thus helped me to broaden my
conceptual horizons. Many thanks also go out to Jenny Canullas – who in an interesting
ii
twist of fate – not only challenged my own – at times – fairly dogmatic views on
authoritarianism but who also made me rethink what love and being there for someone
really means. Acknowledgements also go out to all those – too numerous to mention –
that indirectly have shaped my way of thinking and my way of looking at the world. If it
weren’t for all these fellow travelers, I probably would not be where and who I am
today ….
Finally, and most importantly, I am also eternally grateful to my family in
Germany – my mom, my belated father and my brother and his wife – for their
unwavering emotional and financial support for all my academic and private
enterprises….

I know dad you always wanted me to succeed, and I am really sorry you didn’t live to
see this …. but wherever the stream of life has taken you now … this dissertation is for
you.
I love you!
iii
Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... i
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ iv
List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... ix
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................ x
Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
The Challenge of Conceptual Pluralism........................................................................... 1
Toward a More Holistic Model of Authoritarian Phenomena ........................................ 4
The “New” Model: Tackling Complexity ....................................................................... 15
Conclusions: Roads Less Travelled ................................................................................ 22
Chapter 2: Early Conceptual Contours .............................................................................. 24
Philosophical Precursors: Kant, Hegel and Nietzsche ................................................... 24
Intellectual Antecedents in the Social Sciences ............................................................ 27
Erich Fromm: The Father of the Authoritarianism Concept? ....................................... 30
Conceptual Sketches: The Working Class in Weimar Germany ................................ 33
Theoretical Refinements: Studies on Authority and the Family ............................... 36
Intellectual Departures: Escape from Freedom ........................................................ 41
Maslow’s Contributions to the “Authoritarian Character” ........................................... 46
Snapshot I: The “New” Model in Its Historical Silhouettes ........................................... 48
iv
Chapter 3: TAP and Alternative Formulations .................................................................. 55
Mainstreaming a Concept: The Authoritarian Personality ........................................... 56
Attempts of Alternative Formulations .......................................................................... 62
Research Diversification: The Early Empirical Goldrush............................................ 64
Allport’s Prejudiced versus Tolerant Personality Typology ....................................... 69
Eysenck’s Toughmindedness-Tendermindedness Distinction .................................. 75
Erickson’s Totalitarian Personality ............................................................................ 78
Rokeach’s Work on Authoritarianism and Political Ideology .................................... 79
Tomkin’s Normative-Humanist Ideology Distinction ................................................ 87
Wilson’s Conservatism Approach .............................................................................. 95
Snapshot II: The “New” Model in Its Historical Silhouettes .......................................... 98
Chapter 4: Conceptual Renaissance ............................................................................... 106
RWA and SDO: Two Routes to Authoritarianism? ...................................................... 107
Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) ....................................................................... 107
Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) ...................................................................... 112
RWA versus SDO: Siamese Twins? .......................................................................... 115
Conceptual Syntheses and Alternative Formulations ................................................. 117
Duckitt’s Group Cohesion Model (GCM) ................................................................. 118
Duckitt’s Dual-Process Motivational Model (DPMM) ............................................ 121
v
Kreindler’s Dual-Group-Process Model (DGPM) ..................................................... 123
Feldman and Stenner’s Interactional Models (IM) ................................................. 128
Feldman’s Interactionist Model (FIM) ................................................................. 128
Stenner’s Interactionist Model (SIM)................................................................... 130
Stellmacher and Petzel’s Interactionist Group Authoritarian Model ..................... 134
Jost’s Work on Motivated Social Cognition and Ideological Systems ..................... 136
Oesterreich’s Authoritarian Reaction Model (ARM) ............................................... 144
Authoritarianism Research: The New Kids on the Block? ........................................... 146
Genetics, Personality Characteristics and Authoritarianism ................................... 147
Evolutionary Accounts of Authoritarianism ............................................................ 156
Snapshot III: The “New” Model in Its “Historical” Silhouettes ................................... 161
Chapter 5: Toward a New Model .................................................................................... 176
Part I: Creating a Universal Value-Belief Esperanto .................................................... 178
Postmodern Limbo: The Problem of Construct Infidelity ....................................... 179
Needs, Wants, Motives, Interests and Social Norms ........................................... 179
Personality Traits and Social Attitudes ................................................................ 185
Experiential Summaries: Values, Beliefs and Value-Belief Systems ........................ 195
The Nature of Values ........................................................................................... 196
Value Acquisition, Value Activation and Value Change ....................................... 198
vi
Value-Belief Systems ............................................................................................ 202
Select Value Taxonomies ................................................................................ 203
Personal and Collective Value-Belief Systems: An Attempted Re-Definition . 211
Tackling Complexity ................................................................................................. 215
An Appropriation of Weber’s Elective Affinities ..................................................... 215
Part II: Value-Belief Systems and Self Dynamics ........................................................ 218
Social Identity Theory (SIT): The Concept of Group Prototypicality ....................... 220
Identity Theory (IT): The Conceptual Beauty of Identity Standards ....................... 224
Shadows in the Cave:............................................................................................... 228
Where Prototypicality Meets Identity Standards ................................................... 228
Self Dynamics, Identity Standards and Value-Belief Systems ................................. 234
Chapter 6: Models, Scenarios and “New” Horizons ....................................................... 242
The “Authoritarian Constellation”: Elective Affinities, Self Dynamics and Interactional
Tête-à-Têtes ................................................................................................................ 244
Main Characteristics of the Authoritarian Phenomenon ........................................ 244
Perambulations in an Alternate (Conceptual) Universe ......................................... 249
Predicaments of the “Insecure” Self ....................................................................... 250
Scenariocopia I: Of Camels and Lions .................................................................. 250
Predicaments of the “Secure” Self .......................................................................... 257
vii
Scenariocopia II: Tantrums of the Innocent Child ............................................... 258
A Few Tentative Insights from the “New” Holistic Model ...................................... 265
The Authoritarian Trinity ..................................................................................... 267
Authoritarian Reactions and the Issue of Salience .............................................. 269
Authoritarian Reactions, Threat and Experiential Monocultures ....................... 272
Summary Blues ............................................................................................................ 274
Chapter 7: Of Ends and New Beginnings ........................................................................ 280
The Authoritarian Constellation: A Few Final Comments ........................................... 282
Where to go from here …. ........................................................................................... 289
Bibliography .................................................................................................................... 295
viii