Young people more right-wing and authoritarian than previous generations - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The non-democratic state: Platonism, Fascism, Theocracy, Monarchy etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14839917
Young people are now more right-wing and authoritarian in their views than previous generations

However:
“They’re much less concerned about religious beliefs or whether you’re gay, lesbian or straight, which people were previously more concerned about. They are much more accepting of diversity, but they are also much more accepting of economic inequality.”


What do you think? A good trend or a bad trend?
#14839947
It is a trend. I would call it normal rather than good or bad. When things go too far one way, people will then want them to go back the other way. Both sides screw over the middle class and they futilely switch back and forth looking for fairness where there is none.
#14840551
I'd be careful with the terminology of PolSci studies. In this study they call Thatcher an authoritarian populist. The questions they asked to determine right-wing and authoritarian tendencies are:
What do you think about the income gap between the rich and the poor in the UK today? (1=About Right, Too Small; 0=Too Large)
Government should redistribute from the better off to the less well off. (1=Disagree, Strongly Disagree; 0=Neither, Agree, Strongly Agree)
Government should spend more money on the poor even if it leads to higher taxes. (1=Disagree, Strongly Disagree; 0=Neither, Agree, Strongly Agree).
Opinions differ about the level of benefits for the unemployed. Which of these best reflects your opinion? (1=Benefits are too high and discourage people from finding jobs; 0=Other response categories i.e. Benefits are too low and cause hardship, Neither, Both cause hardship, Some people benefit, Some people suffer, About right, Other)
The unemployed could find a job if they wanted to. (1=Agree, Strongly Agree; 0=Neither, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)
People should learn to stand on their own feet. (1=Agree, Strongly Agree; 0=Neither, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

The death penalty is appropriate for some crimes. (1=Agree, Strongly Agree; 0=Neither, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)
People who break the law should be given stiffer sentences. (1=Agree, Strongly Agree; 0=Neither, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)
Schools should teach children to obey authority. (1=Agree, Strongly Agree; 0=Neither, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

The last three seem to be the variables that make one authoritarian.

I'm mentioning this because you put your OP in this subforum and the study has nothing to do with authoritarian government.
#14841963
Atlantis wrote:It's the counter revolution. They are trying to revers the 68 cultural revolution, yet they have no idea what it was like before.

They know that 68rs are full of fetid shit. I don't think they are going back to the 50s but rather they leaving the duped 68ers and their goofy beliefs behind.
#14841982
They are much more accepting of diversity, but they are also much more accepting of economic inequality.


I think this is just typically British. The class divide is too obvious and there is nothing they can do about it. "Right-wing and authoritarian" means that young British people are pro-monarchy. £17,604 is equivalent to $23,251.



Fees at Thomas's Battersea cost £17,604 a year and increase in year 3.

If George stays at the selective establishment throughout, until the end of Year 8 when he turns 13, the total cost will be £172,116.

The school has 560 boys and girls aged from four to 13, with around 20 in each class.

The Good Schools Guide described Thomas's Battersea as "big, busy [and] slightly chaotic school" popular among "cosmopolitan parents".

http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/850 ... s-revealed
#14841991
They are not more authoritarian. It is social and economic liberalism. In other words it is classical liberalism, the antithesis of authoritarianism. They are just becoming more liberal, in the classical sense. It's hedonism, individualism and every man for himself. None of this surprises me. The young people I encounter on a day to day basis are all ultra-liberal. It is possible to embrace this way of thinking only in an absence of culture. People now days do not need community because they can live in virtual reality with social media, video sharing websites and online entertainment. The natural bonds of kinship and connection to a national community or greater ideal are non-existent. Therefore only the individual remains.

I believe that the average person in most English speaking countries lives as a sort of atomised invidual. They do not have a nation, an ethnicity or a religion. They simply live as individuals. Their main interest is their career development and the accumulation of wealth. Free time is spent watching movies online, playing games or looking for the next date on an online dating website. Friendships are very superfical and are based on fleeting associations through work or specific contexts. It is a most vapid and depressing existence. An existential nightmare for any thinking person.

The social and economic political values outlined in the article are just the expression of this way of life and mentality. The young people do not want socialist policies because they do not want to have to pay for anyone else but themselves. And they are socially liberal because they couldn't care less about what other people do. It's really social darwinism and classical liberalism taken to it's highest conclusion.
#15041408
Haven't read the article yet, but it would make perfect sense. I've met lots of right-wing nationalistic types that are my age. I also have met lots of full-blown communists that are my age. People on the left are moving further to the left, and people on the right are moving further to the right. This is not going to change anytime soon, because people are desperately looking for meaning and identity in an increasingly globalized and soulless world.

Most people are still liberal though, or a type of conservative that is okay with butt sex.
Last edited by Code Rood on 12 Oct 2019 11:53, edited 1 time in total.
#15041410
Political Interest wrote:They are not more authoritarian. It is social and economic liberalism. In other words it is classical liberalism, the antithesis of authoritarianism. They are just becoming more liberal, in the classical sense. It's hedonism, individualism and every man for himself. None of this surprises me. The young people I encounter on a day to day basis are all ultra-liberal. It is possible to embrace this way of thinking only in an absence of culture. People now days do not need community because they can live in virtual reality with social media, video sharing websites and online entertainment. The natural bonds of kinship and connection to a national community or greater ideal are non-existent. Therefore only the individual remains.

I believe that the average person in most English speaking countries lives as a sort of atomised invidual. They do not have a nation, an ethnicity or a religion. They simply live as individuals. Their main interest is their career development and the accumulation of wealth. Free time is spent watching movies online, playing games or looking for the next date on an online dating website. Friendships are very superfical and are based on fleeting associations through work or specific contexts. It is a most vapid and depressing existence. An existential nightmare for any thinking person.

The social and economic political values outlined in the article are just the expression of this way of life and mentality. The young people do not want socialist policies because they do not want to have to pay for anyone else but themselves. And they are socially liberal because they couldn't care less about what other people do. It's really social darwinism and classical liberalism taken to it's highest conclusion.


Most (young) people are content with living meaningless lives, I'm sad to say. They have successfully been domesticated by people that are giving them Marvel, porn, videogames and so on. Their ''identity'' pretty much consists of collecting Star Wars figures and following their favourite football club. They fill up the void in their lives with stupid crap, as their country is being destroyed and integrated into the global order.
#15072697
I would personally attribute this to some considerible extent to the pop cultural influence of the Spice Girls . https://www.independent.co.uk/news/spice-girls-vote-thatcher-the-new-leader-of-their-band-1314278.html , https://graziadaily.co.uk/life/real-life/remember-spice-girls-massive-tories/ I view it all to be characteristic of bourgeois decadence , and concur with those such as Paul Lensch , and Johann Plenge , in their critique of British society . Aside from some , such as Blue Labour , the British do not seem to understand the value of community , and commonweal .
#15072699
Recently, I chatted with a friend who attributed this actually to people's environments in which they are raised. I found the argument to be compelling...

People who grow up without religious beliefs will not value the things that religious people value. People who grow up without a father or a distant father might look to the state as a sort of surrogate father.

We might be seeing a combination of soft social & religious values combined with people who look to the state as a paternal authority, and, moreover, just conceive of things like liberty differently than previous generations.
#15074199
Verv wrote:People who grow up without religious beliefs will not value the things that religious people value. People who grow up without a father or a distant father might look to the state as a sort of surrogate father.


I'd think it would be more along the lines of "People who grow up without religious beliefs will not value religious things".

I know religious people who value good friends. I'm not religious, and I value good friends, too.
#15074202
Verv wrote:
Recently, I chatted with a friend who attributed this actually to people's environments in which they are raised.



This, but not quite the way you meant it.

I've seen research that points to the style of parenting. Were they more authoritarian or more nuturing.

Here on the other side of the pond the kids are to the Left of their parents. But then, America was dragged so far to the Right we left sanity a long time ago.
#15074277
BigSteve-3 wrote:I'd think it would be more along the lines of "People who grow up without religious beliefs will not value religious things".

I know religious people who value good friends. I'm not religious, and I value good friends, too.


OK, I see your point, but I phrased it this way because I think that there are many things which concern people of a particular world view that do not generally concern atheists.

For instance, anti-pronography is generally a religious thing, and often doesn't bother religionless people.

late wrote:
This, but not quite the way you meant it.

I've seen research that points to the style of parenting. Were they more authoritarian or more nuturing.

Here on the other side of the pond the kids are to the Left of their parents. But then, America was dragged so far to the Right we left sanity a long time ago.


Right, and I think whether or not you have a father or mother will have a massive influence on your life, just like the particular parenting style that you received.

What is kind of funny to imagine is that sometimes these things really go the opposite ways. I once spoke to a psychology degree holder who said that often times you can see authoritarians that actually come from very liberal and permissive homes, and that they are actually looking for more strict codification in their lives that they did not get from their parents.

I think it is too complex to come up with really big universals that you can rely on when looking at individuals, but I think that it certainly holds water when we are talking about parenting trends as a whole.
#15074431
Verv wrote:
What is kind of funny to imagine is that sometimes these things really go the opposite ways. I once spoke to a psychology degree holder who said that often times you can see authoritarians that actually come from very liberal and permissive homes, and that they are actually looking for more strict codification in their lives that they did not get from their parents.



Kind of a cultural tide that shifts from generation to generation.

After Prohibition ended, the country went on what seemed like a permanent drunken binge. Their kids drank a lot less, having seen what booze could do to a family.
#15076135
I've commented about this paradox in the past. In countries with greater levels of poverty, the population is less concerned about the poor. It's easier psychologically to just shut them out than to think about it. It's only a wealthier society with low levels of poverty that has the luxury of being able to afford to worry about inequality.
#15103607
I see that political correctness is a must even in daily life conversations between commoners. Especially younger people, although they think they are more Liberal than ever, the truth is that they are so fanatical with political correctness that they end up being more fascist and authoritarian than true authoritarians.
I mean dude, I can't even make a joke with gays and someone (who very possibly hasn't even met a gay in their life) will act offended, in behalf of the gays! I mean DUDE! I got gay friends and they take matters much lighter than non gays when it comes to jokes or just even opinions.

They claim they are pro Democratic while at the same time, anyone who hasn't the same opinion as them as far as it goes for the "environment", "democracy" and "pro animal" is getting mocked and called racist, fascist, boomer(lol) , anti environmentalist and homophobic.
That's not either freedom of speech neither democracy. That's Fascism painted in white

I honestly don't care either way, if I had to vote[…]

Remember when the CCP discovered there were poison[…]

Election 2020

Maybe it would not be so bad a thing (and worth[…]

Joe Biden

He could very well the logopenic variant of Alzhe[…]