This individualistic orientation, along with their respect for hierarchy, makes them into natural supporters of the current power structure, whatever their socioeconomic standing. They think that success is a matter of individual effort, overlooking the social support that they and everyone else has had in order to advance in life. They tend not to see groups and social classes. Rightists tend to be very individually oriented. Rightists become angry with rule breaking, not with oppressive authority. The best people, those who follow rules and control emotions, should be in charge. They also favor hierarchy, at least in part because they want to keep impulses under control through rules. They therefore want emotions under control. In addition, Rightists are often uncomfortable about emotions and tend to deny their feelings. Rules are part of the universe, or ordained by God. They see rules as external to themselves, and even to people in general. Based on his research, Tomkins (1964) concluded that those on the Right end of this continuum first and foremost tended to be rule-oriented. In the 1960s, a psychologist interested in philosophy and ideology, Silvan Tomkins, wrote an essay in which he argued there is a Left-Right dimension in every area of waking thought, from beliefs about mathematics to beliefs about child-rearing practices. The left-right dimension in general thinking But how do Leftists, who are egalitarian in their values, often end up in very hierarchal organizations? It's at this point that we have to look to social psychology and sociology for answers. That fact seems fairly straightforward and understandable for the Rightists because they believe in hierarchy, as will be shown. Both Leftists and Rightists end up working in various hierarchical, top-down organizations. My next step is to suggest that this shared moral fervor leads political Leftists and Rightists to have similar condescending attitudes towards their more moderate left-oriented or right-oriented compatriots, those who are merely "liberal" or only moderately "conservative." Then I show how the left-right dimension manifests itself in personality, and that political preferences do relate to this dimension.Īfter showing the considerable difference between the political Left and Right in personality and social attitudes, I suggest that they nonetheless share certain essential similarities that are relatively rare in the general population, especially a high degree of moral fervor and moral anger, even while they differ completely on what they are fervent and angry about. Then I describe how this dimension has manifested itself in language, and how it became part of politics during the French Revolution. I begin by discussing general findings on the cross-cultural differences in the thinking and attitudes of Leftists and Rightists on many different aspects of life. It's a dimension that precedes and transcends politics, but may well explain some of the puzzles about the political Left and Right. The aim of this essay is to provide a big-picture canvas of the wider meanings of the Left-Right dimension in human thinking and personality. The Left and the Right in Thinking, Personality, and Politics by G.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |