Op-Ed: Understanding the Authoritarian Personality is Key to Comprehending the Appeal of Trump
A psychological management consultant explains one theory that may help explain why voters of a democratic country supported a would-be autocrat for president
By Natasha Todorovic
In autumn 2008, Russia was still open, and freer than it would become within a few years.
My late husband and I were in Moscow at the invitation of a group of businesspeople and psychologists to deliver our personal development and leadership seminars, which we had presented around the world.
There were about 70 people in the hotel ballroom, mostly psychologists and business leaders, and we had just delivered personal data from our “social attitudes” assessment, when commotion suddenly consumed the room.
People yelled and slammed their headsets down on tables, as we glanced at each other confused about what was happening. In a moment, it became clear: this group, most of whose members considered themselves supporters of liberal democracy, had scored very high on the bright red scale, displayed on training screens to measure “authoritarianism.”
“Authoritarianism” was originally defined and studied by the philosopher Theodor W. Adorno and his sociologist and psychologist colleagues, who were trying to understand and explain the fascist personality displayed among the population in Hitler’s Germany.
Russia in the early 21st Century seemed far away from the time and place. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Russians had seen many, if inconstant, signs of a different and exciting society. So for the participants in our seminar, being confronted by data suggesting their authoritarian tendencies was disturbing.
These people understood authoritarianism. While Vladimir Putin was still in the process of consolidating his dictatorial power at that time, many lived under the old Soviet Union. Similarly, groups among the Dutch, Germans, Swiss, Austrians, other Europeans, Australians shook their heads once they understood the underlying concepts of authoritarianism.
The human proclivity towards and away from authoritarianism ebbs and flows over a lifetime both within and around us. While the U.S. is neither Russia nor 1940’s Germany, neither are we immune to authoritarianism.
Fear and chaos increase authoritarianism. Safety, security and good times reduce it. We deny it at our peril. It is naïve to do so, particularly as Donald Trump moves swiftly to upend and damage the political, economic, social and civil society institutions that had buttressed the U.S. as a democracy for 250 years.
Values are more easily lost than won.
Dissecting the authoritarian personality. Understanding the pillars of the “authoritarian personality” provides a lens for beginning to understand that “it can happen here.”
In our work, the data revealed five pillars of this ‘personality’ which can relate to leaders and followers alike.
Authoritarian aggression. This pillar sanctions violence with harsh treatment of individuals perceived as different or outside accepted norms. We're seeing this in our country today amid the summary deportations of alleged “gang members” to a brutal prison in El Salvador. We saw it manifest in Moscow, when we were last there, as a crackdown by police on a gay pride protest. A visiting gay member of parliament from the Netherlands was beaten. Because the victims were unacceptable ‘others,’ the violence was sanctioned by those in charge; now think of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noam’s publicity stunt posing before alleged ‘gang members’ in a cell at that high-security El Salvador prison, imprisoned with lack of any due process.
Authoritarian submission. People with this personality trait zealously follow their leader's policies, regardless of their ethics or consequences. For them, leaders are above the law. Followers ennoble themselves as tools for leadership goals, whether stated explicitly or implied. This includes looking the other way or remaining silent when rules are broken while punishing wrongdoers. They sacrifice their higher principles to protect a 'way of life' at the expense of the law. An extremely dangerous tool in the hands of selfish, punitive, and callous leaders willing to use their people for personal gain. Think: Jan. 6 rioters.
Conventionalism. Common social standards have a normative effect. People are compelled to fit in by willingly adapting to their group’s norms. Whether attire, behavior, appearances, humans sort for ‘who/what belongs’ and ‘who/what does not belong’. Anyone who is unconventional becomes othered, unworthy of social niceties. Think of Rumeysa Ozturk, the 30-year-old Turkish Tufts student pulled off the street by officials with their faces covered, no uniforms, and unmarked cars. Her beliefs defy ‘convention’. These social structures encourage idealization of authority and are punitive of any criticisms of their cherished authority. It results in the unraveling of democratic principles.
Self-righteousness. This appears as a kind of moral superiority classic in one group’s beliefs and way of life are viewed as superior to others, which are condemned. A close-knit social circle keeps the same ideas self-reinforcing, as everyone in the circle believes the same things. It casts alternative judgment of others as deficient. It encourages activities like the elimination questionable reading material and access to contradictory information. Can we say, 'book banning'?
Dangerous world view. Sometimes the most corrosive pillar, the “dangerous world view” They see ‘outsiders’ as a corrupting influence. The unconventional are suspicious. Disagreement translates into ‘rot’ and ‘cancer’ or ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’. Difference equates to danger. Fear, stress, and threat increase authoritarianism as people look for a strong leader to save them.
Because followers can be so adoring, unquestioning, and complicit, the authoritarian dynamic becomes an aphrodisiac for unscrupulous and manipulative leaders, particularly narcissists and sociopaths. Followers fuel their leader as much as leaders embolden their followers. Dissent is quickly crushed.
The rest of the story in Russia. Amid the upset triggered by our data at the seminar in 2008, e psychologists in the group immediately understood the social repercussions, and how it related to themselves and their countrymen.
“Please leaders, tell us what to do to become less authoritarian,” some asked.
As I shared a list of potential activities the room grew silent.
“Question and criticize your leaders.”
“Expose yourselves to gays and radicals, and those who think and live differently, and be able to argue their position as well as they can.”
“Even if you don’t like it, explore unconventional material that rubs you the wrong way, and consider how others might find it true.”
“Question your norms and get curious about other ways of thinking and living.”
The translator changed our words. Our message, while acceptable in the U.S., Australia, and Europe, was far too threatening for him.
Though many participants weren't fluent in English, they recognized a sanitized translation of what we had said, and so debriefed our training at each table without the translator.
The next day str
ange men in black trench coats appeared outside the door of our training site. That was the last time we were invited to work in Moscow. The brief window of freedom closed shortly after.
Santa Barbara business consultant Natasha Todorovic coaches and trains clients worldwide on use of the Spiral Dynamics tools and approaches based on the development theory of Dr. Clare W. Graves. She is active in community affairs on the Eastside.
Image: Authoritarians around the world (Photo illustration by Foreign Policy).
So interesting….thank you.