#the authoritarian personality

[communistkenobi]

I constantly think about that Adorno quote where he says that a characteristic of reactionaries is that they always behave as if they are speaking truth to power, that they are saying the uncomfortable thing that everyone secretly believes but are too afraid to admit, and they are at all times only repeating what is already widely accepted as true in society. And I’m reminded of this anytime someone smugly says violence isn’t the answer or radicals are all the same or this is what jorjorwell warned us about, repeating beliefs so hegemonic that not only do they not require evidence to be believed, they are treated as sensible wise things to say

[deadpresidents]

This is a real message sent out on social media by Donald Trump and retweeted by the White House, amplifying the fact that it is an official statement from the President of the United States --- leader of the "free world".

Notorious dictators with insane personality cults like Turkmenbashi or Emperor Bokassa would see this and say, "Declaring yourself above the law is textbook authoritarianism, but the constipated glare in the portrait is a bit over-the-top."

I don't know about you guys, but it seems like allowing Trump to run out the clock and just walk away unscathed after being charged with 91 felonies might have given him the idea he's untouchable. Fortunately Congress is a co-equal branch of government and will strongly defend the powers granted to it by the Constitution in order to preserve the sacred separation of powers carefully constructed by the Founders, right? Hopefully there isn't some sort of Supreme Court decision that gives him broad immunity against prosecution for crimes he might commit as President.

[weekdaysend]

My SentOpLita 1AM relationship chart I did not think I'd be psycho-analyzing this dynamic as much as I thought I would..

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Background: During adolescence, bullying often has a sexual content. Involvement in bullying as a bully, victim or both has been associated with a range of negative health outcomes. Transgender youth appear to face elevated rates of bullying in comparison to their mainstream peers. However, the involvement of transgender youth as perpetrators of bullying remains unclear in the recent literature. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare involvement in bullying between transgender and mainstream youth and among middle and late adolescents in a general population sample. Methods: Our study included 139,829 students in total, divided between a comprehensive school and an upper secondary education sample. Associations between gender identity and involvement in bullying were first studied using cross-tabulations with chi-square statistics. Logistic regression was used to study multivariate associations. Gender identity was used as the independent variable, with cisgender as the reference category. Subjection to and perpetration of bullying were entered each in turn as the dependent variable. Demographic factors, family characteristics, internalizing symptoms, externalizing behaviors, and involvement in bullying in the other role were added as confounding factors. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) are given. The limit for statistical significance was set at p < 0.001. Results: Both experiences of being bullied and perpetrating bullying were more commonly reported by transgender youth than by cisgender youth. Among transgender youth, all involvement in bullying was more commonly reported by non-binary youth than those identifying with the opposite sex. Logistic regression revealed that non-binary identity was most strongly associated with involvement in bullying, followed by opposite sex identity and cisgender identity. Transgender identities were also more strongly associated with perpetration of bullying than subjection to bullying.

--

Secondly, we found that transgender identity was generally associated with perpetrating bullying and that the association was stronger than that of transgender identity and being bullied. To the best of our knowledge, past research has not examined perpetration of bullying among gender minority youth, thus rendering comparisons to prior research impossible. In a study by Dank et al. (2014), however, it was reported that the few transgender young people in their study were the ones most likely to perpetrate dating violence among their sample.

--

Thirdly, non-binary identity was more strongly associated with involvement in bullying than opposite sex identity. Past research has found elevated rates of being subjected to bullying among youth (Lowry et al., 2020; van Beusekom et al., 2020) and transgender youth (Gower et al., 2018) who perceive themselves as more gender non-conforming (i.e., masculine females or feminine males) than youth with no such perception. Non-binary identifying youth particularly may display gender expression that does not conform to either masculine or feminine roles, and this may make them vulnerable to being bullied either due to simply being different from the mainstream, or as a result of heterosexist control. We found, however, that not only being bullied but also engaging in bullying was even more common among non-binary (perception of gender conforms to both or neither sex or it varies) than among opposite sex identifying youth.

==

"Non-binary" is just a new way to bully other people.

Trying to make people refer to you in stupid, language defying ways, like "schglie/schglem," at the threat of being called a bigot, when you're a completely average man or woman, is the modern day equivalent of making the kids in the playground bow and call you "the god of the jungle gym" at the threat of being beaten up, when you can't actually do that flip from hanging by your knees into a standing position.

When, unlike the playground, society has given you the power to actually carry out that threat, you're not "marginalized," you're the ruling class. (What's that "power plus" arithmetic again?)

Whenever you enter the room, people tense up. And you love it. It's the whole point. Gay and transsexual people just want to blend in, but "nonbinary" is about the opposite. Everybody pays attention to you and you steal the oxygen out of the room. You say it's about "being kind," but you and everyone else knows what you are, which means it's really about being in control, but from a false position of vulnerability.

So it's no wonder it attracts narcissists and bullies. Especially when it's an effort-free way of being celebrated for a month - and on and off the rest of the year for an endless parade of "awareness" days - for being completely unremarkable and average.

Not being a tired stereotype is not an achievement, least of all one that needs to be celebrated.

[tilbageidanmark]

2024

[sixty-silver-wishes]

everyone talking about how robert eggers should do a caligari adaptation after he did nosferatu and like. I liked his nosferatu a lot. but idk if I would trust him with caligari. maybe I would, but I would be watching very carefully.

[piermanwalter]

Big props to Fromsoft for realising that if the most authoritarian character in Elden Ring was an epic badass who fights for their beliefs, there would be legions of the most annoying people possible crowing about how based they are, so instead they made Goldmask an ascetic pacifist with no combat abilities who died from doing too much math and upon resurrection as a candidate for the next shaper of reality, does nothing except stand naked and silent, then did so much math he died again.

[korrasera]

Dehumanizing terrible people doesn't make the world a better place, it just teaches you how to be a terrible person yourself.

It's authoritarianism practice.

[schnaf]

26 days until gunil's 26nd birthday

day 26 aka THE COUNTDOWN IS OVER - gunil's past birthday brrrr ppoppos

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Colin Wright

Published: Dec 23, 2024

A new study from the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) has revealed an alarming surge in anti-civil activity online following the assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. The NCRI study, titled “Killing with Applause: Emergent Permission Structures for Murder in the Digital Age,” highlights the profound societal implications of this event, showcasing the disturbing normalization of violence against corporate figures and the role of social media in amplifying such narratives.

While the specifics of Thompson’s murder are shocking, the NCRI warns that the broader cultural shift it appears to be facilitating may be even more worrisome. The data reveals an evolving “permission structure” online—a system in which social media platforms amplify narratives, and susceptible individuals provide justification—resulting in the normalization of violence on a scale previously confined to small extremist communities.

The murder, which occurred outside a Manhattan hotel during an investors’ conference, has sparked a wave of online glorification, memes, and merchandise celebrating the shooter, Luigi Mangione. The NCRI’s findings expose an unsettling trend: mainstream social media platforms are becoming breeding grounds for rhetoric that not only justifies violence but also facilitates its transition from the digital realm to the real world.

Public Opinion Reflects Shifting Norms

The NCRI’s research reveals a major societal shift, highlighting how public opinion has veered dangerously toward accepting violence as a legitimate response to perceived systemic injustices. Nearly half of Americans surveyed (44 percent) believe that Thompson’s murder was at least somewhat justified, reflecting a growing openness to violent means of addressing grievances. This finding is particularly alarming as it indicates that support for such extreme measures is no longer confined to isolated groups but is increasingly mainstream.

The data shows that social media plays a critical role in shaping these attitudes. Among heavy social media users—those who spend more than 5.4 hours per day on these platforms—the justification rate surges to 64 percent, starkly contrasting with just 23 percent among low-use individuals (0-1.3 hours per day).

Even more concerning is the generational divide: a staggering 78.8 percent of respondents aged 18-27 expressed at least partial justification for the murder, signaling a profound shift among younger demographics toward endorsing “targeted violence.”

The younger generation’s overwhelming approval for violent actions suggests a troubling cultural normalization of aggression as a tool for addressing grievances.

Platforms of Concern: Bluesky and Beyond

One of the most striking revelations in the NCRI study is the role of mainstream platforms like Bluesky in fostering permissive attitudes toward violence. Bluesky, widely lauded by political progressives as a kinder and friendlier alternative to X/Twitter, now exhibits the highest justification rates for the UHC CEO’s murder (78 percent), surpassing even extremist platforms like Gab and 4chan.

Bluesky’s user base skews younger and more tech-savvy, demographics that the NCRI study identifies as particularly susceptible to violent rhetoric. The combination of algorithmic amplification of extreme views and a vulnerable audience creates an environment ripe for the proliferation of violent narratives. This grim reality was recently illustrated when Bluesky users called for the murder of journalist Jesse Singal, en masse, due to his fact-based reporting on pediatric “gender medicine.” Users even posted what they believed to be his address and photos of his apartment door online.

Across social media platforms, including X, Reddit, and TikTok, there has been an alarming increase in content justifying violence. Viral hashtags like #EatTheRich and “Free Luigi” dominate many online discussions, and moderation efforts often lag behind the pace of content creation and dissemination, allowing violent rhetoric to flourish.

From Memes to Real-World Impacts

The transition of violent rhetoric from online spaces to real-world actions is perhaps one of the most troubling revelations of the NCRI study. Viral memes, fancam edits, and merchandise such as “Free Luigi” t-shirts have commodified his image. Events like the “UHC Shooter Lookalike Contest,” held in Washington Square Park, reveals how online rhetoric is influencing real-world behaviors. Participants, many of whom were dressed to mimic Mangione, gathered to celebrate and parody the assassination, demonstrating an alarming erosion of societal norms.

On social media, fancam edits and viral videos glorify Mangione’s actions, framing him as an anti-establishment icon. According to the report:

These videos frequently feature romantic or hyperbolic captions, highlight niche cultural affinities, or focus on his physical appearance, further amplifying his image and fueling narratives that glamorize his actions. This glorification fuels permission structures that could inspire others to perceive violence as a legitimate form of activism.

The hashtag #EatTheRich has surged by over 500 percent week-over-week, accompanying calls for violence against corporate figures and circulating “CEO Wanted” posters and executive “hit lists.” These posters, which feature “mocked-up mugshots of healthcare executives,” promote vigilante justice and represent “a deliberate attempt to provoke fear and destabilize corporate leadership.”

According to the NCRI report, “The murder of Brian Thompson appears to have catalyzed a dangerous feedback loop, where glorification, humor, conspiracy, and targeted harassment create an environment ripe for further violence.”

This blending of online rhetoric and offline action reflects what the NCRI describes as an “emergent permission structure,” which they describe as “a framework that justifies previously unacceptable beliefs or actions, with a clear division of labor: Social media platforms provide the amplification, while psychologically susceptible individuals provide the justification…” Taken in concert, these elements form a system that normalizes and even glamorizes acts of violence.

The Lionization of Luigi Mangione

Luigi Mangione’s transformation from an obscure figure to a symbol of anti-establishment resistance has been meteoric. Within days of his arrest, his social media following exploded from 5,000 to over 400,000. The slogan “Free Luigi” was posted 47,000 times in 48 hours, generating nearly 800,000 engagements across X and Reddit.

The commodification of Mangione’s image extends beyond social media. T-shirts, mugs, and other merchandise featuring his likeness are being sold on e-commerce platforms, trivializing his actions while profiting from the controversy. New cryptocurrency “memecoins” such as $LUIGI have also emerged, turning a deadly act into a speculative financial opportunity.

Psychological Drivers

The NCRI study identifies three key predictors of support for the murder: authoritarian tendencies, heavy social media use, and diminished personal agency. These factors interact in a synergistic way, with social media amplifying authoritarian predispositions and fostering the normalization of violence.

The combination of authoritarianism, an external locus of control, and social media’s amplifying effects appears to be a perfect storm for radicalization. These factors interact in a way that makes violence seem rational and even heroic to those who might otherwise feel marginalized or voiceless.

The interaction between these psychological drivers is particularly pronounced among younger demographics, who are both heavy social media users and more likely to experience anxiety or disillusionment with traditional systems. The NCRI study reveals that among users aged 18-27, those with high authoritarian tendencies and heavy social media use were the most likely to justify violence.

A Call to Action

The NCRI study concludes with a warning:

As digital platforms become arenas for ideological conflict, the consequences extend beyond individual incidents of violence to threaten broader public safety and societal cohesion. This transformation underscores the urgent need for strategies that address the root causes of digital radicalization and mitigate its impacts.

The challenges we face require a comprehensive and collaborative response. No single entity can address the complexities of digital radicalization alone. Policymakers, educators, platforms, and community leaders must work in unison to restore the moral boundaries against violent extremism.

The study concludes:

The spread and scope of justification for murder have significantly eroded what was once the monopoly of fringe communities in supporting violence and glorifying shooters online. This shift underscores the urgency of initiatives aimed at reinforcing the bonds of civic trust and restoring civility. Such efforts are essential not only in countering the tide of extremism but also in fostering a resilient society where dialogue and mutual respect prevail.

==

EDIT: Wow, this managed to attract the murderous psychopaths. I hope you'll be just as understanding when someone kills someone you care about and justifies it in the name of nebulous "systemic" somethingisms.

If there was ever any doubt about Colin's premise, it has been proven by the insanity of those cheering it on in the reblogs.

The death penalty is unfair, unjust, and evil, unless you walk up to a rich guy you don’t like on the sidewalk and shoot him in the back. The only form of the death penalty that’s okay is the form that doesn’t include a judge, jury, or court, and where the executed person has not been charged with, convicted, or even accused of any specific crime.

You don't get to call it "justice" when it's not just bypasses but is in direct violation of the law.

"Arbitrarily killing people I don't like is good akshully," is not the moral high-ground you think it is.

How many times do you think you would have been shot dead if it became acceptable for someone to simply arbitrarily execute you because they don't like you, what you do for a living, what you do with your free time, what you eat, what you stand for, or any other random disapproval?

🤔

[olberic]

triangle strategy freedom path 🤝 tactics ogre chaotic path : better stories than the “ideal” path that the game pushes

[chronicsymptomsyndrome]

I love earnestly and unironically calling conservative men bitches. I’m obsessed. Looking a wealthy white cishet christian man probably named John or Dave right in the face and saying “you’re being kinda bitchy, are your hormones acting up maybe?” really fucking makes my day

[hurremsultanns]

I have a headache and nausea and class in an hour and a half. I don't have time for my Dad to expect me to both-sides the political parties that I dislike.

[thumbdrivethoughts]

No, it's not Democrats

I find it hard to sympathize with any take that blames Democrats for being “too this” or “too that” to win the election, when Trump and Republicans behave like the second coming of the Third Reich and still win.

The problem is not anything Democrats are doing.

The problem is a politically uneducated electorate that is easily fooled and brainwashed by right-wing lies and propaganda. They can't spot demogogues. They can't spot narcissists. They don't understand why an authoritarian personality is a bad thing. That’s why many Americans run their own families like dictatorships rather than democracies. And when someone like Trump comes along it’s personally flattering because they see their narcissistic, authoritarian selves in him. They don’t know how to run their own families democratically and so they vote for someone like themselves who doesn't know how to run a country democratically either.

If you doubt whether horrible leaders can be elected to power by a majority of dumb and misled voters, we have plenty of examples from history, including Hitler and Mussolini.

Such low information, low interest voters are flat-out non introspective and stubbornly and habitually dumb and the election of Donald Trump is their fault and their fault alone. Full stop.

That’s where the blame for Trump’s election lies. Not the fact that Democrats want marginalized people to be included in society. Not even the fact that progressives refrain from voting because they want a morally pure candidate. If the typical American voter paid enough attention to politics and was educated enough, their educated votes against Trump would have made up for the lost votes of progressives that sat the election out.

The blame lies squarely and fully with an immensely dumb American voting block that is ignorant of basic human psychology, personality disorders and authoritarian political history. They are straight-up some of the dumbest motherfuckers I've ever seen.

[mindshelter]

i've really had xina and miguel's dynamic under a microscope lately; right now my object of scrutiny is xina's use of "kevorkian" in issue #26. it's a quick, tongue-in-cheek comment about miguel's suicidality; kevorkian, at the time of publication, was routinely making headlines for his stance taken and assistance in physician-assisted suicides.

we know early on that xina is, as miguel describes, a "twencen freak," which manifests the most prominently via a love for old pop culture, but it doesn't stop there. she notably talks about alchemax's habit of erasing history, has a lifelike version of a old political figure in her home, and, in this case, brings up a name that's big in bioethics debates.

importantly, she says it very offhandedly, implying that she and miguel have had these discussions before—and i doubt the state is particularly eager to bring up any talk of ethics to their scientists-in-training.

my take on miguel sinking deeper into alchemax's agenda is that while he really doesn't care for the institution itself, he's mistakenly convinced himself that he's chosen the most politically neutral option possible. science is anything but apolitical; it is deeply, irretrievably steeped in concerns about morality. at the time miguel and xina were drifting apart, this wasn't something he wanted to mull over. (after all, once he realizes he's an accessory to state-sanctioned oppression, he wants nothing more than his life to end.)

xina is smart, yes—and i think, knowledgeable, specifically, in ways that directly challenged the delicate mental gymnasium that miguel had started to build for himself. it's not just that xina being more intelligent became a problem. she was also probably (and rightfully) challenging the value of his work, the completeness of his knowledge, and becoming a huge source of cognitive dissonance.

he's the geneticist, but xina, who specializes in an entirely different field, was engaging him in talks about the ethical implications of the work he was doing. trying to get him to think for himself, appealing to the good person she sincerely believes exists in this strange new version of her friend.