Eight Clusters of Radical (Authoritarian) Statism

Here is a list of these clusters before we examine them in detail:

1. Supports delegating coercive and directive functions in society to men.

2. Nationalism, with purity of blood (race) and isolationism also among its values.

3. Clan-tribal values. Clan, tribe, and nation above the individual and above all else.

4. Apologetics of the vertical chain of subordination, the state above all else.

5. Cruelty, violence, reliance on punishments in managing people.

6. Approval of usurpation of power and of usurpers.

7. Questions closely correlated with approval of usurpation of power and state usurpers (correlation above 0.9).

8. Medically recognized markers of antisocial personality disorder (an empirically established high correlation with the preceding clusters).

For those clusters containing too many questionnaire items, the item lists below have been shortened. The numbers after the questions show the linear correlation of the question profile with the averaged profile of the entire cluster scale.

1) SUPPORTS DELEGATING COERCIVE AND DIRECTIVE FUNCTIONS IN SOCIETY TO MEN

No. 1. Supports delegating coercive functions in society to logical types (that is, more likely to men)

(averaging the profiles of 4 scale questions, 1012 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. For most countries, a ruling king is better than a ruling queen. 0.72

2. I believe that society is usually better off when its leader and guarantor of order is a woman rather than a man. -0.80

3. Matriarchy in the history of civilization was better than patriarchy. -0.71

4. I prefer that the distribution of duties in a group, its hierarchy, and order be handled by some emotional ethical type (preferably a woman), rather than by a cold logical type. -0.38

55% of the population examined (see Table No. 1 - estimated as the average of the percentages across all type groups) support the view that men in positions of power are preferable to women.

This is a traditionally patriarchal view, although it is still not universally prevalent; Beta is ahead of all the quadras, with the highest percentages among LSI and SLE.

2) NATIONALISM, WITH PURITY OF BLOOD (NATIONALITY, RACE) AND ISOLATIONISM ALSO AMONG ITS VALUES

No. 2. Nationalism, with purity of blood (race) and isolationism also among its values

(averaging the profiles of 33 scale questions, 35850 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. National values are more important and higher than the so-called “universal human” values. 0.90

2. The rights of newcomers should be substantially restricted compared with the rights of native residents. 0.89

3. The division of people into nations is fundamental; different nations will always “drag away” from one another everything that can be taken or stolen. 0.88

4. I find it much easier to take in information from a person if I know that person’s membership in some group: national, professional, etc. 0.85

5. If people marry representatives of racially distant ethnic groups, a people’s national self-consciousness suffers and perishes as a result. 0.83

6. There is nothing to be done about it, but some nationalities are deeply unpleasant to me. 0.79

7. The most dangerous people for the state are those who contaminate the national soil with the weeds of cosmopolitanism. 0.79

8. The interests of one’s own nation must necessarily be above the interests of all other peoples. 0.77

9. The principal meaning lies in the triumph of my nation over other, less adapted peoples. 0.77

10. Without national self-consciousness, that is, without a sense of its own national separateness, a nation and its state necessarily die out. 0.76

11. I am absolutely indifferent to where a person comes from, what nationality or grouping the person belongs to, etc. - I am interested exclusively in that person’s personal qualities. -0.90

12. Closeness of interests is always far more important than people’s citizenship and nationality. -0.85

13. I am equally tolerant of all people, whatever “cell” they may occupy in life or on the geographical map. -0.84

14. If there is no language barrier, a person’s nationality is completely unimportant to me in becoming friends with that person. -0.80

15. A shared language is more important than skin color and shared national origin. -0.79

16. I regard marriages between representatives of different religions, nationalities, and social groups calmly or even approvingly. -0.78

According to the results, the average proportion of the population supporting nationalism (with a racist tinge of one degree of expression or another) is 27%.

Beta is ahead of all the quadras.

The highest percentage of nationalists (51%) is in the LSI group, and the lowest (7%) – in the ILE group. The real contrast, as in the examination of all the other clusters, may be even greater (because, first, cultural stereotypes may be superimposed on respondents’ answers, and second – the effect of random noise in respondents’ answers is always present, naturally reducing the contrast in the intertype spread of results).

3) CLAN-TRIBAL VALUES - CLAN, TRIBE, AND NATION ABOVE THE INDIVIDUAL AND ABOVE ALL ELSE

No. 3. Clan-tribal values. Clan, tribe, and nation above the individual and above all else

(averaging the profiles of 32 scale questions, 117274 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. I believe that the importance and value of the interests of an individual human person are often exaggerated - because one person is always only part of a whole composed of many people. 0.96

2. A citizen should belong to the state as a child belongs to a family. 0.96

3. I believe that the interests of an individual person – nothing compared with the interests of the clan and tribe. 0.95

4. A people, with its collective self-consciousness, stands above any individuality. 0.95

5. I support the principle of collective responsibility - everyone must answer for one person. 0.93

6. A person should submit to the opinion of the majority. 0.93

7. I am very sympathetic to the customs of those peoples where the interests of the kinship clan and the opinion of the elders are law for everyone. 0.93

8. I always feel myself to be part of a larger human whole - a people, a state, a collective. 0.92

9. I practically always feel myself not as a loner, but as part of a clan, a tribe. 0.91

10. Among other peoples, I most respect those that know how to act in a coordinated manner, as a single whole. 0.91

11. A family has the right to restrict the rights and interests of any of its members. 0.88

12. With regard to educational work in schools, I support the rule of collective responsibility. 0.88

14. Individualism is good, not bad. -0.97

15. Individuality is above all else; any hierarchy, pack mentality, and factionalism are alien to me. -0.96

16. Which statement is closer to you? - 1) A people is strong through its unity. 5) A people is strong through its individual talents. -0.94

17. I am an individualist, and in both myself and others I am interested exclusively in personal qualities, not in membership in some collective. -0.93

According to the results, the average proportion supporting clan-tribal values as the most important values is 26% in society.

Beta is ahead of all the quadras. The highest percentage is in the LSI group (48%), SLE is in second place, and the lowest – in the SEE group (6%). It is also low among ESI, ILI, SLI, and Alpha logical types.

The property is almost entirely determined by three traits: Aristocracy, Declatimity, and Merriness.

4) APOLOGETICS OF THE VERTICAL CHAIN OF SUBORDINATION, A STRICTLY VERTICALLY ORGANIZED STATE ABOVE ALL ELSE

No. 4. Apologetics of the vertical chain of subordination, the state above all else

(averaging the profiles of 70 scale questions, 147110 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. A country will not be strong and respected in the world if dissent is given free rein within it. 0.96

2. I believe that ranks and classes dependent on length of service and assigned to civil servants in government service are necessary and useful. 0.93

3. A person who by birth is destined to be a servant of superiors should be obedient to fate. 0.93

4. In my view and to my taste, there is too much equality in modern society. 0.93

5. The world of any individual person is only part of the common fate of the state, and nothing more. 0.93

6. Every collective should have a “senior in rank.” 0.92

7. It is very important to respect power and authority. 0.92

8. Usually, those who undermine the authority of the leadership do more harm than those who conceal the truth in the name of public tranquility. 0.92

9. If a person lacks loyal-subject sentiments, then that person also lacks nobility of soul. 0.91

10. Monarchy is better than a republic in most cases. 0.91

11. Military valor is one of the principal human virtues. 0.91

12. If you do not belong to a group of people bound together by personal loyalty to their leader, you will achieve nothing in life. 0.91

13. It is obvious that citizens should ideally be subordinate elements of their state, “cogs” in a large, well-functioning machine. 0.91

14. People’s rights to life and liberty are more important than any state and national interests. -0.93

15. If I were President, I would expand glasnost and reduce the lists and duration of classification of information designated as a state secret. -0.92

16. I am a person of liberal rather than conservative views. -0.92

17. I believe that even the highest state interests cannot take priority over the laws and rights of citizens. -0.92

18. Human rights and social equality are surely more important than the country’s imperial power. -0.91

19. Any hierarchy and the obligatory respect of people “according to their status”: position, age, etc., irritate me; to my taste, in all cases this is more bad than good. -0.91

20. In a normal society, people should not march through life in a coordinated formation and “in step,” because they are all different. -0.90

21. I believe that a people can govern itself and live happily without tsars, leaders, and masters. -0.88

The average population percentage of people supporting the theses of «apologetics of the vertical chain of subordination» and «the state above all else» is 28%. The Beta quadra leads, and within it – LSI (58% group support for these theses) and SLE (48% group support).

Special attention should be paid to the fact that even within the LSI group, the leader for this property, support for the theses of a strict hierarchy of power and of the state always having priority over the individual and human rights, although high (almost 60% of all LSI), is far from universal. About 40% of all LSI hold at least more cautious, if not opposite, views.

5) CRUELTY, VIOLENCE, RELIANCE ON PUNISHMENTS IN MANAGING PEOPLE

No. 5. Cruelty, violence, reliance on punishments in managing people

(averaging the profiles of 27 scale questions, 54265 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. I like rule by a firm hand, even if some people howl about all kinds of violations. 0.94

2. Enemies exist and should always exist, in almost any situation and any company. 0.93

3. Society needs strict and even fierce leaders. 0.92

4. I favor state power that would be the power of a “strong hand.” 0.91

5. The more fear there is in society, the more prosperity and order there is in it. 0.91

6. The triumph of the strong over the weak is a normal and entirely acceptable basis of life. 0.91

7. Painful physical punishments help in the proper upbringing of children. 0.90

8. The ideas of humanism only corrupt people. 0.90

9. If people live without fear of punishment, they generally turn into unrestrained animals. 0.89

10. The best way to stimulate people to do high-quality work in production is through fines and deductions from wages. 0.89

11. If social control is weakened, everyone will steal. 0.87

13. Fear of punishment should be used as an incentive as rarely as possible, and preferably not at all. -0.95

14. The people who cause me the greatest apprehension and distrust are those in whom I see a tendency toward dictation and violence. -0.91

15. An atmosphere of fear and penalties makes me lose the desire to learn anything for a long time. -0.89

16. My slogans are: live and let live, do not seek domination, and respect the freedom of others. -0.88

17. Criminal laws should be made more lenient, not stricter. -0.81

People love violence, and about 35% of the population believe that there should be a great deal of it in society on the part of the state toward citizens – possibly even more than there is now. This is not surprising. Sociologists unanimously say that if the question of capital punishment depended on opinion polls and referendums rather than on lawyers, capital punishment might perhaps be applied even for crossing the street incorrectly. However, there is also an encouraging fact: after all, two thirds of society do not want the state to intensify fear and violence or to rely on repression and punishment. However, two thirds of SLE and fully three quarters of all LSI – are in favor of intensifying fear and state violence in society. They think this will be good. We will try to understand where such bloodthirstiness comes from at the end of the article, in the «Discussion» section..

6) APPROVAL OF USURPATION OF POWER AND OF THE USURPERS THEMSELVES

No. 6. Approval of usurpation of power and of usurpers

(averaging the profiles of 3 scale questions, 4204 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. Usurpation of power at the first opportunity is more normal and natural than not. 0.85

2. I consider those who are capable of usurping power or taking something away from the weak to be scum. -0.93

3. If I were in Napoleon Bonaparte’s place and enjoyed the same popularity and power as he did, I would: 1) likewise proclaim myself ruler of France for life; 5) use my power to introduce, over several years, a system of regular and guaranteed renewal of France’s highest authority through democratic procedures. -0.92

Average approval of usurpers (understanding their position with a note of sympathy – as if to say, I would act the same way in their place) is 38% in society. This is a great deal, which indicates a high level of human rapacity and egoism. But it is still less than half!

Predominant attitudes in favor of usurpers are characteristic of all four Beta types and the SEE type. The other 62% of people who do not approve of usurpation of power (many – with contempt) would do well to keep this circumstance in mind.

7) QUESTIONS CLOSELY CORRELATED WITH APPROVAL OF USURPATION OF POWER (WITH MUTUAL PROFILE CORRELATION ABOVE 0.90)

No. 7. Questions closely correlated with approval of usurpation of power and state usurpers (correlation above 0.9)

(averaging the profiles of 19 scale questions, 32095 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. Let the will to power grow and triumph; let all the weak and ugly perish. 0.96

2. The world is cruel, and I am always for the victors, not for those who have suffered. 0.96

3. I believe that spreading hostility toward a potential enemy and fear of the power of the authorities among the population is a useful measure for strengthening a good state. 0.95

4. I need the power to subordinate and command not for any particular purpose - it is pleasant in itself. 0.94

5. The sweetest thing in life is power over others. 0.94

6. Violence is an acceptable method for solving very many problems. 0.93

7. Weak and stupid people should share with those who are stronger and smarter. 0.93

8. If a society has no masters and subjects obedient to them, it is boring to live in such a society. 0.93

9. If I see an obvious weakling, I often and quite automatically immediately feel like putting that person down somehow, “kicking” them, mocking them, etc. 0.93

10. I like expressions such as “ruthless energy,” “cold determination,” and “brute force.” 0.92

11. Sometimes I like inflicting pain on another person. 0.92

12. Any means are acceptable for achieving what one wants. 0.92

13. If there were no hatred of enemies, there would be no progress either. 0.92

14. I believe that “slandering” one’s enemy or opponent is normal and not a sin, because lies are also an acceptable weapon. 0.91

Property No. 7, which echoes sociopathy and criminal values, is supported by 30% of the population. In Beta and among SEE, this percentage is up to twice as high.

And you wonder where Mussolini, Pol Pot, slave traders, and the like come from in the world.

The semantic content of the questions shows what causes underlie the tendency to usurp power. This is quite a «gangster» complex of traits involving a predisposition to violence, lust for power, and egocentric rapacity. Alas, as much as about 30% of the population is «infected» with this complex.

But once again: about 40% of Beta-quadra members also do not support gangster values at all. There are many decent people everywhere. Most importantly, however, the population as a whole consists of a majority of “decent” people (that is, not gangsters, not perpetrators of violence, not usurpers) – 70%. The question arises: with so many decent people, how do usurpers get into power? Ask yourselves that question if, God willing, you are ever again given the opportunity to elect those in authority with some hope that the election results will not be completely falsified. Moreover, falsified by those whom you yourselves once, in distant past elections that were still more or less honest at the time, frivolously delegated to power so that they could later rob you, deceive you, and steal from you, while also using you as cannon fodder in their masters’ games.

================

8) MEDICALLY RECOGNIZED MARKERS OF ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY DISORDER (the cluster is presented because of its empirically observed correlation with authoritarian-statist values)

No. 8. Medically recognized markers of antisocial personality disorder

(averaging the profiles of 28 scale questions, 66149 respondent answers in total, all profiles except the 2nd and 3rd type profiles are normalized to a unit sigma of the type profile). All profiles are given after corrective factor rotation

Unnormalized type profile (deviations from the mean in population standard deviations):

Approximate percentage of representatives of each type group giving raw responses of “YES” and “RATHER YES” for the property (averaging all scale questions, taking the sign of the question into account, after corrective factor rotation, diagnosis by traits)

Contribution of traits to the variance of the property, in percent:

1. As a child, I liked harming someone or breaking something. 0.93

2. Sometimes another person’s fear gives me satisfaction. 0.93

3. When I am in a good mood, I like to play with people, somehow “squeezing” their interests in favor of my own. 0.92

4. Sometimes I like seeing another person’s fear. 0.91

5. Let the will to power grow and triumph; let all the weak and ugly perish. 0.91

6. It is better to humiliate another person first so as not to be humiliated oneself. 0.90

7. Doing something bad to an enemy is often more pleasant to me than doing something good for a friend. 0.90

8. On internet forums, I sometimes add fuel to the fire of someone’s quarrel that might otherwise die down. 0.90

9. When I see that someone is angry with me, I feel like making that person even angrier. 0.90

10. I believe that everything unfit for life and everything weak should be eradicated. 0.90

11. I like learning news about all kinds of misfortunes and troubles. 0.90

12. The rights and feelings of other people do not concern me much. 0.89

13. Sometimes I like inflicting pain on another person. 0.89

14. Sometimes I am reproached for “having no conscience.” 0.83

15. As a child, I often violated established rules, fought, and frequently had conflicts within the family. 0.77

16. In general, I rarely sweat, and “from nerves” never. 0.62

17. I rarely get agitated and almost never worry about the consequences or about other people’s possible reactions to my actions. 0.61

18. Sometimes I lie in order to obtain something or achieve some other goals of mine. 0.58

19. In relations with people, I often lack sensitivity and tact. 0.37

20. My heart always beats slowly and unhurriedly, no more than 60-70 beats per minute, and it does not tend to accelerate from agitation. 0.35

21. I try to ensure that no one feels hurt by my actions. -0.94

22. I always treat other people’s rights with exactly the same respect as my own. -0.93

23. I absolutely need relationships of love and peace among my friends. -0.92

24. Other people’s hatred or suffering depresses me and throws me off balance. -0.90

25. If I accidentally bump into someone, I always apologize. -0.87

26. I become very distressed if I quarrel with close relatives and loved ones or feel their inattention and poor treatment of me. -0.86

Most often (but not always), high scores on the sociopathy scale are obtained by people with the types SLE, LSI, ILI, and SEE (and by intermediate types between them – among whom this occurs even more often).

The average percentage of people in the population answering «yes» or «rather yes» to questions that are markers of sociopathy (that is, having some inclination toward sociopathy, from moderate to pronounced) is 28%. This is not a small amount. It may be assumed that almost half of them again, that is, overall 10 to 15% of the population, are people with an almost criminal mentality. It is true that if sociopaths do not have an opportunity to commit crimes, they usually do not commit them; that is, they rarely seek out such an opportunity deliberately. Fear rarely stops sociopaths – they are very insensitive to negative experiences. On the contrary, an atmosphere of fear and violence in society, intensified by the state, is more likely to provoke sociopaths into manifesting inhumane behavior – as if to say, if the state can do it, why can’t we? What more often restrains them is precisely a high level of humanization of public morality (the effect of instilling corresponding models of behavior) and the absence of a need for crime because of a high level of prosperity in society.

There are many sociopaths, among other places, among captains of big business and among lawyers. But if an opportunity to commit a crime appears, for example to usurp power or, in the role of an official, to demand and take a large corrupt kickback – they will do it without any moral pangs.

Therefore, a great deal depends on the proper placement of personnel in society, while the placement of personnel in the highest state offices in most countries depends on the people (at least while the country is democratic). That is, formally it depends on those same 72% who are not sociopaths, who in their conscience do not approve of sociopathic practices in any way, but who for some reason choose sociopaths as their superiors. Why? Because they are poorly informed. One might exclaim: be better informed! But that would be an obvious demagogic lie, because most people will in any event never be sufficiently well informed about the psychology of the candidates they evaluate.

Demanding the impossible from people – is the best way to perpetuate the existing mess. Therefore - seek the creation in society of such a SPECIAL INSTITUTION OF PERSONNEL FILTERS that would enjoy your trust and through which sociopaths could no longer seep into power (to which they are always very, very strongly drawn – much more strongly than non-sociopaths). How can this be achieved? For example, from among the most intelligent and life-experienced «non-sociopaths» (selected by EGE-type tests under the supervision of NON-SOCIOPATHS), one could once create and then continually renew a PEOPLE’S EXPERT CORPS that would assume personnel policy throughout the country – having the right to select, reject, and dismiss officials in the most responsible positions - judges, heads of security and law-enforcement structures, etc. It could also conduct the initial selection (replacing signature collection) among candidates for legislative vacancies and elective offices.

I emphasize: the task is not to fight sociopaths; it is to fight any inefficient, knowingly corrupt, or knowingly stupid decisions that defy explanation and are dictated by stupidity or the desire to please. Therefore the principal right of the expert corps at the local level is to promptly dismiss those officials who have distinguished themselves in this more than others. After obtaining and considering their explanations. From the standpoint of the interests of the population.

Only after this will the state stop robbing you and stop exploiting you in the personal, purely self-serving and shameless interests of self-seekers whom you once appointed through lack of understanding. If your country ever has the political opportunity to carry out such a reform – do not miss it. Without this, any democratic country will constantly balance on the verge of sliding into autocracy (from which it is then difficult to get out, and into which any chance surge of pre-election passions can push it, giving an opportunity to people such as Mussolini, Hitler, Trump, Berlusconi, etc.). Without this, any democratic revolution in an autocratic country will also soon begin to reproduce the very same autocracy again, but with new names (the example of the recent Egyptian revolution is illustrative).

But if you like state lies, digital concentration camps, wars, and a slave-owning order, then of course it is better to leave everything in the world as it is.

===============

DISCUSSION

- WHAT CAUSES GIVE RISE TO AUTHORITARIAN THINKING AND THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY?

1. A deficit of so-called «affective empathy for the negative emotions of others.» This is a purely innate trait, a stable marker of most sociopaths. Simply put, they do not catch the pain, anger, or anxiety of people nearby. They can still understand this state of other people with a cold mind, but become emotionally infected with it in interaction and personally empathize with it – they cannot.

2. Love of violence, elevated aggressiveness (a complex of traits associated with so-called «proactive» or territorial aggression – again, an innate trait).

3. Strengthening of the ancient clan-tribal instinct (rudimentarily preserved in the gene pool), which under modern conditions of very large urban human communities and the «mixing of peoples» takes predominantly socially maladaptive forms. Hence nationalism.

4. Another instinct is linked with the clan-tribal instinct, the «pack instinct.» The point is that in communities of herd or pack animals (and especially – pack predators), to which our ancestors also belonged, an intragroup hierarchy rapidly forms, based both on superiority in force over other competitors and on the ability to «acquire friends» among conspecifics. Thereafter this hierarchy is maintained stably until the alpha individual dominating the pack dies or weakens. The pack instinct allows the pack to act in a coordinated manner, as a single whole with a partially distributed set of roles. Wolves attack as a pack acting in coordination, and even a flock of sheep obediently follows its leader (sometimes into an abyss) in search of better pastures. In human civilization this instinct long ago lost its adaptive role for most individuals, but remained adaptively useful in the army, security and law-enforcement structures, and criminal communities. Those people who are drawn to these structures have a predictably elevated level of pack instinct. In the absence or substantial weakening of this instinct, the authoritarian personality becomes impossible.

5. A positive attitude toward observing manifestations of other people’s fear and pain. Observing manifestations of pain and fear in other individuals produces pleasurable feelings through the release of endorphin hormones into the blood, which in turn stimulate the dopamine «pleasure center» in the basal ganglia of the brain. Again, the magnitude of these hormonal releases is an innate property, adaptively suited to extracting the maximum benefit from an individual’s elevated aggressiveness.

6. Egocentric rapacity («Whoever dares, eats»). In earlier times - a factor contributing to the survival of genes through individual rather than group evolutionary selection. Egocentric rapacity is mainly not an independent factor, but a derivative consequence of several others already listed – a deficit of empathy, aggressiveness, and, strange as it may seem, the pack instinct. It is precisely within pack behavior that the principle «whoever dares, eats» is best realized – taking into account, of course, one’s place in the hierarchy (as the Governor taught in Gogol’s comedy, bribes should be taken according to rank, according to the code). But this factor also has partly independent components. They are associated with increased general irrationality (that is, reduced control of one’s behavior from the standpoint of any norms, both personal and social) and with increased Ni (it is precisely dynamic Ni that works most strongly for the gift of intrigue and deception, which in society, especially a hierarchically organized society, is a factor favorable to survival and reproduction).

The 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th factors are positively correlated with one another, forming the core of the authoritarian personality. They also have some positive correlation with the first factor, but it is nevertheless relatively independent.

All six of these biological factors are represented most strongly in the Beta quadra, and in their sum are expressed most strongly among Beta logical types. Therefore, the LSI and SLE psychotypes constitute the majority among authoritarian personalities.

- HOW DOES THE AUTHORITARIAN MODEL OF THE MODERN STATE JUSTIFY ITS ALLEGED ADVANTAGES WHEN PROMOTING ITSELF TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT SHARE THE VALUES OF AUTHORITARIANISM?

As for what is pleasant in this for autocrats themselves – that is clear. For example, they can arbitrarily imprison their political opponents and every day, before food is distributed to the cells, spit into their prison gruel. But what is useful for society?

1. Allegedly, every person is by nature aggressive, base, criminal, and parasitic. Therefore, without the whip, without pain, and without fear, no one will work or obey laws that ensure the common good. In particular, to prevent rampant crime, a cruel state and cruel punishments are absolutely necessary.

However, absolutely all of these theses are false (and in the case of the last assertion – even exactly the reverse is true).

First, it is precisely the dehumanization of society that leads to an increase in crime. This is because sociopaths present in society are not fearful and are restrained from crime more by models of behavior accepted in society and by the unobstructed availability within it of all the main desired goods than by fear of punishment. By setting an example of dehumanization, the state thereby gives criminals a free hand as well.

Second, a hierarchical authoritarian state is economically inefficient, as has been tested many times in history. Its economic efficiency is prevented by the suppression of the initiative of the majority of citizens, parasitism, and total inevitable corruption – an inherent feature of authoritarianism. «From top to bottom» no one owes anyone anything; any service to those below must be paid for by them individually (something like quitrent under serfdom).

Third, an authoritarian state inevitably suffers from enormous disproportions in the distribution among people of their shares of influence, income, and wealth. Economic inefficiency and income disproportions generate mass poverty against the background of luxury for the chosen few, which in no way contributes either to growth of the national product, to increased labor productivity, or to scientific and technological progress. In short, the «ape model» of authoritarian statehood has long been hopelessly obsolete in economic terms and is needed only by the bearers of authoritarian consciousness themselves, who derive from it primarily purely moral satisfaction («He will grovel at my feet, while I will spit down on him from above and enjoy it» - «Kin-dza-dza!»).

2. The second thesis of autocrats is that they allegedly «save the country» (from the consequences of devastation, from a conspiracy of foreign enemies, from terrorists, crime, etc.). At the same time, the required level of devastation is permanently maintained by the autocrats themselves so that it can always be said that the troubles and machinations of enemies have not yet been overcome and that an even greater tightening of the screws in repressive laws and in the financial plundering of the population is therefore required. First the country is saved from foreign cheese and butter. Then from honest journalism. Then, finally, from space exploration, elite sport, medicine, and oxygen in clinics. Then from literacy and science. In the future – also from urban sewerage. But none of this can finally “save the country,” so the dictatorship continues and continues, acquiring new saving initiatives each year.

So we will not argue with this thesis – it testifies against itself.

3. Finally, the authoritarian model gives major tactical advantages under conditions requiring societal mobilization.

This – now this is the plain truth. The only one among all the arguments. Therefore, under conditions of an emergency, whether an epidemic, earthquake, confiscatory land reform, or war, any society provides for the TEMPORARY use of ELEMENTS of authoritarian governance, WHICH, HOWEVER, ARE ABOLISHED IMMEDIATELY ONCE THE VERY CAUSES OF THE EMERGENCY HAVE ENDED.

Therefore, in republican ancient Rome, consuls and dictators were appointed for only one year without the right to extend their powers. For the same reason, an army returning from a campaign there had no right to cross the bridge over the Tiber and enter the capital city of Rome itself.

Therefore, for the period of the Second World War the British elected Churchill (SLE) as leader, and immediately after the end of the war – promptly removed him from office. Therefore, in the same Britain, even during the war all freedoms that did not interfere with the successful conduct of military operations were fully preserved and safeguarded. Multiparty politics – of course, but also freedom of rallies, which no war could obstruct in proud Britain.

IN CONCLUSION – ONE SAD CONCLUSION:

30% of people prepared to approve an authoritarian dictatorship, a good half of whom – active supporters of dictatorship, is, alas, far too much! A personnel reserve amounting to 15% of the population – this is the source from which a dictatorship can for an indefinitely long time, in the absence of external «shocks» or until complete devastation sets in, replenish the ranks of its armed Tonton Macoutes, repressing the active part of the majority of the population and, ultimately, preventing the country from returning to civilization.