His first published work, in 1944, was on social attitudes. The statistical analysis of attitudes and the psychology of politics became career interests. He held the view that, besides the distinction between conservatism on the Right and radicalism on the Left, "tough-mindedness" (or authoritarianism) is distinguishable from "tender-mindedness". He found evidence for his view, later expounded in his Psychology of Politics (1954), that the tough- minded include Fascists on the Right and Communists on the Left, whereas liberals are tender-minded. Further, men are more tough-minded than women, and working-class people more tough-minded than the middle classes.
And so the working classes keep voting against their own financial interests.
6 comments:
Interesting article.
Yes, but neither mainstream American party currently represents the financial interests of the working class.
Perhaps Corbyn is beginning to do that in the UK, but he got a late start and has been smeared by the oligarch-owned media. It's my understanding that polls show support for most of Corbyn's domestic platform. If we were allowed to vote on issues rather than personalities .....
What is wrong with Corbyn's personality? Too soft-spoken?
Eysenck regarded personality largely as innate and genetically determined.
Is this a 'brain rules' perspective?
Yes, the working classes are tough-minded, even more so in third world countries. Duterte's vigilantes in the Philippines are a lovely example of this mentality in action.
@Bob, Corbyn is anti-semitic, he mocks wounded veterans, he is a Marxist, and he is not sufficiently interested in killing people, according to the tabloids and even the BBC. They would not lie, would they?
They lied. He's an ex-Trotskyist.
Post a Comment