AMERICAN POLITICS 0.05--SUMMER READING FOR LAW STUDENTS: THE AUTHORITARIAN TRADITION IN AMERICAN POLITICS

Marc J. Hetherington & Jonathan D. Weiler, Authoritarianism And Polarization in American Politics (New York: Cambridge U. Press, 2009) ("WHAT IS AUTHORITARIANISM? The scholarly literature on authoritarianism is vast, but we focus on a relatively small handful of considerations often associated with it, which are particularly germane to understanding political conflict in contemporary American politics. Those who score high in authoritarianism tend to have a different cognitive styles than those who score low. The former tend to view the world in more concrete, black and white terms . . . . This is probably because they have a greater than average need for order. In contrast, those who score lower in authoritarianism have more comfort with ambiguous shades of gray, which allow for more nuanced judgments." "Perhaps because of these cognitive differences, people who are more authoritarian make stronger than average distinctions between in-groups--the groups they identify with--and out groups--groups that they perceive challenge them. Such a tendency has the effect of imposing order and minimizing ambiguity. In addition, those who are more authoritarian embrace and work to protect the existing social norms . . . These conventions are time-tested in their ability to maintain order. Altering norms could result in unpredictable changes with undesirable consequences." "Since the more authoritarian view the social order as fragile and under attack . . . , they tend to feel negatively about, behave aggressively toward, and be intolerant of those whom they perceive violate time-honored norms or fail to adhere to established social conventions. Specifically, scholars have shown a strong relationship between authoritarianism and negative affect toward many minority groups. Over the past fifty years these groups have included Jews . . . , African Americans . . . , gays . . . , and Arabs after September 11 . . . ." "Authoritarianism is a particular attractive explanation for changes in contemporary American politics because it structures opinions about both domestic and foreign policy issues. In addition to having concerns about racial difference and social change, those who are more authoritarian tend to prefer more muscular responses to threats than those who are less. . . . Viewed as a whole, research on authoritarianism suggest that the same disposition that might dispose people to be anti-black or anti-gay might also dispose them to favor military conflict over diplomacy and protecting security over preserving civil liberties. A preference for order and a need to minimize ambiguity connects both impulses." Id. at 3-4. "Although politics at the elite level has been polarized for some time, a scholarly controversy has raged over whether ordinary Americans are polarized. The book argues that they are and that the reason is growing polarization of worldviews--what guides people's view of right and wrong and good and evil. These differences in worldviews are rooted in what Marc H. Hetherington and Jonathan D. Weiler describe as authoritarianism. They show that differences of opinion concerning the most provocative issues on the contemporary issue agenda--about race, gay marriage, illegal immigration, and the use of force to resolve security problems00reflect differences in individuals' levels of authoritarianism. This makes authoritarianism an especially compelling explanation of contemporary American politics. Events and strategic political decisions have conspired to make all these considerations more salient. The authors demonstrate that the left and the right have coalesced around these opposing worldviews, which has provided politics with more incandescent hues than before. Id. at i.).