Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday December 07, @01:05AM   Printer-friendly
from the and-a-polite-discussion-ensued... dept.

Recently published in Journal of Social and Political Psychology by Thomas F. Pettigrew seeks to understand the psychological profile of Trump supporters:

The Trump movement is not singular within the United States (the Know Nothing movement in the 1850s, the Wallace movement in the 1960s, and the more recent Tea Party Movement). Moreover, other democracies have seen similar movements (e.g., Austria's Freedom Party, Belgium's Vlaams Blok, France's National Front, Germany's Alternative for Germany Party (AfD), and Britain's U.K. Independence Party (UKIP).

In virtually all these cases, the tinder especially involved male nativists and populists who were less educated than the general population. But this core was joined by other types of voters as well. Five highly interrelated characteristics stand out that are central to a social psychological analysis – authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, outgroup prejudice, the absence of intergroup contact and relative deprivation.No one factor describes Trump's supporters. But an array of factors – many of them reflecting five major social psychological phenomena can help to account for this extraordinary political event: authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, prejudice, relative deprivation, and intergroup contact.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough

Mark All as Read

Mark All as Unread

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday December 07, @03:45AM (5 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 07, @03:45AM (#606622)

    I think it safe to say that estate taxes only affect the upper 25% of Americans, at most.

    I think is safe to say that less than 0.005% from all population [] would be affected by the estate tax every year.

    For 2017, the Tax Policy Center estimated, based on past tax data and modeling, that 11,310 individuals will have estates big enough to file an estate tax return. "After allowing for deductions and credits, 5,460 estates will owe tax," the center concluded. "Over two-thirds of these taxable estates will come from the top 10 percent of income earners and close to one-fourth will come from the top 1 percent alone."

    Bottom line: it's a tax break for the rich.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Informative=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 07, @04:03AM (3 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 07, @04:03AM (#606629) Journal

    Bingo. Thank you for clarification.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday December 07, @05:19AM (2 children)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 07, @05:19AM (#606655)

      Now stand up to your fellow travelers on this site. You are armed with the facts, and you have a duty as a functioning (?) member of society to confront harmful untruth.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 07, @03:27PM (1 child)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 07, @03:27PM (#606818) Journal

        Why, yes, 'Zumi, I'll just do that. I'll stand up, since you can't. Fellow travelers, one and all - if you haven't figured it out yet, Trump sucks. He STILL sucks less than the alternative, but he SUCKS!!

        Now, back to you, 'Zumi. I realize that you've been broken by life, but why can't you stand up and tell the world that all of our choices suck diseased donkey balls?

        Oh, wait. I haven't triggered anyone, have I? I certainly don't want to hurt any healthy donkey's feelings, or anything. Don't want to start some stereotype about donkeys being diseased.

        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday December 08, @08:45PM

          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 08, @08:45PM (#607408)

          All our choices did suck donkey balls. I agree with you there; I felt so fucking filthy pulling that level for Clinton. Had to keep repeating "it's not FOR Hillary, it's AGAINST all the people the giant orange Oompa Loompa from Hell is gonna bring on's not FOR Hillary it's AGAINST Pence when Fastass McOrangeFace von Shitty Toupee the third eats himself to death."

          Wish to hell Sanders had won.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Thursday December 07, @09:38PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 07, @09:38PM (#607007)

    Bottom line: it's a tax break for the rich.

    Its more complicated if you assume "the rich" are smarter than average and have agency. Basically there is a (dumb) tax code that can be avoided if you have time by structuring various things insert much handwaving here.

    So its really a tax on dumb rich people (inheritance, lotto winners, not really sad here) and people who die young and suddenly (a tax on tragedy, how romantic, kick em when they're down, taking money from little orphans, etc)

    Or rephrased, its a social engineering stick to force rich people into behaviors involving working around the tax. I'm not sure this is a useful goal, but there are "happy middlemen" as usual, so ...