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.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07 2017, @03:44PM (2 children)
To claim that conservatives and liberals have "read you literature, marinated in your mass media" of each others is not true. You never heard of echo chambers? Really?
Yes, conservatives and liberals want different things. Could that be because they are different?
You are the one that says conservatives are mental. Is that an admission? The FA just listed 5 qualities that science has attached to Trump voters. Why is that so hard to believe? Just out of curiosity, did you vote for Trump? Which of the 5 do you think you do and don't exhibit?
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday December 07 2017, @05:26PM (1 child)
"In the same way, social scientists should eschew the quest for truths about human behavior. They should instead focus more intensely on finding answers to specific problems, whether our current economic woes, the inefficiency of our health-care system or our reliance on military force to resolve disputes."
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Thursday December 07 2017, @07:36PM
Or maybe they can just STFU until they learn to stop saying stupid crap like "or our reliance on military force to resolve disputes" since force or the threat of force is pretty much the ONLY thing that solves a dispute. Think about it. Even when a court "solves" a dispute it is the threat of overwhelming force backing the legal system that causes the losing side to accept the decision. The entire basis for the State is it holding a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. The only difference between police force and military force is military force is violence between nation states to create an international order vs internal enforcement of order.
Violence solves problems. Every solution to a problem tends to plant the seed of a fresh problem but properly applied violence solves problems. The only Nazis left are a few LARPers because violence solved them. Capital Punishment 100% solves the problem of recidivism and if swiftly and uniformly applied would do wonders at deterrence.
And the idea of social scientists trying to solve economics is comedy gold.