Although politics at the elite level has been polarized for some time, a scholarly controversy has raged over whether ordinary Americans are polarized. This 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 worldview are rooted in what Marc J. 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 problems - reflect 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.As I was reading one section on what exactly authoritarianism was - a personality trait (which many psychologists claim), an attitude, value, etc. - I discovered that Hetherington and Weiler consider it a "worldview." It seems reasonable, then, to link it with an ideology - one held by authoritarian ideologues.
While worldview appears a valid definition, I prefer thinking of it a defense mechanism since it consists of behaviors designed to protect the individual from plaguing fears (largely unjustified). Regardless of specific definition, some people score high in authoritarianism while others don't. As you may have surmised, these authors (and I) claim that, in the political arena, far more Republicans are authoritarians than Democrats.
What remains for "next time" is a list of authoritarian traits/behaviors and how they apply to political affiliation. Until then...
