Study: Extreme Conservatives Make Happier People

Tom Jacobs, Salon, July 24, 2013

Given the many instances of Tea Partiers lashing out in anger over the past few years, it’s reasonable to think this is an extremely unhappy group of people.

Reasonable, but wrong.

At least, that’s the implication of newly published research from Canada. It finds a “significant association” between authoritarian attitudes and a subjective sense of well-being. These findings are “in line with evidence that conservative ideology . . . may promote positive psychological outcomes,” writes a research team led by psychologist Cara MacInnis of the University of Toronto and Michael Busseri of Brock University.

In the journal Personality and Individual Differences, the researchers describe a study featuring 237 Canadian university students. Participants provided a set of opinions to determine the extent to which they are aligned with right-wing authoritarianism—that is, a tendency to submit to authority, condemn those who violate the rules, and uphold established traditions.

They then gave a second set of opinions designed to determine their “social dominance orientation,” another aspect of generalized authoritarianism. Specifically, they expressed the extent of their agreement with statements such as “Some groups of people are just more worthy than others” and “In getting what your group wants, it is sometimes necessary to use force against other groups.”

Finally, they were asked to rate their current life on a scale of one to nine (from the “worst life I could have” to the best). {snip}

The results: “On the general level, greater generalized authoritarianism was clearly related to greater subjective well-being,” the researchers write. “The association suggests that generalized authoritarianism may be ‘good’ for the self.”

{snip}

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Puggg

    This conflates “extreme conservatism” with authoritarianism. When sometimes, the problem with “extreme conservatism” is its libertarianism.

    • WR_the_realist

      Yes, the liberals love to equate authoritarianism with conservatism. The most authoritarian people I know are leftists. They are always coming up with new ways to use the power of the state to force people to be good, by their crabbed understanding of what is “good”. I don’t count myself as a libertarian, I think big business needs more watching and regulation than the libertarians do, I’m more pro-environment than libertarians are, and I am against open borders. Nonetheless I don’t care what gun my neighbor buys or how many bullets can fit in its cartridge. I don’t care to tell a businessman what the racial composition of his workforce must be. I have no interest in telling a store owner that he must install a wheel chair ramp just in case some handicapped person wants to visit his store. If someone in my town wants to restrict the sale of his house to a tall blonde haired person (I’m neither) that should be his right. I will not tell a landlord that he has to rent his apartment to a homosexual couple, if he doesn’t want to.

      So your average Democrat is vastly more totalitarian than I am.

      • Puggg

        You agree with some of the line items of libertarianism, and you agree with some of the line items of authoritarianism. You’re not purely either one. The trick is to find the happy median while not giving our souls over to either cult.

        The only “freedoms” the left really care about anymore are gay and abortion. This is how they can get away with calling conservative authoritarians.

      • Rhialto

        Liberals are not capable of not propagandizing. For many decades liberals have been skreeching that anyone who does not submit to liberal authorities has an “authoritarian” personality.

        I guess most people don’t realize how little integrity or mental capacity these liberal social scientific types have.

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

          They’ve been smart enough to put it over on the politicians and their constituents pandering with religious dogma, super-patriotic phonies while actually fronting for for corporations while an amazing amount of corruption in government was tolerated. If you actually looked into it, it was the misrule and total corruption of conservative government that allowed the Left it’s opportunities. Now, they are as bad as the worst days when their opposites were in control. But we’re just cannon fodder and sheep to all of them.

      • I am not a libertarian, far from. But I am against all the laws businesses/corporations face. Make it easier for businesses to exist and there will be more businesses. As for supposed legal infractions, let the courts sort them out. That is what they are there for. There is no reason for the gangs of stormtroopers that currently go around to generate revenue to justify their employment.

        And Dems are not authoritarian, they are totalitarian.

      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

        If you check U.S. political history, the Republicans were more authoritarian and more suppressive than the Left was. In fact, the vast and incredible misrule by conservatives and their various abuses is what opened the door to the Left, which stampeded in. Once in control, the ones in power begin to believe even more in how right they are because success creates a myriad of personal and general delusions that can be summed up as arrogance. It always goes as far as conditions can bear. In our current situation, the Left has little opposition because the conservatives allowed themselves to be outflanked due to focusing on “moral” issues and allowing/supporting an underlying culture of corruption (corporate collusion, etc.). When the GOP has people who sound more like cartoon caricatures of politicians (Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney) representing them, it further diminishes them in general. It is simply not possible to state the realistic and necessary platform of a realistic conservatism any longer because “conservatives” are still focused too much on religion and supporting corporations, so they end up shooting themselves in the foot while holding it in their mouths.

    • sbuffalonative

      How did “authoritarian attitudes” come to be associated with small, limited government and lower taxes as espoused by the Tea Party?

      The link doesn’t exist except in the mind of the author.

      • Sick of it

        Because this is the sort of garbage they can been saying about us for decades while they take control over every aspect of folks’ lives in America. And elsewhere, using the same b.s. script.

      • Puggg

        Best I can figure, it started with the Frankfurt School after WWII and well after it moved from Germany to America, and its “scholarly” attempt in screeds like The Authoritarian Personality and others to pathologize nationalist-right ideology as the root cause of genocide. The main problem was that since the Frankfurt School fellows and “scholars” were largely German-Jewish Europeans who had only recently migrated across the Atlantic, they were still unaware that in their new home, “right wing” largely meant libertarian and definitely not imply racial or ethnic nationalism.

        And if my father could read what I just wrote, he would wonder where I got all these brains, and why I didn’t act like I had these kind of brains when I was just a puppy.

        • robinbishop34

          Wasn’t the primary goal of the Frankfurt School to mitigate the Gentile power structure of Western Europe and the U.S.?

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

          You would probably be interested in reading about phenomena in the U.S. that occurred before Herbert Marcuse, Emmanuel Cellar and the Frankfurt School ever arrived here. Check out for example, The Red Scare of 1918-1921 (I think was the year). Also, look up the history of socialist uprising, in places like Wisconsin in the 19th century. It helped me understand why that region of the U..S. is so divided and so often in the forefront of union and Leftist agendas.

          What the Frankfurt School represents is the rise of what is called “The New Left.” This is different from the old, Bolshevik inspired Red Scare that usurped the more common sense union movements before them, while the Frankfurt School focused on the acquisition of power through social change like civil rights legislation and the Civil Rights Movement itself. (BTW, the Frankfurt School was funded by the son of a German Capitalist who felt guilty for his personal wealth while most Germans were suffering after WW1).

          • Romulus

            Really? Which kind of German!?

      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

        Just consider that our government always grew more, especially under Republican presidents like Reagan, than they ever did under Democrats (including LBJ) with Obama being the single exception. But the real message of this author is not to say that Tea Party people are happier or Leftist are happier, but that people who “feel” they agree with the current authority are happiest.

        It is amazing how happy people can feel when they are living in oppressing circumstances. (Just consider the Jews and the amazing sense of humor that community is famous for). That is due to the mental endurance that the human mind is capable of. I would agree with anyone that said that for example, Christians are (generally) more content than atheists (at least in America). Christians allow themselves to be lulled into a set of ideas and outlooks that are contrary to common sense and everything that has been learned about everything we exist in. But because they have numbers, community and most often, have been taught their myths since childhood, they feel content, as long as they reinforce themselves everyday and “twice on Sunday.” Atheists on the other hand, are alone, isolated, actually see the magnitude of human isolation and usually have little or zero community for support. (Although they continue to try). The challenge to the atheist is an existential one. They must literally “seize the day” because they realize that this is all there is. But progress has usually been achieved by discontented individuals who were usually obliged to fight against frightening authority under which most people felt content (with revolutions being the example of the end of human toleration of such “stable” conditions).

  • Then how come I always get angry when I read the news?

    • JohnEngelman

      History is moving in a direction you do not like and cannot stop.

      • David Ashton

        Is history out of human hands? If not, in whose hands is it now?

        • JohnEngelman

          In democratic countries history is in the hands of the majority.

          • David Ashton

            This is a very naive political theory. The UK is supposedly a “democratic country”, but the majority have not had their views on immigration or the death-penalty reflected in legislation.

            Majorities of course are not always right or enlightened. The media can gradually alter the “popular will” (e.g. over sexual degeneracy) and the ruling parties can close off options by central direction, party preferments and funding access.
            I could refer to scores of contrary writers, from Robert Michels (“Political Parties” 1915) to George Walden (“New Elites” 2006), but you would then claim (however absurdly) that this means you have “won the argument”.

          • Sick of it

            And your government has forced your people into numerous wars they did not want to fight, per majority consensus.

          • David Ashton

            A good example of how “elites” manage public opinion. See e.g. Lindbergh on the US, Mosley on the UK.

          • JohnEngelman

            In the UK and the US rich people have political out of proportion to their numbers.

            The rich favor immigration because it enables them to lower wages.

            They tend to be forgiving toward criminals because they seldom have anything to forgive. They live in safe neighborhoods and are rarely crime victims. They suffer from what George Orwell called, “money sheltered ignorance.”

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            This condition has been changing quite a bit, lately. With HUD’s new program to make sure all neighborhoods will be integrated by force, it won’t be long before violent abuse is made an equal opportunity experience.

          • Mike Conrad

            In theory. In reality the wealthy one or two percent will remain insulated from HUD programs. Otherwise, get back to me when welfare families are living on Gin Lane in Southampton.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            I am afraid you are all too correct. The only solution seems to be the removal of central authority to regional. I think the key is to try to make the democratic systems small enough that your neighbor might be the representative you elected. However, this opens up such regions or nations to larger, empire minded autocracies that historically wish to conquer others. The can of worms we live in today makes the possibility of any satisfactory change for people like you and me unlikely, unless and until the entire house of cards collapses, and then, there is no guarantee of what will remain.

          • Mike Conrad

            Exactly right. The smaller the political unit, the greater the freedom.

          • Romulus

            Wwhaaatt? You base your conclusions on what? Fiction! Those that control the key elements of the power structure in a society control it’s course direction. The police, military, banks,courts etc. However, those with the most power always win (arms). Might makes right, always has ,always will. It matters not how it manifests itself. Power is power.

          • Luca

            In democratic countries hijacked by liberals, liberals cultivate and import their majorities.

          • JohnEngelman

            Pro business conservatives have always favored unlimited immigration because it enables businessmen to raise prices while cutting wages.

          • Luca

            Businesses seeking lower wages can move to China. Chinese manufactured goods are sold in Walmart and consumers vote with their dollars. Democrats are not business friendly and have helped push companies overseas.

            Liberals want unlimited, low IQ, immigrants to lavish with tax-funded gifts in return for their voting skills.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            Sorry, Luca, but regulations are only part of the problem. China and other slave-labor countries have an insurmountable advantage over countries with decent working conditions and a higher living wage.

            And corporations LOVE unlimited immigration because it drives down wages and drives more consumer, er, consumption.

            But go ahead. Get rid of all those pesky regulations and laws that the globalist corporations are always complaining about. When that doesn’t bring jobs back home, I want tariffs and an immigration moratorium. Let’s see who’s solution actually works.

          • Luca

            Businesses profit from cheap labor and immigration…no doubt and no argument. But who imports and allows these people to be here and why? Who championed and engineered the Immigration Act of 1965?

            Who is creating sympathy for the illegals now, saying they are living in the shadows and pushing for a new amnesty? Overwhelmingly it is Liberals/Democrats. Agreed there is Republican complacency or agreement but again the key word is “overwhelmingly”. Simpson-Mazzoli was supposed to end this nightmare and yet it was the Clinton administration that began to turn a blind eye to enforcement in the 90’s. I live in So Cal and I am right in the middle of this firestorm. Believe me, Clinton started this fire, Bush watched it burn and Obama is throwing gas on it.

            And where are the big pro-Democrat, Labor Unions for the last 25 years? Isn’t it their job and aren’t they paid to protect the workers? They are in lock-step with the Democrats and keep their mouths pretty well shut while collecting dues. They have allowed this to happen.

            Democrats are importing voters and as a side effect businesses benefit and the American public loses.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            I’m an equal opportunity basher. I hate both the pro-illegal neocons as well as those on the left who support these suicidal policies.

            Guys like you and John seem to focus mostly on one side or the other. I would invite you to both (in a spirit of bipartisanship) join is opposing amnesty for illegals no matter the reason.

          • Mike Conrad

            That’s a great scheme but I wonder if people will ever trade their rabid partisanship in, even for the public good.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            Oops, I forgot to answer your question about 1965.

            That would be the bilious alcoholic philanderer who is now (if there is any justice) roasting in Hades.

          • JohnEngelman

            Luca,

            Your plan to keep businesses in the United States is to let employers pay their American employees as little as they pay people in the third world, and to treat them as badly.

          • Luca

            Please don’t put words in my mouth. You never asked me and I have never volunteered anything on that subject. I simply state the facts as I see them. I majored in business management, I feel I know a little bit about the subject.

            You complain about big businesses and yet it is clearly, without argument, the Democrats who are anti-business.

            No matter how much logic and how many facts I throw your way, you don’t absorb them or even see them. You fight armed with only an ideology and cherry picked statistics. You would have made a lousy lawyer, all your “facts”, statements and arguments have another side to them that I believe are far more evident and compelling to a reasonable mind. Your evidence is usually true, but one-dimensional, your ideology is flawed and irrational. You cling to an agenda without allowing any reason to enter into your thought process. The only clarity you have is on race and apparently that was beat into you.

            You are the perfect example of someone who is intelligent and articulate but lacks reason, logic and common sense. I enjoy this website because most of the folks here engage in realism. I’m trying to avoid arguments with irrational people but I am also not going to let propaganda get the better of the conversation.

          • JohnEngelman

            You are a perfect example of someone who thinks insults are an adequate substitute for facts and logic.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            That is their plan now, and it seems to be moving right along. And it isn’t keeping businesses in America, either.

            Once they’ve fired their customer base, they shouldn’t be surprised that the consuming is drastically reduced.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            Certainly they are a good bit of the problem. But as you well know, the left is also very interested in importing “undocumented Democrats.” Then, there are the idiotic Evangelicals and Catholics practicing “suicidal altruism.” (Hell, I even heard this claptrap being preached at a Fundamentalist gathering). And finally, whether one wishes to admit it or not, there is a certain group (which is vastly overrepresented in positions of wealth and power) that believes that their group would be safer in a non-white-majority society. I appreciate any efforts we can make to convince them that this reasoning is erroneous, which is why, although they vote about 75% Dem, I seldom criticize them as a group.

          • Luca

            You know nothing about business, but you are good at writing mindless slogans.. You can’t blindly raise prices when you have competitors. Businesses do not always want cheap labor because they know cheap labor is not good and good labor is not cheap.

            Underpaid workers generally turn out inferior products, inferior, overpriced products do not sell in the marketplace. I suggest you do the math and put away the slogans.

          • JohnEngelman

            More immigrants mean more people. More people mean more customers and more job applicants. By the law of supply and demand this means higher prices, lower wages, and higher profits.

            Most who post on this website have an easy time understanding that.

            Here is an equation for you:

            (natural resources x technology) / population = standard of living

          • Luca

            Looking at your last equation tells me that while Democrats are flooding the country with immigrants they are in effect lowering the standard of living. I agree.

            More immigrants also mean more crime, more jails, more police, more free medical, more welfare, and the lower wages mean less tax revenue per capita. Immigrants are far more likely to use social services than native born Americans.

            When people make lower wages or no wages, Liberal politicians take money by force so their favorite voters can get food stamps, cell phones, EBT, you name it. They punish the producers and reward the takers and the takers keep them in office.

            You seem to bypass my statement that Democrats engineer the immigrant supply for more voters and go right to a side issue that big business profits from it..

          • JohnEngelman

            You seem to bypass my statement that Democrats engineer the immigrant supply for more voters and go right to a side issue that big business profits from it.

            – Luca

            The fact that the business community benefits from immigration is not side issue. It explains why many Republican politicians are in favor of amnesty, and other ways of facilitating a high degree of immigration.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            It is why the Republicans are not representing their base. If they were, they would be winning quite handily every election where white people are the majority.

          • JohnEngelman

            The only whites Republican politicians really care about are rich whites. They do represent those people, and they are adequately compensated with generous campaign contributions.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            John, when you say things like that, you are doing the same thing that many posters here do by painting with too broad a brush.

          • JohnEngelman

            You make a good point. Nevertheless, sometimes the truth is very simple. The Republican Party exists in order to advance the economic interests of the most prosperous ten percent of the United States. Since 1980 Republican have advanced those interests very well.

            I also give the GOP credit for the fact that the crime rate has declined since 1980 by one third. This is largely because the prison population has tripled.

            Unfortunately, most Americans are worse off than we were when Bill Clinton left office. President Obama has not reversed the decline, but it began with George the Lesser.

        • Luca

          A good revolution has been known to be effective. At this point I would settle for a military coup, anything is better than the direction we are headed.

          • Sick of it

            Considering who leads the military these days…and really since WW2, hell no.

          • Romulus

            I wouldn’t worry so much about the military my friend. They are still overwhelmingly our demographic. I know firsthand. Soldiers always follow the NCO’s and they in turn the officers. What we should keeping an eye on is the officer corps. Yet history has demonstrated that if threaders stray too far off the cuff, the soldiers can and have stepped in to fix it.

          • Sick of it

            One could only hope for the return of the ‘fragging’ phenomenon if/when things get really bad. I’ll remain skeptical.

          • Romulus

            Always good to keep your radar on.

          • David Ashton

            In the UK the armed forces and police are nominally loyal to the Queen, not parties; in practice, it doesn’t work like that, with these services obedient to civilian warmongers in the cabinet and gradually infected by political correctness on homosexual and multi-ethnic recruitment.

          • JohnEngelman

            Those whose strong opinions are opposed by a majority of the voters sometimes fantasize living under a dictator who agrees with them. They forget that if the dictator disagrees with them he may have them imprisoned or executed.

          • Luca

            I live in the liberal La La land of California. The majority of voters here voted against gay marriage. That was changed by a liberal judge and Governor.

            Theories on voting and democracy are illusions.

            Liberals are the most hypocritical of dictators.

          • JohnEngelman

            I dislike the power of courts in the United States to overturn popular opinion in any direction. Most Americans favor restrictions on campaign financing, but the Supreme Court overturned that.

          • Sick of it

            Like you said, when the majority doesn’t go the way certain minority groups want, they abridge the political power of the majority through the courts or the federal government. This is nothing new in America and one of the reasons we don’t have rights as we did in the past.

            I saw a list of things in 1975 which were legal then but illegal now and it was mind boggling…all of this licensing and gun control garbage was pushed when my older sister was a child.

          • KingKenton

            Well, at least you know who to blame and take out. In our beloved Democracy, the buck gets passed every two to four years but the totalitarianism continues. I believe it was Russell Kirk who coined the phrase, “Despotic Democracy”.

        • Romulus

          The inexorable push of the global machine! It will keep going until it can go no further and life on planet earth will get really interesting. For a preview, take a virtual tour of Detroit.
          I do hope you indulge in some of the information I suggested. I’d like to share opinions and analysis.

          • David Ashton

            I promised a sample of assorted race-realist or classic conservative works by Englishmen or other Europeans, although the best stuff is mostly American (e.g. Scott-Townsend & Radix publcations); and will add these here shortly.

          • Romulus

            Thank you.

          • David Ashton

            SOME CLASSIC TEXTS
            1 Walter Bagehot, Physics & Politics [1872], Chicago 1999
            2 David Hume, ‘On National Character,’ Philosophical Works, vol.3 (1898)
            3 Duncan, David (ed) Life & Letters of Herbert Spencer, London 1908/2004 [vs miscegenation]
            4 McDougall, William, The Group Mind, Cambridge 1920
            5 Gates, Reginald Ruggles, “Heredity & Eugenics”, London 1923
            6 Barker, Sir Ernest, National Character, London 1927/1948
            7 Pitt-Rivers, G.H.L. The Clash of Culture & the Contact of Races, London 1927
            8 Ludovici, Anthony, A Defence of Aristocracy, London1933
            9 Spengler, Oswald, The Hour of Decision, [tr] NY 1934
            10 Unwin, J.D. Sex & Culture, Oxford 1934
            11 Widener, Alice (ed) Gustave LeBon [Major selections], Indianapolis 1979
            12 Lunn, Arnold, Communism & Socialism, London 1939

            SECONDARY SOURCES [Critical *]
            13 Baker, John R. Race, Oxford 1974
            14 Martindale, Don, The Nature & Types of Sociological Theory, London 1960
            15 Duchesne, Ricardo, The Uniqueness of Western Civilization, Leiden 2012
            16 *Stone, Dan, Breeding Superman: Nietzsche, Race & Eugenics in Edwardian & Interwar Britain, Liverpool 2002
            17 *Semmel, Bernard, Imperialism & Social Reform, London 1960
            18 *Young, Robert, Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture & Race, Oxford 1995
            19 *Gerrits, Andre, The Myth of Jewish Communism, Brussels 2009

            20 *Isaac, Benjamin, The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity, Princeton 2004

            MISCELLANEOUS INTEREST
            21 Ferguson, Niall. Civilization, London 2012
            22 Browne, Anthony, The Retreat of Reason [v. PC], London 2006
            23 Eysenck, Hans. The Inequality of Man. London 1973
            24 Bashford, Alison & Levine, Philippa, The Oxford Handbook of the History of Eugenics, Ox

          • Romulus

            Thank you my friend. I will begin in earnest!
            Here’s yet another shining example of our “friends”, the money changers. As reported on fox news 4pm est. 7/24/13 Stuart varney.
            SAC capital investment CEO Jacob COHEN indicted for insider trading. The SEC is seeking 10 billion in retribution/fines.

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

          Thank you for the great opportunity to point out that conservatives have always loved to say that “the matter is in God’s hands.” This is so that they don’t have to explain things they either don’t want to expose politically, or they don’t really understand themselves.

          • David Ashton

            If there is a divine purpose in nature, it presumably works towards higher forms of human life, and it would be right not wrong actively to pursue an evolutionary ethic of all-round excellence in active co-operation with any such cosmic purpose.

          • ShermanTMcCoy

            Some do. I don’t. I believe in God and that He allows us to do whatever we want, no matter how heinous.

  • WmarkW

    Liberals dream of what’s never been and ask, “Why not?”
    Conservatives make a sincere effort at understanding causes.

    • Luca

      Liberals dream of what’s never been and ask, “Why not?”

      Liberals however, won’t admit failure of a concept because they don’t possess a scientific mind. They’ll do the same thing over and over expecting one day to get a better result. You know, like explaining or closing the educational gap with blacks and hispanics.

      They dream, but they don’t see.

    • Sick of it

      They don’t seem to dream much in the scientific realm, excepting the notion of global warming. They’re the people who say ‘it can’t be done’ over and over again.

  • Hal K

    They then gave a second set of opinions designed to determine their “social dominance orientation,” another aspect of generalized authoritarianism. Specifically, they expressed the extent of their agreement with statements such as “Some groups of people are just more worthy than others” and “In getting what your group wants, it is sometimes necessary to use force against other groups.”

    This is intriguing. They have said that authoritarianism is connected with in-group / out-group bias, without backing up their assertion in any way. It makes sense, in some ways, but things are so twisted around in the West that you have to dig beneath the surface to see it. Liberals are very much in favor of identity politics for nonwhites, but not for whites. Mainstream conservatives, on the other hand, explicitly (but weakly) pander to nonwhites while shunning explicit white identity politics.

    This backs up what I have been suggesting in comment threads, which is that in a healthy society the political right wing represents the dominant majority ethnic group, while the left wing represents groups outside of the majority. Western society is unhealthy because the political right wing refuses to explicitly represent the dominant ethnic majority.

    Another implication is that liberalism can be viewed as conservatism for nonwhites, since it promotes nonwhite identity politics. When you think in terms of group interests, the liberal vs. conservative dichotomy is just a distraction. If a race’s group interests are not being explicitly represented in politics then they will lose out in the long run, which is what is happening to whites throughout the West.

  • din_do_nuffins

    This is a hate myth hoax.
    Extreme conservatives are miserable, because they see what’s been done to America, and all they have left is hatred and racism. Misery is right for the conditions.

  • Jack Burton

    Yes, traditional culture, heterosexual monogamy and ethnic homogeneity make people happy and create healthy communities. It’s common sense.

    • Owen

      Heterosexual monogamy for people who are gay is misery for both of the spouses but thankfully fewer gay folks feel pressured into lying about who they are and marrying someone of the opposite gender. Would you prefer that a gay man marry his boyfriend or your daughter?

      • Luca

        I’d prefer that he recognize that he has a problem and get it fixed or keep it to himself and stay single to avoid lying and a life of misery.

        Some things in life are gender specific or have reasonable limitations. Marriage is one of those things.

      • KingKenton

        I would prefer he recognize his state of depravity and fix himself.

  • Spartacus

    Wow… So you mean people who don’t live in Anarchy are happier than who do? Who would’ve thought ?

    • Romulus

      Surprise!! Jeez!! They actually funded a study that any ten year old could’ve figured out.

  • Randall Ward

    Good Lord, what a def of conservatives. It is not conservatives that give in to authority and line up behind a “great Leader”. Stalin was not a conservative. Hitler was a man of the left.
    Liberals contend that if anyone uses force they are “conservative”. Liberals come in all flavors but have one thing in common; they want to use the state to get their perfect world.

    • Sick of it

      Their common flavoring also leads to mass genocide. This is historical fact. No wonder they want to take away our guns.

      • ms_anthro

        Indeed. They will get their utopia and they don’t care how many innocent bodies they have to stack up to do it. They’re morally bankrupt but appoint themselves the arbiters of all that is moral and enlightened. They declare war on everything good and uphold the worst of society as a sort of middle finger to the very pillars that enable them to spew their venom. It’s a story as ancient as the Pharisees.

        • Sick of it

          It’s a story as ancient as Cain and Abel.

  • Romulus

    So many of the so called studies,especially if the douches at salon carry the story, ist hat the researches pose loaded questions that are intended to give a desired result.
    Conservatives typically have a world view that comports to the eternal rules of the universe. I.e. there is a higher power than me, I am penitent the gift of life and the rules set before me. Deviations from moral codes or traditional credos always obviate problems. Following a set of rules or guidelines provides structure and each in the hierarchy know how to function at their tier of the ladder. Good behavior yields positive results ,bad bad behavior in decay of the structure or system. Whether liberals know it or not,cream is supposed to rise to the top,not everybody. Too bad if they don’t like rules. Without them there is chaos.

  • Romulus

    I wonder about that as well. Any thinking conservative should be able to see that the biological processes of evolution don’t in fact deconstruct what they believe. Heck, any reasonable person can see some merit to a design that gives them a framework for living.

    • David Ashton

      Worth a look? – Larry Anhart, “Darwinian Conservatism” (Exeter 2009).

  • biscuits&gravy

    Yep. Reality is a certain way. If you align your behavior to reality, you’re happier. Less friction against immutable things.

  • IstvanIN

    I wonder if they confuse authoritarian attitudes with respect for tradition and a lack of jealously? I have had arguments here with atheists who claim I am “lying” when I say I believe in God because I can not prove he exists. I have always felt atheists are sad little creatures. While I certainly am against a communist style social system I believe that faith in a power higher than myself that provides guidance is a great benefit to living life. I understand the great joy many British people feel over the birth of a potential new king. It is nice to think there is, hopefully, someone above it all. I believe in freedom and the ability to better oneself but not envy over those who posses something I can not. I abhor the fact the little courtesies that used to be so common in day to day life are forgotten in our base and selfish society. That good manners are oppressive and sexist. I can not exactly express what I feel but I know it isn’t a desire for authoritarianism, but for structure and continuity.

    Anarchy is for fools.

  • MBlanc46

    Let’s see: A sample size of 237 university students. Self-reports of answers to a set of completely artificial questions. A scale of “from 1 to 10” to evaluate your life. And this is supposed to lead to meaningful conclusions about political orientation and “positive psychological outcomes”? That journal must be pretty hard-up for submissions.

    • bigone4u

      Right you are. And the professors were hard up for something to put on their resumes.

  • JohnEngelman

    In addition to denying the reality of man made global warming, conservatives continue to believe, despite contrary evidence, that cutting taxes is the way to balance the budget.

    In addition, Republicans are about twice as likely as Democrats to believe in the literal truth of the Genesis creation story.

  • Evette Coutier

    As always academics twist every study they can to support their social and political agenda. It’d be nice if our research universities were actually interested in fact and not politics.

    • Sick of it

      Such a situation would endanger the power of the elites.

    • bigone4u

      Professors today should be titled “Mini-Ministers of Propaganda.”

  • rightrightright

    Authoritarianism comes from the Left. Look how meekly our populations accept the dictats of PC speak. They know they have to, or else!

  • Nathanwartooth

    What was the race of the people questioned?

    “Some groups of people are just more worthy than others” and “In getting what your group wants, it is sometimes necessary to use force against other groups.”

    This sounds like something that 90% of Blacks would agree with.

    I looked at the abstract but of course it didn’t give racial breakdowns.

    • bigone4u

      I’ve observed that you make many highly intelligent probing comments here. As an ex-prof, I hope you’re developing your mind by getting a university degree, but part of me says you’re too smart and un-PC to not engender the wrath of the Cultural Marxist profs. You’re the kind of white male that feminist and liberal profs love to screw.

  • John Smith

    And liberal Marxism and socialism isn’t authoritarian? The Soviet Union, China, etc… aren’t? Of course they are.

    • anon

      Even though China or Soviet Union (Stalin) were not entirely conservative, they could hardly be considered liberal. Their mentality was one of combatting the moral decay created by the “aristocratic class” and passed many laws to this effect.

      • John Smith

        And then you woke up from your fantastic dream. Marxist communism is radical left by definition. All of it. Only within this radical leftist political ideology do political scientists toy with which approaches are more “conservative” than others. The only mentality questioned here is your own to make such a ridiculous statement that Marxist communism is actually conservative. LOL!

      • David Ashton

        A mixture of much bad and some good. Stalin’s campaign to curb sexual chaos was positive, and that’s about it.

  • anon

    “Some groups of people are just more worthy than others”
    “In getting what your group wants, it is sometimes necessary to use force against other groups.”

    I don’t see what social authoritarianism has to with conservatism. If anything, it’s liberals who are more likely to try to impose their will on others. It seems the author of the study was a liberal who wanted to use a faulty test based on a false premise to bash anti-gay conservatives.
    “Opposing gays” or “Not soul-searching for your sexual orientation” was meant to make conservatives unhappy, but the results of the test backfired.

    • bigone4u

      I’m going to try to forget the right side pic and remember the left side. If I fail, I won’t be able to sleep. That homosexual is a nightmare.

    • David Ashton

      Brilliant – a picture is sometimes worth a thousand words.

    • Spartacus

      Now I’m not gonna eat for a few days…

  • robinbishop34

    I would challenge the assumption that ‘so many’ conservatives deny evolution. The number of people that believe Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church are very few. It’s just that those who control media portray this tiny minority of people as the face of ‘conservatism.’

    • David Ashton

      Their biggest probem is not descent from a human couple in prehistory but from a family in an ark in comparatively recent historic time. This is not to say there are no problems with “transformation” of species, but these also arise with any human racial differentiaton after a supposed universal deluge. Conservatives and race-realists should try to focus on shared problems and common enemies whatever their theistic or atheistic views.

  • Transpower

    Ridiculous article. I’m on the minarchist Right. I am therefore very anti-authoritarian. As usual, Leftists are utterly clueless about the nature of reality.

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

    Since the dawn of civilization, authority has existed to organize and manage life for populations that began to form around agricultural communities that also naturally became trade centers. Since prehistory, people have been searching for answers to questions beyond their mundane, daily lives. The people who can best feel content with the authority that they have either been convinced is correct, or that they feel is at least bearable, but above all STABLE is what results in the most happiness. But this relies upon the formula of bliss depending upon ignorance. It is the restless and inquisitive that have always moved civilization forward, and it is they that have always had to face the most resistance because established, vested interests don’t want anything to change. But human beings, being what they are corrupt and other human beings, being what they are, occasionally refuse to be sheep.

  • Puggg

    “Bible thumper” = Anyone who owns a Bible and has actually read at least half of it.

  • concernedcollegekid

    I started questioning my liberalism when I realized exactly that. I mean, it was a combination of things, but seeing blatantly unsupported statements billed as “fact” in certain social science classes was a big part of what led me to AmRen.

  • MekongDelta69

    I am a happier person b/c my life is based on truth and realism.

    Unlike leftists, whose entire belief system is built on a hypocritical, guilt ridden, self hating house of cards. Since that base is built on quicksand where all they do is blame someone ELSE for doing / saying / thinking what THEY are doing / saying / thinking, it will eventually crumble. That’s why they are such tyrannical, hateful people. Their self-esteem is so low and they know, deep down inside, they can’t measure up to us and that’s why they feel they have to control us.

    Those who can – DO
    Those who can’t – become leftists

  • robinbishop34

    Same thing.

  • MarcB1969

    Weren’t they supposed to be a bunch of angry old sour-pusses? Leftists usually vilify libertarians as the “far right” now, even tough they used to see them as the reasonable “good” conservatives. Now the neocon/mainstream conservatives are their “respectable” opposition as leftists have traded their constitutionalism and civil libertarianism for brazenly pro-authoritarian, statist policies.

  • WhiteGayMale

    The older I grow, the more conservative I become. I believe this is a good thing.

  • I Actually Read The Paper

    These were not “extreme conservatives” they surveyed, but 237 university students (88% girls). The researchers actually raise concern that the “right-wing authoritarianism” (RWA) and “social dominance orientation”(SDO) scores had little variance (i.e. were about average with small differences among subjects).

    Furthermore generalized authoritarianism (GA) is a latent variable they created in their structural model. there were actually no correlation between SDO and subjective well being. RWA and subjective well being had such a small correlation as not to be considered an actual one.

    “Extreme conservatives make happier people” is a gross misrepresentation of the article.