Suchergebnisse

Political ideologies play a less important role in the political belief systems of the general public than is commonly assumed. The concept of nationalism is reviewed & its saliency is tested. Two models of nationalism are compared. The ethnocentric model predicts that, within a nationalist group, the national in-group should be viewed more favorably than the out-groups, & that in-group & out-group evaluations should be negatively correlated. The historical model incorporates explicitly politicized group orientations. It assumes that group orientations are rationally linked, & allows the concept to be defined in terms of specific historical conditions. A study was conducted during July/Aug 1974, consisting of 221 personal interviews. The Ss were randomly chosen from the population of Calgary. The data give only weak support to the ethnocentric model of nationalism, & only for the apolitical group orientations in the sample. The politicized orientations were related in a manner suggesting the historical model. The existence of two conflicting ideological patterns in the political belief systems of the Ss contradicts the assumptions at the beginning of the study. 11 Tables, 3 Appendices. Modified HA.

Introduction -- Jonathan Haidt and the five political ideologies -- On the psychopathology of polarization -- Understanding the psychopathology of the right -- The hysterical left and the narcissistic center -- The anti-ideology ideology : re-discovering the Enlightenment -- Conclusion.

This study explored the relationships among political ideologies, masculinity ideologies, and shame ideologies within three online communities. Three different ideological communities, all on Reddit (a discussion-based social news website), were chosen based on previous research suggesting they differ in terms of their conceptualizations of gender and support for or rejection of feminism: r/TheRedPill, r/MensRights, and r/MensLib. This study uses a framework for understanding Ideologies as Complex Adaptive Systems (ICAS) as articulated by Thagard (2017), which uses Cognitive and Affective Maps (CAMs) as its primary tool of analysis. Using the postings on the Reddit sites as our raw data, we created CAMs to assist in comparing the conceptual and affective qualities of each community. We conducted the study in three phases: in Phase One, we used Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR) methods and correlational analyses to create a set of general ideological CAMs for each community. We also constructed a set of CAMs depicting whom each group views as ingroups and outgroups in their creation of social identities. In Phase Two, we created a set of CAMs for each community's dominant conception of gender. In Phase Three, we constructed a set of CAMs depicting each community's relationship with the ideas of shame and injustice. The discussion section is organized into five main chapters. The first chapter contains reflections on the process of using CAMs, the next chapter is on the study's limitations and future directions, and the final three are on the study findings' empirical, theoretical, and clinical implications. The empirical implications of the study contribute to the following areas of research: the role of shame in ideology, the political construction of victimhood, and Ambivalent Sexism. In the theoretical implications chapter, I discuss the study's potential contributions to theory development in the CAMs methodology. The final chapter offers reflections on the study's clinical implications, especially related to gender identity development, sexual violence, and the role of ideology in emotion regulation.

The article presents a critical overview of underlying ideas, social context, and original teachings of two "mediating ideologies" (social democracy and conservatism) and two mass "political phenomena" (nationalism and populism). Each of them constitutes a form of more or less effective political compromise, which ought to neutralize constant tensions and clashes between the leading modern ideologies of freedom and equality, i.e. liberalism and communism. However, the clash of ideologies which were prominent in the 19th and 20th centuries has lost much of its intensity today, although the social causes that gave rise to them have remained unchanged: social inequalities, abuse of freedom, and uneven distribution of social power. At the same time, the main social forces and political organizations that had been the symbols and striking forces of freedom and equality in the preceding decades - the political parties of the "left " and "right", including the never clearly defined "political center" - also lost their identity and power. Th e then political mortal enemies look and behave today almost exactly as they did then: in the ideological sense, "everyone wants everything" (allegedly representing/ defending the interests of "all citizens"); in the organizational sense, there is almost no difference between them; whereas the difference in the manner they behave when in power is almost negligible.