Right-WIng Politics and Asperger's Syndrome

Post Reply New Topic

Some aspects of the autistic syndrome sound almost conservative by nature. A person who prefers the familiar and the comforts of routine would be said to be highly conservative by disposition. The flux then of contemporary society could be quite frightening to someone of this disposition and lead them towards a conservative or even far-right-wing politics, depending on how much of this fear is expressed as malice towards immigrants, minorities, and foreigners. If merely a Burkean conservative, the aspie will want to retain the power structures of the status quo with only the reforms needed to preserve it. A scientific-like rationale for free markets might also appeal to the aspie's more fact-based and logical mind as arguments based on fairness and compassion may fail to move. Many aspies eschew social interaction, and so they might find the ostensible individualism that's considered the marker of the right appealing. The libertarian considers the rights over private property inviolable, recognizing no duty of the individual towards society, especially not when it comes to taxes or regulation of commerce.

On the other hand, some things might count against rightism among aspies. Fascists and laissez-faire capitalists have historically promoted social Darwinism, whereby the weak were let (or even forced) to perish; the social disadvantages may even put an otherwise intelligent aspie at a severe disadvantage in competitive, dog-eat-dog capitalism, and without some kind of social support, they might die. The status quo also is the preserve of the rich, powerful, and well connected (i.e., social capital), promulgated from the popular cliques in well-to-do high schools to the governor's suite, the board room, and elsewhere; aspies were never part of the "in crowd," so it would seem they'd have little stake in preserving its influence. Religion and nationalistic fervor are two forms of emotional contagion popular in the right that may not catch in the more rational mind of aspies.

I'm an Aspie, but I consider myself to be very socially liberal. Contrary to the standard label of Aspies being reluctant toward change, I don't really mind change. In fact, change sort of excites me.

Change indicates movement of some sort. To reject movement is to be happy the way things are. If this site is indicative it seems unlikely AS people are happy with the status quo.

I'd say that aspies are people. I know that's a strange idea, but I think it is true and reflected in the expressions of personality on the forums.

That being said, I do think Sand is right that aspies will tend to be dissatisfied with the status quo. However, at the same time, I can see aspies attaching themselves to all sorts of intellectual systems.

As for aspies rejecting nationalism or religion, I'd have to say that this seems false in some cases, and that degrading the notions of nationalism and religion to just "emotion" is to fail to understand these different perspectives. A nation does have emotion surrounding it, however, nationalism is a matter of in-group bonds. A religion also tends to have emotion surrounding it, however, religion also includes theologies which are attempts to reason about God that an aspie could be attracted to.


Additionally, while I agree that aspies might be somewhat put-off by the elements of right-wing political philosophy that tends to cut against their interests or even possibly degrade them. However, I think the notion presented of the status-quo is irrelevant. Only radical political philosophies will actually substantively change the social order enough where the power of social capital could be undermined, not only that, but some right-wing political philosophies actually take offense to the political system because of how it promotes social capital above usefulness, such as small-government right-wing philosophies(which by your schema includes libertarianism). This isn't to say that the economic order doesn't value connections, but it is hard to say that politics practices less favoritism to the less connected.


I am just going to say that aspies are probably the same as most people, but I would imagine that they are attracted to the systems they are attracted to in manners more likely to involve intellectualism, but even then there are aspies who don't engage political processes in an intellectualist manner.

I think one of the defining marks of Conservatism, is certainty; that you absolutely know the correctness of your ideas. Having as much doubt as to what people think, etc., I don't have that.
I tend conservative fiscally, but pretty moderate socially.

I am going to disagree, and in fact, Burkean conservatism, mentioned earlier, is not a matter of absolute correctness so much as a belief in organic change as opposed to more sudden change driven by ideology and abstract ideas.

This doesn't mean that it isn't true that many conservatives are black and white thinkers who long ago decided that they were in the white section, however, the early Greek skeptics were conservatives, a fact that can be clearly found in this random syllabus for a class I found.(I knew the knowledge, but this was one of the clearer sources on the issue and even showed some complexity on it)

http://www.trincoll.edu/NR/rdonlyres/7E ... n_0506.pdf

"ancient Greek skeptics professed to be social conservatives: the reasoning being that if we cannot know whether a certain thing
is really good or just, then we have no reason to militate for political change. To the extent that the goal of ancient skepticism is ataraxia, or tranquility of mind, the best and most prudent course is simply to follow the prevailing mores of one’s own society."

I'm political a radical Left-winger (a Left-Libertarian to be precise), but am a conservative by temperament. Mainly I consider American "Conservatives" to be dangerous radical Fascists/Corporatists that are enemies of principles of liberty and equality the US is based on and that us on the more libertarian-leaning center-left are the real conservatives.

Right-Libertarians are just corporatist suckers, they ignore the great enemy of liberty that is Corporate Power.

An interesting topic. I do agree on why aspies don't like some conservative ideas. I'm a conservative aspie. Many conservatives will admit that there are times when government needs to help people who can't help themselves. I became conservative when I took economics class. Liberal and conservative economists agree that to boost the economy, you have to increase production. Conservative ideas seem to give the best answers on how to increase production.

And when production has been boosted spectacularly (as it has been in this latest decade) with little if any reward to the workers who are also consumers, how does that benefit the common good?

Good stuff. I myself am not liberal or conservative, I admire and dislike aspects of both. I support gay rights and abortion, but I also support gun rights and limited federal government.

Aspies who are Populist conservatives are being totally irrational and in some cases they are like right-wing blacks: UNCLE TOMS. The populist right, being mostly uneducated and anti-intellectual, strongly favors certainty over consistency. Thats why all them hicks are prone to believe in conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and other BS. AFAIC these people are extremely vulgar and need to be controlled for the sake of civilization and public decency.

I get the impression that many aspies are quite liberal (as in liberalistic, not necessarily supporters of the Democratic Party). I'm a supporter of social liberalism. I support gun rights, legalization of mild narcotics, gay rights, polygamy rights and so on. Unlike libertarians, I still believe in government funded schools and hospitals, though...

Therein lies the oxymoron of right-wing politics. Highly conservative by disposition, coupled by the Christian faith? And then again, right-wing politics promotes merciless Darwinism and that if you're poor, then it's your own fault to begin with?

Last I remembered, Christianity was about mercy for others and loving your fellow man. Jesus was an egalitarian and possibly, closer to being a socialist than some kind of capitalist, because heaven forbid, he gave bread and fishes to his hungry peasant followers for free. And yet, heaven forbid, he trashed up the Temple in Jerusalem because he called capitalists, 'thieves'.

The whole hoopla about God purportedly supporting capitalism and the rich is based on Carnegie's religious assertion that to earn as much money as possible as tycoons, was to please God. Because the more money the rich made, the more money there was to trickle down to the masses and since it was for the greater good, God would bless the rich people for it.

Right wing politics was irrational and flawed to begin with. Only hicks, rednecks and the ignorant would subscribe to such hogwash.

It's more likely that, due to Aspies suffering from social and economic exclusion due to their mental deficiencies, they will encounter the same difficulties and hurt that John Stuart Mill suffered upon the realization that to conform to his father's vision of a strictly Utilitarian society would cause him to suffer, it drove him to formulate the history-defining text 'On Liberty'. I could dare say that any Aspie who seeks to understand his/her place in the world ought to read that text.

That sums me up as well.

You probably mean paradox. As it really seems, there are potentially 2 paradoxes:

One: Christianity was not a conservative movement, but rather it was a movement that conflicted with prevailing Jewish and Roman cultural norms, and arguably one that even promoted continual tension with "the world". Conservatism is the world.
Two: Capitalism doesn't really care about the old order or its institutions and would gladly sell everything against the status quo, but conservatism is highly linked to the old order and its institutions.


I am not sure I would subscribe to quite that view. Certainly Christianity was about mercy and loving one's fellow man, but Christianity was also not a politically oriented theology in some ways as there are no clear ways to take Christian teachings, unlike with the earlier Jewish teachings that created a legal framework. I mean, I would just say that he attacked these people because he objected to capitalism in religious affairs, but that doesn't say anything about outside of it.


Well, actually one can pull the idea of God supporting capitalism from the parable of the talents in some ways. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... ersion=NIV

I mean, in the parable the master tells a servant to have bankers lend money at interest, and encourages the idea that making money is something a good servant will do with that money.


Well, part of this will depend on who you call right-wing, but really it seems that to some extent that this is an idea that you'd probably have to defend more strongly. After all, it does not seem to follow that every person who could broadly be considered on the right wing would have to be irrational. In fact, one doesn't have to be a Christian to be broadly right-wing, it is just that Christianity is often associated with the right.


Well, most people should read that text, but the issue is that right-wingers do often find that valuable, as Bush administration economist Greg Mankiw considered that text one of the principle ones guiding his ethical framework, and the libertarian Don Boudreaux reads anti-government ideas from the book. http://cafehayek.com/2009/09/mill-on-li ... power.html

Now, I suppose you might not consider libertarians to be right-wing, but the OP did, and I don't know what issues your attacks on the right really center around.

The desire for stability, clearly arranged boundaries and morality, certainty in the future, autistics certainly often desire these and this is what parts of right wing politics aims for, certainly the extreme right.

However, autistic are usually just so lost to society, so out of place and feel so out of touch amongst everyone else that whatever any given society might project about morality will unlikely affect the autistic emotionally like it affects normal people. While in principle the autistic might favour right wing politics, it's actual manifestation of a community arising with shared values is precisely what will so often go over the autistics head (and emotional heart), hence the autistic is unlikely to be convinced.