that the
Catholic
Church is the only true church," since "she was the church founded by Christ.
Adorno-T-Authoritarian-Personality-Harper-Bros-1950
Robert, whose life goal is to "own three ---stores," feels especially abused by "spongers .
.
.
these so-called shoppers who .
.
.
pick over all the --- and pick out the one on the bottom.
"
This suspiciousness is expressed in several questionnaire items, such as those betraying a cynical view of "human nature" as inherently warlike (Item 6), fears of "prying" (Item 31), and fantasies about secret "plots" which "con- trol our lives" (Item 38). The last item, which reflects the victimization theme most directly, has much the highest DiscriminatQry Power.
A further aspect of the high scorers' moral-religious ideology is their de-
? THE AUTHORIT ARIAN PERSONALITY
pendence and submission to authority in religion and morals. Such basic sub- mission is in striking contrast with their exaggerated fears of having to submit to domination by outgroups-Jews, Negroes, labor, "Reds," Russia, etc. Authoritarian submission in the moral-religious sphere is expressed in three main ways. In every prejudiced interviewee, as the foregoing discussion has emphasized, there seems to be a submissive self-negating overconformity to externalized, conventional moralism. This requires no further elaboration here.
A second aspect is the submissive emphasis on unquestioning belief in re- ligious authority. Questionnaire Item 8, which is clearly discriminating, expresses the core of this attitude: Everyone should submit "without ques- tion" to the "decisions" of "some supernatural power" in whom he has "complete faith. " In the interviews, the three most conventional high scorers are definitely traditionalists in religion.
-
Robert reiterates the point that "I believe pretty strongly along the lines of the
Bible. " Both Clarence and Wilbur declare categorically that they have never ques- tioned any of the (fundamentalist) religious teachings of their parents. . . . Re- ligion is more remote for Eugene, who confesses that "I don't know" the Ten Com- mandments or Christ's teachings. But he states that the most important thing in religion is "belief . . . in Jesus Christ, the Bible," and "I've always believed in it. " Even Ronald, who says that he no longer "believes," reveals that his is not the integrated philosophy of "a staunch free-thinker" who has no need for external props of "faith. " Rather, he suffers from a hollow cynicism, and longs to surrender himself dependently to "God. " The most important thing in religion, he declares, is "belief. " "I think that belief in anything-that's the thing that holds you to- gether. " More personally: "It seems as if I want to believe in the Supreme Being, but try and keep it suppressed. " The source of this conflict is suggested later in discussing Ronald's relations with his father.
The third aspect of authoritarian submission in religion on the part of these men is their submissive relationship to their deity, conceived as a dominating "supreme" power.
God is "someone a lot bigger and stronger than anyone on this earth (Robert), who "rules all things" (Clarence), and whose "word" in the Bible one is called upon to "live up to" (Wilbur) and "abide by" (Robert). Ronald's longing for such sub- mission has just been mentioned. It is of interest that Eugene, who never knew his father, is the only one of these men whose conception of God appears to be quite blank: "Just believe in it and that's about all. "
The prejudiced men's repression of a large part of their selves, their intel- lectual-emotional submissiveness in the moral-religious sphere, their anti- intraceptive narrowing of inner freedom-all these trends weaken their intel- lectual strength. Loss of conscious awareness of so much of one's self tends to undermine one's confidence in human ability to understand the world in general, and to render one. susceptible to various forms of mysticism-espe- cially mystical interpretations of human behavior. These trends are thus con-
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
ducive to agreement with such questionnaire items, all clearly discriminating between high and low quartiles, as those stressing the limitations of human understanding (Item 4), admitting belief in astrology (Item 29), and assuming a mystical-hereditarian (externalized) explanation for some people's "urge to jump from high places" (Item 16). The general tendency toward mysti- cism and intellectual defeatism appears as a formal characteristic of many quotations from the present high scorers.
3. F ASCISTS
Certain attitudes implicit in the approach of the pseudodemocratic high scorers break through explicitly in the fascists. To begin with, the authori- tarian hostility toward people implicit in moralism appears in the fascists as open hate and contempt for people, directed especially toward moral-out- groups. The attempt to bolster up self-esteem by identifying oneself with an (hereditarian) elite, is also more openly expressed by these men.
Floyd shows the hatred for people in its most extreme form, when asked what things irritate him most in others. "Just that they're people! (How do you mean? ) Oh, the majority are ignorant, close to animals as anything else. I mean dumb animals! (Can you elaborate on that? ) They haven't got sense enough to see things as they are, they are easily swayed, crude, uncouth, they are like a pack. Show 'em a leader and they will go anywhere. " . . . Buck's authoritarian hate is not "system- atized" into an explicit ideology like Floyd's, but his interview protocol is filled with expressions of hate and contempt for "slummy women" and "goddam ch- - " ; for " j - - o - - happy idiots," "sex maniacs," "goddam syphilitic people" (homosexuals); "people that go around stealin' ";other inmates-"Hell, you can't have real friends in here. . . . Stab you in the back. Can't trust many of them"- and everyone else regarded as outside "my own class of people. " . . . Adrian is too deferential to use the same strong language as these men, but his antidemocratic hatreds seem clear. His contempt for "people who never had anything" and for workers generally has already been mentioned. Interesting is his emphatic dichot- omy between men and women, and his authoritarian hostility toward both. It is men who evoke his deepest anxiety and hate: "A lot of people irritate me, a lot of men irritate me by what I think is a superior attitude that women don't usually have"; "all men are more or less supercilious. " Having self-protectively identified himself with what he conceives as the submissive-dependent role of women vis-a- vis men-"1 identify myself with the dependent kind" of woman-Adrian adopts an essentially paranoid attitude toward all men in terms of this identification: "I don't think men respect women, or anything about women, the way they ought to. . . . Women aren't inferior to men. If anything, they are superior! " (The possi- bility of equality is alien to his thinking; the only choices he knows are to submit or to dominate, to be superior or inferior. ) Yet, in his role as would-be aristocrat, Adrian shares the same chauvinistic attitudes toward women which (in his paranoid submissive-"feminine" role) he ostensibly criticizes. As a persecuted "woman" he protests that "women make better business women than men do"; but as an aristo- crat, "I don't approve of women in business. " He even mentions an episode in which he was strongly condemned by a woman for his "supercilious" attitude toward her and toward women who work.
? 8p THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
The lack of a genuine conscience is scarcely even concealed by a moralistic fac;ade in the fascists. They display an externalized, undeveloped superego. One aspect of this is an absence of inner guilt over violation of values; no ethical values have really been incorporated into the self. What superego activity exists is almost entirely limited to fear of external punish. ment or social ostracism.
Buck suggests in almost so many words that his superego is merely an external mystical "power": "There must be some power over us to punish us. . . . He's sure givin' me hell, bein' in here. " This "hell" is not the torture of a guilty con- science. On the contrary, Buck explains that being in prison "hurts my pride" and "hurts my business," when "I could be out there makin' money all the time. " The cause of his delinquency (a long trail of bad checks, passed on an extended spree with a woman) is for him purely external: Lying about many details, he bemoans that "a man of my intelligence20 let some damn broad put me behind bars. " . . . Floyd, too, shows no signs of actual guilt over his long record of delinquencies. On his admission to prison he is described by an interviewer as feeling "that his present series of violent robberies doesn't mean a thing. " To the present examiner, he mentions these as "just something that happened. " He is reported to have said on admission: "We heard about others getting caught but couldn't believe we would. " . . . Adrian attributes his various delinquencies to drinking: "That's all my trouble is. " According to the initial prison interview report, "he does not feel that he has any serious problem except a tendency to get very drunk when discouraged. " Adrian's conscience, too, is organized chiefly around fears of ostracism and of punitive agencies mystically assigned to an "intangible something" outside himself: "I do believe in retribution. We pay right here. I've proved that in my own life. We think we can get away with things. It's an illusion. " (Adrian has spent "most of my life" in jails, prison, or "on probation. ") With respect to ostracism: "I have always been greatly concerned with what other people thought about me. " As will be elaborated later, he is especially apprehensive over rejection by his father, who "haunts me" and whose approval is required to allay Adrian's anxiety: "I'm always wondering if he would approve of this or approve of that. "
A second aspect of the fascists' undeveloped superego is its domination by the pleasure principle. They are quite unable to postpone gratification. Unable to pursue any integrated long-term achievement goals, they are at the mercy of an imperious oral-demandingness.
Describing with much braggadocio his sharp dealings in cattle trading (actually, he lost a sizeable inheritance by mismanagement and drunken neglect), Buck be- moans openly that ordinary ways of doing business are "too damn slow for me. " (Recall his anti-Semitic projection about Jews' "beatin' a guy out of his money. ") Admittedly, "money is the main object. . . . Can't buy nothin' without money. . . . Can't buy whiskey. "
These attitudes are part of an essentially egocentric conception of reality. The following is one of many similar remarks made by Buck in his discussion of politico-economic affairs:
"I never paid no attention to that---; get me out of here and out on that damn 20 Buck obtained a Wechsler-Bellevue Full-Scale I. Q. of 83.
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
range is all I want. " . . . Simih1rly, Floyd states that the $59 a week he received on his last job (which he held for a month) was "too slow" because "I started from scratch. " "Had to acquire everything: clothes, quarters, the fundamentals. " Detail- ing on admission to the prison some of the robberies and orgies of his gang, Floyd explains that "We had to have money to operate on: We spent $40 or so for our dinner parties. " . . . Adrian admits that from infancy he "usually got my way. " "In fact, all I ever had to do was cry about anything. " At the several boarding schools where his father placed him after his mother's death (when he was 5), "I was incorrigible, left school when I pleased. I overdrew my charge account . . . " His self-centered definition of reality is made explicit: "When things don't person- ally concern me, they just don't exist for me. "
Implicit in these men's weak conscience, their infantile-demanding im- pulses, and their egocentric view of the world, is a trait which governs their entire behavior. This is their extreme (personal) opportunism. The disregard of principle in their personal behavior corresponds with the ideological opportunism of their racism and reactionism. The personal opportunism is usually expressed in the service of infantile attitudes of omnipotence, and of trying to deny personal weakness.
Buck's pathological lying has been mentioned. As for his other offenses, he has served time for obtaining money on false pretenses, and for failure to provide for his children. He was arrested on one occasion for "molesting" his own children (girl then age 2-3, boy age 4-5), but it is reported the charges were dropped be- cause the children were too small to testify. . . . Floyd's delinquencies are less dramatic, but equally capricious. They include two jail sentences for disturbing the peace; an Army record of alternating between the guardhouse and repeated A. W. O. L. 's until he was discharged; and a series of armed gang robberies under- taken as an easy way of making a lot of money "to operate on. " Relevant here is Floyd's stated desire to marry a "wealthy woman," who should have "fair physical attractions" but whose personality he will "take as it comes. " . . . Adrian's delin- quencies include his self-styled "incorrigibility" at boarding schools (truancy, re- peatedly overdrawing his charge accounts, etc. ); numerous jail sentences for drunkenness and homosexual prostitution; and robbery. "I had probation, it seems to me, most of my life. " He supported himself mainly by prostitution, and by his own statement "never had any (sexual) relations with anyone that didn't have money connected with it. " He admits that some men attract him more than others, but "I never let preferences stand in the way. . . . The only thing I was ever in- terested in was the rent. "
The essentially frantic nature of these men's approach to life suggests a desperate inner emptiness and lack of moorings. This hollowness may pro- vide part of the basis for their wish to submit to "strong" political "leader- ship. " Further, any religious leanings of these men might be expected to express cravings for authoritarian submission. This would be expected to differ from the religious authoritarian submission of other high scorers in two interrelated aspects. As in other conflicts in the fascists, the craving for religious submission might very well be explicit rather than implicit; and since dominance-submission conflicts are involved, this craving might be
? THE AUTHORIT ARIAN PERSONALITY
expressed with open ideological opportunism. It happens that Buck "never did think much about religion," but Adrian and Floyd reveal these very characteristics clearly. Floyd's opportunism takes the form of highly egocen- tric (as well as confused) "criteria" for belief, with no apparent interest in considerations of evidence or truth-falsity.
Floyd states that before he was shot (almost fatally) in his last gang robbery, he was "reaching for something" and "wanted" to believe in God. (He had never had any religious training; his father was a free-thinker, and he had never known his mother. ) But "I just couldn't feature that a human being, an intelligence, could be obliterated so easily. " Having been thus let down "personally" by the God he was "reaching for" (in that his delinquency led to disaster), he could no longer "believe. " . . . Adrian's religious training consisted of very early exposure to the Christian Science of a governess and living in Episcopal boarding schools from the ages of 8 to I 5. At I 5 he tried to submit to what for him seemed clearly to represent religious totalitarianism and voluntary self-emasculation: "I very seriously went into the Church of Rome at I5" to become a priest-not because of any specific religious convictions, but "because I believed and still do . . .
that the Catholic Church is the only true church," since "she was the church founded by Christ. " "She was the first" and therefore "the other churches had no real excuse to break away. " His fascistic inclinations are stated openly: "I respect her as a political organization. I think it would be better to have everything under one head". It would save dissension. " Adrian's father forcibly interfered, however, to prevent his entry into the priesthood. Adrian drifted until he became "very interested in Christian Science" with quite practical motives: "I'm not positive I believe in Christian Sci- ence, but there's much in it that seems to help me. . . . I don't try to apply Christian
Science to physical things . . . but my worries, mental things-there's where it helps me most. " In anticipation of parole, he wrote to two Christian Science practitioners for aid in lining up a job (a prerequisite to being granted parole). When both of them criticized him for "trying to manifest a job" instead of relying mystically upon "the Divine Employer," Adrian was "never so disgusted in my life. " But Adrian admittedly has "got to have a God" to submit to, "So what do you think I took up! " The answer is "Hinduism," which "teaches you discipline" such as "cut- ting down on cigarettes. " Adrian summarizes his approach to his latest ideological "manipulandum" in this way: "It's practical. That's the main thing. "
4. LOW SCORERS
The moral-religious ideology of the low-scoring interviewees is quite dif- ferent from that of the prejudiced men. They are relatively free of moralism, and sometimes verbalize explicitly antimoralistic sentiments.
Thus, for Art religion has "nothing to do with keeping laws, except the Golden Rule. " Highly objectionable to Don is the idea of religion as "abiding by a certain set of rules. " Probing reveals no sign of rejection in any of the 4 low scorers toward atheists or non-Christians.
They speak ofreligion primarily in terms of ethical values. Religion is "whatever spiritual qualities you have within yourself" (Art). This orienta- tion is embedded in more individualized relationships to themselves and other people, as compared with the high scorers' impersonalization of such rela-
? Bss
tionships. Different features of this ethical approach are stressed by each. Jim expresses most clearly the aspect of nurturant-affiliative attitudes toward people:
"I look on God as mostly the goodness in all peoples. . . . If everyone . . . carried out the principles that religion expounds, it would be a better world. (How do you mean? ) To treat others as a person would wish to be treated himself, and to help those less fortunate than oneself, and to be a part of the community or society that one is in, to take an active part in it, and being kind and generous, and to more or less have a high regard for your fellow human being. " Art, too, conceives of God, not as a person, but "more a power of good. . . . God is a force. "
Another aspect is the emphasis on full expression of the individual person- ality and "happiness on earth. "
Don declares that his concept of a hereafter was nicely expressed by a girl-friend who said that "if she believed in a hereafter it would mean developing one's unde- veloped talents. " For Jim "the only happiness that we really know of is here on earth; so why not try to enjoy the people and things on this earth, rather than a life somewhere else. "
Further, a rich inner life is a religious value.
Religion "gives you some access to your thoughts" (Dick). Prayer is conceived not as a mode of securing gratification of personal desires or of paying obeisance to a parent-substitute God. Rather, prayer is something which in and of itself "can help a person" (Dick); which "helps form what you're to be" (Don); "a personal thing that happens when the lights are out before you retire. Not 'I want something or other,' but consciously putting into words so as to place whatever you are look- ing for into a positive plane" (Art).
Opposed to the prejudiced men's authoritarian submission in moral-religi- ous matters is the insistence upon individuality in the credos of the low scorers.
"Religion is a personal thing. . . . Religion is as individual to me as my finger- prints, or as yours are to you" (Art). Dick explains his change from a Baptist to a Christian Scientist partly in terms of his objection to the teachings of a Navy chaplain, and especially the chaplain's efforts to "force us to come to church . . . I believe it's a man's personal affair. " It happened that Dick "got hold of a Christian Science textbook, liked the ideas . . . the idea that they had an explanation for almost everything that happened. " (Contrast Dick's emphasis on "ideas" and the implied internalization of Christian Science, with Adrian's externalized, oppor- tunistic-manipulative approach. ) Dick adds another value, however, which sug- gests some of that antiweakness drive that is usually typical of high scorers: "And another idea-they claimed that if you try to attain a goal, nothing can stop you. "
It will be recalled that those who "believe" show submissiveness toward a God who is essentially dominating (whose "word" they must "abide by") and punitive (toward those who violate his "word"). The low scorers, on
CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
the other hand, show an optimistic and trusting dependence toward a God conceived as kind and nurturant.
Although spoken of as "kind of an infinite being" rather than directly anthropo- morphic, God is "something there you can turn to in case you need someone to turn to" (Dick); "someone to cling to in times of emergency or stress" (Jim). Actually, "I don't know if there is a God," but the most important thing in religion is "a genuine belief and a faith that things would always turn out all right" (Jim). Religion involves "a belief, without academic proof, of a higher power-of some- thing you can depend on, of dependency" (Art).
The ultimate optimism hinted in these statements is consistent with findings about low scorers generally. However, the lack of inner self-reliance implied by their dependence on a supernatural power resembles certain trends found to be more typical of high scorers generally. This latter aspect is consistent with the fact that none of the low-scoring interviewees scored extremely low on any of the questionnaire scales.
E. DEFENSES AGAINST WEAKNESS
1. HIGH SCORERS
Defenses against weakness seem to be especially pronounced in the prej- udiced inmates. All of the high-scoring interviewees show deep-seated fears of weakness in themselves. The meaning of weakness to these men seems to be tied up with intense fears of nonmasculinity. To escape these fears they try to bolster themselves up by various antiweakness or pseudomascu- linity defenses. These can be grouped into four general themes, each of which may be expressed in a certain formula: (I) Power-strivings: "I am not on the bottom, I am one of those on top"; or, "I do not weakly submit, I domi- nate and control, I have power. " (2) "Toughness": "I am not weak, I am strong"; "I am not soft, I am tough"; "I am not passive and feminine, I am active and masculine. " (3) Flight into heterosexual activity: "I am not homo- sexual, I am heterosexual"; or "I do not love him, I love her. " (4) Paranoid reactions: "I do not love him, I hate him because he persecutes me"; i. e. , "I do not feel submissive-homosexual desires, I feel aggressive resentment toward men because they persecute me. "21
The questionnaire item which reflects defensive masculinity attitudes (spe- cifically, "toughness" and power) in purest form is number 26, which stereo- typically divides the world into "the strong" (ingroup) and "the weak" (outgroup). This item has the highest D. P. in the F scale. Other items con- taining antiweakness themes are those exalting "will power" (Item 2), "dis- cipline" and "determination" (Item I 3), an exaggerated notion of "honor"
21 The formulae (3) and (4) are adapted from Freud (40).
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
(Item 19), as well as items a1ready mentioned in another context, especially 14 (PEC), 23, 30, and 45 (E).
The relative emphasis placed on different aspects of masculinity fa~ades, in relation to the fears underneath, differs from individual to individual. Therefore, instead of proceeding variable by variable, we shall discuss the weakness-antiweakness complex separately for each inmate.
Robert has centered his efforts to "prove" his "masculinity" around compulsive status-power strivings. He declares that from an early age "my greatest desire was to be somebody in life. . . . I wanted to be a success in business . . . and sometimes worried whether I would. . . . The future goal that I have set up is to own at least three . . . stores of my own . . . I was on my first store at the time of my arrest. " This concern with status and power gives meaning to his anxious fantasy that Negroes "don't have a goal in life" but "just want to exist," and his envious stereotype of Jewish "drive and ambition to get there. " Robert projects this compulsive power-drive onto others and reveals his inability to imagine any alternative to dominance or submission: "Every man has a certain ego that he has to satisfy. You like to be on top. If you're anybody at all, you don't like to be on the bottom. "
(Italics supplied. )
The submissive dependence behind Robert's power-seeking is shown in
his attitudes toward friends and family. (What do friends offer a person? ) "To me, friends offer satisfaction to myself that I've been doing a job well done, that I'm satisfying those people of their expectations. . . . (Q. ) Well, I was referring to the business viewpoint. " (Note the impersonalized use of people as primarily an external prop for what Robert calls his "ego. ") His main satisfaction with his younger brother was "the satisfaction he gave my ego. . . . He's patterned his life after mine. He's in the - - - business, too. " Robert further expresses pride that "my folks have always classed me as a success in the--- business. " The deference toward the examiner ("Do you think I have the right view of things? ") has been mentioned before.
Robert's power drive has apparently not stopped his fears of femininity, of heterosexual impotence, and possibly of latent homosexuality. Underlying identification with a feminine role is suggested by his own admission that "up until the time I left home, (my mother) always referred to me as her best daughter. " The possibility of conflict over latent homosexuality is raised by several cues: e. g. , by Robert's insistence, despite instructions not to bother with details, on exhibitionistically giving to the examiner (a man) a minutely detailed account of his first experience of intercourse; and by indirect "con-
tact" with other men via a hostile affair with a highly promiscuous woman. This last behavior, which finally broke up Robert's marriage, suggests a common type of defense against homosexual wishes, viz. , compulsive flight into heterosexual relationships which are extremely impersonal and hostile.
Ronald's ego-alien weakness is more transparent than Robert's. Mentioned
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
earlier was his unsatisfied dependent longing for authoritarian religious belief as "the thing that holds you together. " Similar extreme dependence is shown in his conception of "friends" as "someone that you can . . . talk to about your troubles, and vice versa" and "know that he's there at all times, and if you need any help at any time. " Also, like Robert, he asked the exam- iner to reassure him at the close of the interview that he is not "too radical" in some of his ideas. This "too radical" was apparently a euphemism for "too aggressive" toward outgroups. Ronald has a history of severe chronic bed- wetting until the age of 12, for which he has no explanation to offer beyond an extemalization of the symptom onto "my kidneys. " He has no idea why his enuresis suddenly stopped at the age of 12. That bed-wetting may have represented in part a passive mode of sexual gratification is suggested by his homosexual conflicts. Earlier mention has been made of his righteous condemnation of "sexual perversion" including, explicitly, fellatio. He de- nies that he has ever "felt any desire of any kind" for homosexual relations, yet subsequently admits to having several times had such relations with a fellow inmate. He implicitly denies any "real" homosexuality in this (blam- ing it exclusively on prison sex deprivation), and says that he had no special reaction to the experiences except to lose respect for the other man. Ron- ald's paranoid "toughness" toward Negro men might perhaps be a defense against homosexual excitement aroused by them. Ronald's promiscuous heterosexuality, including several impersonalized, unusual marriage cere- monies, may also be understood as an attempt to deny homosexual impulses. "I always get married spectacularly"-e. g. , "in a taxicab" or "my partner in a dance walkathon-married on the floor-no love, but received money for it from the spectators. " Both weakness and compensatory "toughness" seem to be combined in Ronald's thefts and gang robberies carried out "as a business. "
The chief prop of Eugene's defenses is a fac;ade of toughness. He has repeatedly been involved in petty trouble, especially by fighting when drunk. "I've got quite a temper," and "I like to fight once in a while . . . usually when I'm drinking. " Moreover, "I'm proud of my people," the "Scotch-Irish," whose most prominent characteristic, according to Eugene, is that "most of them like to fight. " When the examiner points out that this is precisely what Eugene resentfully says about Negroes, he differentiates on the basis that Negroes "go around looking" for fights, while he himself merely "likes" to fight (and does so frequently). The psychological reason why he likes to fight and has "quite a temper" seems to be largely uncon- scious; he "can't explain it. " He explains, however, that Negroes "go around picking trouble" because they've "got an inferiority complex" and "try to be big shots"-which may be a projection of his own inferiority feelings and the "big shot" way he tries to compensate for them. The situations which . evoke
Eugene's temper suggest possibly more specific causes, namely homosexual
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
impulses, against which his impulsive aggressiveness may be a paranoid defense: "I was with a girl at a bar, and a guy got a little out of line . . . talkin' dirty-not to her, but he was talkin' loud. . . . "; or "maybe some guy calls me a name. " Eugene himself associates his propensity for "trouble" with fear of heterosexual adjustment: "I'm just a little too wild to get married. I'm scared of it. "
Clarence shows ,more obvious signs of ego-alien "weakness," and has less effective defenses against it. The army, he declares, "makes a man of you," but it did not succeed in overcoming Clarence's fear of rising above a private, because that would have meant "too much responsibility"- although "I'm pretty good at takin' orders. " Discharged for tuberculosis, he drew government compensation for seventeen years and then lived "on the county. " According to the prison physician, Clarence "claimed he still had T. B. , but . . . we failed to find any evidence of any active T.
This suspiciousness is expressed in several questionnaire items, such as those betraying a cynical view of "human nature" as inherently warlike (Item 6), fears of "prying" (Item 31), and fantasies about secret "plots" which "con- trol our lives" (Item 38). The last item, which reflects the victimization theme most directly, has much the highest DiscriminatQry Power.
A further aspect of the high scorers' moral-religious ideology is their de-
? THE AUTHORIT ARIAN PERSONALITY
pendence and submission to authority in religion and morals. Such basic sub- mission is in striking contrast with their exaggerated fears of having to submit to domination by outgroups-Jews, Negroes, labor, "Reds," Russia, etc. Authoritarian submission in the moral-religious sphere is expressed in three main ways. In every prejudiced interviewee, as the foregoing discussion has emphasized, there seems to be a submissive self-negating overconformity to externalized, conventional moralism. This requires no further elaboration here.
A second aspect is the submissive emphasis on unquestioning belief in re- ligious authority. Questionnaire Item 8, which is clearly discriminating, expresses the core of this attitude: Everyone should submit "without ques- tion" to the "decisions" of "some supernatural power" in whom he has "complete faith. " In the interviews, the three most conventional high scorers are definitely traditionalists in religion.
-
Robert reiterates the point that "I believe pretty strongly along the lines of the
Bible. " Both Clarence and Wilbur declare categorically that they have never ques- tioned any of the (fundamentalist) religious teachings of their parents. . . . Re- ligion is more remote for Eugene, who confesses that "I don't know" the Ten Com- mandments or Christ's teachings. But he states that the most important thing in religion is "belief . . . in Jesus Christ, the Bible," and "I've always believed in it. " Even Ronald, who says that he no longer "believes," reveals that his is not the integrated philosophy of "a staunch free-thinker" who has no need for external props of "faith. " Rather, he suffers from a hollow cynicism, and longs to surrender himself dependently to "God. " The most important thing in religion, he declares, is "belief. " "I think that belief in anything-that's the thing that holds you to- gether. " More personally: "It seems as if I want to believe in the Supreme Being, but try and keep it suppressed. " The source of this conflict is suggested later in discussing Ronald's relations with his father.
The third aspect of authoritarian submission in religion on the part of these men is their submissive relationship to their deity, conceived as a dominating "supreme" power.
God is "someone a lot bigger and stronger than anyone on this earth (Robert), who "rules all things" (Clarence), and whose "word" in the Bible one is called upon to "live up to" (Wilbur) and "abide by" (Robert). Ronald's longing for such sub- mission has just been mentioned. It is of interest that Eugene, who never knew his father, is the only one of these men whose conception of God appears to be quite blank: "Just believe in it and that's about all. "
The prejudiced men's repression of a large part of their selves, their intel- lectual-emotional submissiveness in the moral-religious sphere, their anti- intraceptive narrowing of inner freedom-all these trends weaken their intel- lectual strength. Loss of conscious awareness of so much of one's self tends to undermine one's confidence in human ability to understand the world in general, and to render one. susceptible to various forms of mysticism-espe- cially mystical interpretations of human behavior. These trends are thus con-
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
ducive to agreement with such questionnaire items, all clearly discriminating between high and low quartiles, as those stressing the limitations of human understanding (Item 4), admitting belief in astrology (Item 29), and assuming a mystical-hereditarian (externalized) explanation for some people's "urge to jump from high places" (Item 16). The general tendency toward mysti- cism and intellectual defeatism appears as a formal characteristic of many quotations from the present high scorers.
3. F ASCISTS
Certain attitudes implicit in the approach of the pseudodemocratic high scorers break through explicitly in the fascists. To begin with, the authori- tarian hostility toward people implicit in moralism appears in the fascists as open hate and contempt for people, directed especially toward moral-out- groups. The attempt to bolster up self-esteem by identifying oneself with an (hereditarian) elite, is also more openly expressed by these men.
Floyd shows the hatred for people in its most extreme form, when asked what things irritate him most in others. "Just that they're people! (How do you mean? ) Oh, the majority are ignorant, close to animals as anything else. I mean dumb animals! (Can you elaborate on that? ) They haven't got sense enough to see things as they are, they are easily swayed, crude, uncouth, they are like a pack. Show 'em a leader and they will go anywhere. " . . . Buck's authoritarian hate is not "system- atized" into an explicit ideology like Floyd's, but his interview protocol is filled with expressions of hate and contempt for "slummy women" and "goddam ch- - " ; for " j - - o - - happy idiots," "sex maniacs," "goddam syphilitic people" (homosexuals); "people that go around stealin' ";other inmates-"Hell, you can't have real friends in here. . . . Stab you in the back. Can't trust many of them"- and everyone else regarded as outside "my own class of people. " . . . Adrian is too deferential to use the same strong language as these men, but his antidemocratic hatreds seem clear. His contempt for "people who never had anything" and for workers generally has already been mentioned. Interesting is his emphatic dichot- omy between men and women, and his authoritarian hostility toward both. It is men who evoke his deepest anxiety and hate: "A lot of people irritate me, a lot of men irritate me by what I think is a superior attitude that women don't usually have"; "all men are more or less supercilious. " Having self-protectively identified himself with what he conceives as the submissive-dependent role of women vis-a- vis men-"1 identify myself with the dependent kind" of woman-Adrian adopts an essentially paranoid attitude toward all men in terms of this identification: "I don't think men respect women, or anything about women, the way they ought to. . . . Women aren't inferior to men. If anything, they are superior! " (The possi- bility of equality is alien to his thinking; the only choices he knows are to submit or to dominate, to be superior or inferior. ) Yet, in his role as would-be aristocrat, Adrian shares the same chauvinistic attitudes toward women which (in his paranoid submissive-"feminine" role) he ostensibly criticizes. As a persecuted "woman" he protests that "women make better business women than men do"; but as an aristo- crat, "I don't approve of women in business. " He even mentions an episode in which he was strongly condemned by a woman for his "supercilious" attitude toward her and toward women who work.
? 8p THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
The lack of a genuine conscience is scarcely even concealed by a moralistic fac;ade in the fascists. They display an externalized, undeveloped superego. One aspect of this is an absence of inner guilt over violation of values; no ethical values have really been incorporated into the self. What superego activity exists is almost entirely limited to fear of external punish. ment or social ostracism.
Buck suggests in almost so many words that his superego is merely an external mystical "power": "There must be some power over us to punish us. . . . He's sure givin' me hell, bein' in here. " This "hell" is not the torture of a guilty con- science. On the contrary, Buck explains that being in prison "hurts my pride" and "hurts my business," when "I could be out there makin' money all the time. " The cause of his delinquency (a long trail of bad checks, passed on an extended spree with a woman) is for him purely external: Lying about many details, he bemoans that "a man of my intelligence20 let some damn broad put me behind bars. " . . . Floyd, too, shows no signs of actual guilt over his long record of delinquencies. On his admission to prison he is described by an interviewer as feeling "that his present series of violent robberies doesn't mean a thing. " To the present examiner, he mentions these as "just something that happened. " He is reported to have said on admission: "We heard about others getting caught but couldn't believe we would. " . . . Adrian attributes his various delinquencies to drinking: "That's all my trouble is. " According to the initial prison interview report, "he does not feel that he has any serious problem except a tendency to get very drunk when discouraged. " Adrian's conscience, too, is organized chiefly around fears of ostracism and of punitive agencies mystically assigned to an "intangible something" outside himself: "I do believe in retribution. We pay right here. I've proved that in my own life. We think we can get away with things. It's an illusion. " (Adrian has spent "most of my life" in jails, prison, or "on probation. ") With respect to ostracism: "I have always been greatly concerned with what other people thought about me. " As will be elaborated later, he is especially apprehensive over rejection by his father, who "haunts me" and whose approval is required to allay Adrian's anxiety: "I'm always wondering if he would approve of this or approve of that. "
A second aspect of the fascists' undeveloped superego is its domination by the pleasure principle. They are quite unable to postpone gratification. Unable to pursue any integrated long-term achievement goals, they are at the mercy of an imperious oral-demandingness.
Describing with much braggadocio his sharp dealings in cattle trading (actually, he lost a sizeable inheritance by mismanagement and drunken neglect), Buck be- moans openly that ordinary ways of doing business are "too damn slow for me. " (Recall his anti-Semitic projection about Jews' "beatin' a guy out of his money. ") Admittedly, "money is the main object. . . . Can't buy nothin' without money. . . . Can't buy whiskey. "
These attitudes are part of an essentially egocentric conception of reality. The following is one of many similar remarks made by Buck in his discussion of politico-economic affairs:
"I never paid no attention to that---; get me out of here and out on that damn 20 Buck obtained a Wechsler-Bellevue Full-Scale I. Q. of 83.
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
range is all I want. " . . . Simih1rly, Floyd states that the $59 a week he received on his last job (which he held for a month) was "too slow" because "I started from scratch. " "Had to acquire everything: clothes, quarters, the fundamentals. " Detail- ing on admission to the prison some of the robberies and orgies of his gang, Floyd explains that "We had to have money to operate on: We spent $40 or so for our dinner parties. " . . . Adrian admits that from infancy he "usually got my way. " "In fact, all I ever had to do was cry about anything. " At the several boarding schools where his father placed him after his mother's death (when he was 5), "I was incorrigible, left school when I pleased. I overdrew my charge account . . . " His self-centered definition of reality is made explicit: "When things don't person- ally concern me, they just don't exist for me. "
Implicit in these men's weak conscience, their infantile-demanding im- pulses, and their egocentric view of the world, is a trait which governs their entire behavior. This is their extreme (personal) opportunism. The disregard of principle in their personal behavior corresponds with the ideological opportunism of their racism and reactionism. The personal opportunism is usually expressed in the service of infantile attitudes of omnipotence, and of trying to deny personal weakness.
Buck's pathological lying has been mentioned. As for his other offenses, he has served time for obtaining money on false pretenses, and for failure to provide for his children. He was arrested on one occasion for "molesting" his own children (girl then age 2-3, boy age 4-5), but it is reported the charges were dropped be- cause the children were too small to testify. . . . Floyd's delinquencies are less dramatic, but equally capricious. They include two jail sentences for disturbing the peace; an Army record of alternating between the guardhouse and repeated A. W. O. L. 's until he was discharged; and a series of armed gang robberies under- taken as an easy way of making a lot of money "to operate on. " Relevant here is Floyd's stated desire to marry a "wealthy woman," who should have "fair physical attractions" but whose personality he will "take as it comes. " . . . Adrian's delin- quencies include his self-styled "incorrigibility" at boarding schools (truancy, re- peatedly overdrawing his charge accounts, etc. ); numerous jail sentences for drunkenness and homosexual prostitution; and robbery. "I had probation, it seems to me, most of my life. " He supported himself mainly by prostitution, and by his own statement "never had any (sexual) relations with anyone that didn't have money connected with it. " He admits that some men attract him more than others, but "I never let preferences stand in the way. . . . The only thing I was ever in- terested in was the rent. "
The essentially frantic nature of these men's approach to life suggests a desperate inner emptiness and lack of moorings. This hollowness may pro- vide part of the basis for their wish to submit to "strong" political "leader- ship. " Further, any religious leanings of these men might be expected to express cravings for authoritarian submission. This would be expected to differ from the religious authoritarian submission of other high scorers in two interrelated aspects. As in other conflicts in the fascists, the craving for religious submission might very well be explicit rather than implicit; and since dominance-submission conflicts are involved, this craving might be
? THE AUTHORIT ARIAN PERSONALITY
expressed with open ideological opportunism. It happens that Buck "never did think much about religion," but Adrian and Floyd reveal these very characteristics clearly. Floyd's opportunism takes the form of highly egocen- tric (as well as confused) "criteria" for belief, with no apparent interest in considerations of evidence or truth-falsity.
Floyd states that before he was shot (almost fatally) in his last gang robbery, he was "reaching for something" and "wanted" to believe in God. (He had never had any religious training; his father was a free-thinker, and he had never known his mother. ) But "I just couldn't feature that a human being, an intelligence, could be obliterated so easily. " Having been thus let down "personally" by the God he was "reaching for" (in that his delinquency led to disaster), he could no longer "believe. " . . . Adrian's religious training consisted of very early exposure to the Christian Science of a governess and living in Episcopal boarding schools from the ages of 8 to I 5. At I 5 he tried to submit to what for him seemed clearly to represent religious totalitarianism and voluntary self-emasculation: "I very seriously went into the Church of Rome at I5" to become a priest-not because of any specific religious convictions, but "because I believed and still do . . .
that the Catholic Church is the only true church," since "she was the church founded by Christ. " "She was the first" and therefore "the other churches had no real excuse to break away. " His fascistic inclinations are stated openly: "I respect her as a political organization. I think it would be better to have everything under one head". It would save dissension. " Adrian's father forcibly interfered, however, to prevent his entry into the priesthood. Adrian drifted until he became "very interested in Christian Science" with quite practical motives: "I'm not positive I believe in Christian Sci- ence, but there's much in it that seems to help me. . . . I don't try to apply Christian
Science to physical things . . . but my worries, mental things-there's where it helps me most. " In anticipation of parole, he wrote to two Christian Science practitioners for aid in lining up a job (a prerequisite to being granted parole). When both of them criticized him for "trying to manifest a job" instead of relying mystically upon "the Divine Employer," Adrian was "never so disgusted in my life. " But Adrian admittedly has "got to have a God" to submit to, "So what do you think I took up! " The answer is "Hinduism," which "teaches you discipline" such as "cut- ting down on cigarettes. " Adrian summarizes his approach to his latest ideological "manipulandum" in this way: "It's practical. That's the main thing. "
4. LOW SCORERS
The moral-religious ideology of the low-scoring interviewees is quite dif- ferent from that of the prejudiced men. They are relatively free of moralism, and sometimes verbalize explicitly antimoralistic sentiments.
Thus, for Art religion has "nothing to do with keeping laws, except the Golden Rule. " Highly objectionable to Don is the idea of religion as "abiding by a certain set of rules. " Probing reveals no sign of rejection in any of the 4 low scorers toward atheists or non-Christians.
They speak ofreligion primarily in terms of ethical values. Religion is "whatever spiritual qualities you have within yourself" (Art). This orienta- tion is embedded in more individualized relationships to themselves and other people, as compared with the high scorers' impersonalization of such rela-
? Bss
tionships. Different features of this ethical approach are stressed by each. Jim expresses most clearly the aspect of nurturant-affiliative attitudes toward people:
"I look on God as mostly the goodness in all peoples. . . . If everyone . . . carried out the principles that religion expounds, it would be a better world. (How do you mean? ) To treat others as a person would wish to be treated himself, and to help those less fortunate than oneself, and to be a part of the community or society that one is in, to take an active part in it, and being kind and generous, and to more or less have a high regard for your fellow human being. " Art, too, conceives of God, not as a person, but "more a power of good. . . . God is a force. "
Another aspect is the emphasis on full expression of the individual person- ality and "happiness on earth. "
Don declares that his concept of a hereafter was nicely expressed by a girl-friend who said that "if she believed in a hereafter it would mean developing one's unde- veloped talents. " For Jim "the only happiness that we really know of is here on earth; so why not try to enjoy the people and things on this earth, rather than a life somewhere else. "
Further, a rich inner life is a religious value.
Religion "gives you some access to your thoughts" (Dick). Prayer is conceived not as a mode of securing gratification of personal desires or of paying obeisance to a parent-substitute God. Rather, prayer is something which in and of itself "can help a person" (Dick); which "helps form what you're to be" (Don); "a personal thing that happens when the lights are out before you retire. Not 'I want something or other,' but consciously putting into words so as to place whatever you are look- ing for into a positive plane" (Art).
Opposed to the prejudiced men's authoritarian submission in moral-religi- ous matters is the insistence upon individuality in the credos of the low scorers.
"Religion is a personal thing. . . . Religion is as individual to me as my finger- prints, or as yours are to you" (Art). Dick explains his change from a Baptist to a Christian Scientist partly in terms of his objection to the teachings of a Navy chaplain, and especially the chaplain's efforts to "force us to come to church . . . I believe it's a man's personal affair. " It happened that Dick "got hold of a Christian Science textbook, liked the ideas . . . the idea that they had an explanation for almost everything that happened. " (Contrast Dick's emphasis on "ideas" and the implied internalization of Christian Science, with Adrian's externalized, oppor- tunistic-manipulative approach. ) Dick adds another value, however, which sug- gests some of that antiweakness drive that is usually typical of high scorers: "And another idea-they claimed that if you try to attain a goal, nothing can stop you. "
It will be recalled that those who "believe" show submissiveness toward a God who is essentially dominating (whose "word" they must "abide by") and punitive (toward those who violate his "word"). The low scorers, on
CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
the other hand, show an optimistic and trusting dependence toward a God conceived as kind and nurturant.
Although spoken of as "kind of an infinite being" rather than directly anthropo- morphic, God is "something there you can turn to in case you need someone to turn to" (Dick); "someone to cling to in times of emergency or stress" (Jim). Actually, "I don't know if there is a God," but the most important thing in religion is "a genuine belief and a faith that things would always turn out all right" (Jim). Religion involves "a belief, without academic proof, of a higher power-of some- thing you can depend on, of dependency" (Art).
The ultimate optimism hinted in these statements is consistent with findings about low scorers generally. However, the lack of inner self-reliance implied by their dependence on a supernatural power resembles certain trends found to be more typical of high scorers generally. This latter aspect is consistent with the fact that none of the low-scoring interviewees scored extremely low on any of the questionnaire scales.
E. DEFENSES AGAINST WEAKNESS
1. HIGH SCORERS
Defenses against weakness seem to be especially pronounced in the prej- udiced inmates. All of the high-scoring interviewees show deep-seated fears of weakness in themselves. The meaning of weakness to these men seems to be tied up with intense fears of nonmasculinity. To escape these fears they try to bolster themselves up by various antiweakness or pseudomascu- linity defenses. These can be grouped into four general themes, each of which may be expressed in a certain formula: (I) Power-strivings: "I am not on the bottom, I am one of those on top"; or, "I do not weakly submit, I domi- nate and control, I have power. " (2) "Toughness": "I am not weak, I am strong"; "I am not soft, I am tough"; "I am not passive and feminine, I am active and masculine. " (3) Flight into heterosexual activity: "I am not homo- sexual, I am heterosexual"; or "I do not love him, I love her. " (4) Paranoid reactions: "I do not love him, I hate him because he persecutes me"; i. e. , "I do not feel submissive-homosexual desires, I feel aggressive resentment toward men because they persecute me. "21
The questionnaire item which reflects defensive masculinity attitudes (spe- cifically, "toughness" and power) in purest form is number 26, which stereo- typically divides the world into "the strong" (ingroup) and "the weak" (outgroup). This item has the highest D. P. in the F scale. Other items con- taining antiweakness themes are those exalting "will power" (Item 2), "dis- cipline" and "determination" (Item I 3), an exaggerated notion of "honor"
21 The formulae (3) and (4) are adapted from Freud (40).
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
(Item 19), as well as items a1ready mentioned in another context, especially 14 (PEC), 23, 30, and 45 (E).
The relative emphasis placed on different aspects of masculinity fa~ades, in relation to the fears underneath, differs from individual to individual. Therefore, instead of proceeding variable by variable, we shall discuss the weakness-antiweakness complex separately for each inmate.
Robert has centered his efforts to "prove" his "masculinity" around compulsive status-power strivings. He declares that from an early age "my greatest desire was to be somebody in life. . . . I wanted to be a success in business . . . and sometimes worried whether I would. . . . The future goal that I have set up is to own at least three . . . stores of my own . . . I was on my first store at the time of my arrest. " This concern with status and power gives meaning to his anxious fantasy that Negroes "don't have a goal in life" but "just want to exist," and his envious stereotype of Jewish "drive and ambition to get there. " Robert projects this compulsive power-drive onto others and reveals his inability to imagine any alternative to dominance or submission: "Every man has a certain ego that he has to satisfy. You like to be on top. If you're anybody at all, you don't like to be on the bottom. "
(Italics supplied. )
The submissive dependence behind Robert's power-seeking is shown in
his attitudes toward friends and family. (What do friends offer a person? ) "To me, friends offer satisfaction to myself that I've been doing a job well done, that I'm satisfying those people of their expectations. . . . (Q. ) Well, I was referring to the business viewpoint. " (Note the impersonalized use of people as primarily an external prop for what Robert calls his "ego. ") His main satisfaction with his younger brother was "the satisfaction he gave my ego. . . . He's patterned his life after mine. He's in the - - - business, too. " Robert further expresses pride that "my folks have always classed me as a success in the--- business. " The deference toward the examiner ("Do you think I have the right view of things? ") has been mentioned before.
Robert's power drive has apparently not stopped his fears of femininity, of heterosexual impotence, and possibly of latent homosexuality. Underlying identification with a feminine role is suggested by his own admission that "up until the time I left home, (my mother) always referred to me as her best daughter. " The possibility of conflict over latent homosexuality is raised by several cues: e. g. , by Robert's insistence, despite instructions not to bother with details, on exhibitionistically giving to the examiner (a man) a minutely detailed account of his first experience of intercourse; and by indirect "con-
tact" with other men via a hostile affair with a highly promiscuous woman. This last behavior, which finally broke up Robert's marriage, suggests a common type of defense against homosexual wishes, viz. , compulsive flight into heterosexual relationships which are extremely impersonal and hostile.
Ronald's ego-alien weakness is more transparent than Robert's. Mentioned
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
earlier was his unsatisfied dependent longing for authoritarian religious belief as "the thing that holds you together. " Similar extreme dependence is shown in his conception of "friends" as "someone that you can . . . talk to about your troubles, and vice versa" and "know that he's there at all times, and if you need any help at any time. " Also, like Robert, he asked the exam- iner to reassure him at the close of the interview that he is not "too radical" in some of his ideas. This "too radical" was apparently a euphemism for "too aggressive" toward outgroups. Ronald has a history of severe chronic bed- wetting until the age of 12, for which he has no explanation to offer beyond an extemalization of the symptom onto "my kidneys. " He has no idea why his enuresis suddenly stopped at the age of 12. That bed-wetting may have represented in part a passive mode of sexual gratification is suggested by his homosexual conflicts. Earlier mention has been made of his righteous condemnation of "sexual perversion" including, explicitly, fellatio. He de- nies that he has ever "felt any desire of any kind" for homosexual relations, yet subsequently admits to having several times had such relations with a fellow inmate. He implicitly denies any "real" homosexuality in this (blam- ing it exclusively on prison sex deprivation), and says that he had no special reaction to the experiences except to lose respect for the other man. Ron- ald's paranoid "toughness" toward Negro men might perhaps be a defense against homosexual excitement aroused by them. Ronald's promiscuous heterosexuality, including several impersonalized, unusual marriage cere- monies, may also be understood as an attempt to deny homosexual impulses. "I always get married spectacularly"-e. g. , "in a taxicab" or "my partner in a dance walkathon-married on the floor-no love, but received money for it from the spectators. " Both weakness and compensatory "toughness" seem to be combined in Ronald's thefts and gang robberies carried out "as a business. "
The chief prop of Eugene's defenses is a fac;ade of toughness. He has repeatedly been involved in petty trouble, especially by fighting when drunk. "I've got quite a temper," and "I like to fight once in a while . . . usually when I'm drinking. " Moreover, "I'm proud of my people," the "Scotch-Irish," whose most prominent characteristic, according to Eugene, is that "most of them like to fight. " When the examiner points out that this is precisely what Eugene resentfully says about Negroes, he differentiates on the basis that Negroes "go around looking" for fights, while he himself merely "likes" to fight (and does so frequently). The psychological reason why he likes to fight and has "quite a temper" seems to be largely uncon- scious; he "can't explain it. " He explains, however, that Negroes "go around picking trouble" because they've "got an inferiority complex" and "try to be big shots"-which may be a projection of his own inferiority feelings and the "big shot" way he tries to compensate for them. The situations which . evoke
Eugene's temper suggest possibly more specific causes, namely homosexual
? CRIMINALITY AND ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
impulses, against which his impulsive aggressiveness may be a paranoid defense: "I was with a girl at a bar, and a guy got a little out of line . . . talkin' dirty-not to her, but he was talkin' loud. . . . "; or "maybe some guy calls me a name. " Eugene himself associates his propensity for "trouble" with fear of heterosexual adjustment: "I'm just a little too wild to get married. I'm scared of it. "
Clarence shows ,more obvious signs of ego-alien "weakness," and has less effective defenses against it. The army, he declares, "makes a man of you," but it did not succeed in overcoming Clarence's fear of rising above a private, because that would have meant "too much responsibility"- although "I'm pretty good at takin' orders. " Discharged for tuberculosis, he drew government compensation for seventeen years and then lived "on the county. " According to the prison physician, Clarence "claimed he still had T. B. , but . . . we failed to find any evidence of any active T.
