Authoritarianism is all about giving some classes of people [...] absolute authority over others. When that happens, human nature being what it is, abuse is the natural and inevitable result.

I disagree. The rapes and murders committed by authoritarians in power are not "human nature". Rather, they are akin to the sneezes of a person with a cold, or the leaking bodily fluids of a person with Ebola.

They are disease symptoms, but they are also disease vectors.

Why does a cold make you sneeze? Because sneezing spreads the cold virus, by scattering infected snot around your environment. Likewise, abuse spreads authoritarianism. Children who are abused frequently grow up to be either abusers themselves, or willing victims, or both at the same time. People who are victimized seek out an authority figure to protect them, and are willing to grant that authority the power to victimize others. (That's what "post-9/11" means.)

But the fact that authoritarianism is a disease does not excuse the abusive behavior. A person with a cold has a moral obligation to avoid sneezing on others. Likewise, even a person who was abused as a child is still morally obligated to refrain from abusing others. By choosing not to treat others the way we were treated -- by choosing to make a society that gives people greater freedom than we ourselves had -- we can fight the authoritarian disease.

Look at "Dr." Laura (quotes because I seem to recall there was some question as to whether she was actually entitled to this honorific; it certainly isn't a medical degree in any case as is often assumed.) Look at Phyllis Schlafly. Look at Lynn Cheney. (oh, okay, you can stop looking now, ick.)

When authoritarian-minded women are in patriarchal societies they find men to operate through, or function by providing cover and excuses for authoritarian practices. I don't know that anyone's ever studied enough examples to say it's a scientific fact, but at least a rule of thumb is that no war can continue once a solid majority of the women of the warring society have turned against it. As Heinlein (via Lazarus Long) once said, "Roman matrons used to tell their sons to return with their shields, or on them. Later this custom declined. So did Rome."

Boys sign up to fight not because they really care about bringing democracy to Iraq, or to prevent Japanese hegemony over Asia, or to avenge the sinking of the Maine, or want to preserve the Union/preserve slavery, or because barbarians are amassing on the borders of the Imperium, or any of that horseshit.

They sign up because other boys are doing it and if they don't join too, the girls will snub them. Not that they usually picture it that clearly-- they enlist to amass the money needed to go to school, start a business, buy a house, or otherwise establish their fitness for breeding. It all comes back to sex in the end.

Except of course for those who enlist because it gives them a socially acceptable outlet for their impulses to kill, torture, rape and loot.

Ahem, I seem to have drifted off topic. What I originally meant to ask was, whatever happened to Mr. Dr. Laura? Did he croak or something? Not that I care enough to google to find out, but it seems like she spends an awful lot of time yammering about Family Values for somebody who does not appear to be modeling correct behavior by her own standards.

I am about to come up with another rule of thumb that anybody who makes a career out of yammering about Family Values probably should not be allowed to breed. Normally I am an absolutist on right of individual choice in such matters but there are some exceptions it's hard to make a case against.

Dr. Laura does actually have a doctorate... in physiology (from UCLA, I believe). She is a fully licensed therapist in California, but through completing practical requirements rather than educational.

So she's not engaging in anything unprofessional or in malpractice of some sort by acting as a therapist on her radio show, as she is licensed to do so.

However, I still have no clue how she hasn't been forced to remove the "Dr." from the name of her show, because that's got to be a clear case of false advertising. I haven't met a single person who says he/she listens to her show AND knows that her doctorate is not in psychology/psychiatry (for all his faults, at least Dr. Phil is a legitimate doctor of psychology). Whether she's a licensed therapist or not, callers call in to talk to a doctor about their problems, and she isn't a psychologist any more than a doctor of French is.

Also, back to the original post subject, wasn't there something back during the 2004 elections where a bunch of Republican thugs attacked a woman at the GOP convention, and it was supposed that one of the attackers was the son of Dr. Laura? That certainly lines up perfectly with this MySpace issue.

I know we don't normally mention Stuart Smalley and "Doctor" [cough] Laura in the same breath, but....

No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.