Authoritarian voters tolerate in-party political intimidation while condemning identical out-party acts.

Evidence

I uncovered another double standard in a 1978 study in which students were asked to judge the seriousness of an unfair election practice (RWA, p. 323). Half the subjects were told a New Democratic government had discretely threatened Conservative Party supporters if they contributed to a Conservative campaign. The others got the reverse story. Low RWAs condemned both acts of intimidation, equally. Highs proved less concerned overall about official wrongdoing, and were significantly more condemning of a New Democratic government putting the screws to its political opponents than of a Conservative government doing the same. — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 1459

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the vault’s Christian-nationalism and prejudice claims about in-group favoritism overriding principle in Cooper and Whitehead & Perry. — connects to: Equal operation of law prevents officials escaping political backlash through selective enforcement. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 202
• SEED: Article angle: ‘the party follows the flag’ — how double standards on electoral intimidation measured decades ago predict today’s tolerance of political violence.