{"id":232,"date":"2026-01-06T14:47:28","date_gmt":"2026-01-06T20:47:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/phw.pfz.mybluehost.me\/website_0c7237c9\/?page_id=232"},"modified":"2026-02-20T06:09:04","modified_gmt":"2026-02-20T12:09:04","slug":"deia-sdo-r-wa-and-fear","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/thewaywesee.com\/understanddjt\/deia-sdo-r-wa-and-fear\/","title":{"rendered":"DEIA\/SDO\/R-WA\/FEAR"},"content":{"rendered":"

……………….INDEX OF CONTENTS IN THIS PAGE\u00a0 ………………………………<\/strong><\/p>\n

PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION ACCESSIBILITY (DEIA)<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

SOCIAL DOMINANCE ORIENTATION (SDO)<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

RIGHT-WING AUTHORITARIANISM (R-WA)<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

RELATIONSHIP OF SDO AND RIGHT-WING AUTHORITARIANISM (R-WA)<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

DEIA SDO, R-WA and FEAR<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

TENSIONS BETWEEN SDO, R-WA, PREAMBLE AND BIBLE<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

TRUMP’S APPEAL TO SDO AND R-WA PSYCHOLOGY<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

FEAR IS THE COMMON FACTOR IN SDO, R-WA AND MAGA<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\n

<\/a>PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION: FOUNDATION FOR FREEDOM, GOOD GOVERNMENT AND HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS<\/strong>
\nThe philosophical foundation for the freedoms and rights of U.S. citizen’s established in the Preamble to the Constitution:<\/p>\n

\u201cWe the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the\u00a0Blessings\u00a0of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The principles of the Preamble are found in these three principles of democratic government:<\/p>\n

Equality of political rights:<\/span> Universal suffrage and equal voting power for all citizens.\u200b<\/span><\/p>\n

Equal access to power:<\/span> Inclusive participation without group-based barriers.\u200b<\/span><\/p>\n

Equal protection under law:<\/span> Impartial application of rights and freedoms across social groups.<\/p>\n

When read together, these principles create three distinct but complementary foundations that provide a coherent concept of freedom:<\/p>\n

1. Shared Responsibility for the Common Good: <\/span>The Preamble emphasizes that government exists to serve everyone\u2014promoting justice, peace, and general well\u2011being. It frames society as a shared project rather than a competition for dominance.<\/p>\n

2. Protection of Rights and Human Dignity: <\/span>By committing to \u201cjustice\u201d and \u201cliberty,\u201d the Preamble establishes the idea that every person deserves fairness, safety, and the freedom to live with dignity.<\/p>\n

3. Commitment to a More Inclusive and Evolving Union:<\/span> The phrase \u201ca more perfect Union\u201d signals that the nation will always be a work in progress. It invites continuous improvement, broader inclusion, and the willingness to expand rights and protections over time.<\/p>\n

This page (DEIA, SDO, R-WA and FEAR) will show how these principles are missing in DEIA, SDO and R-WA.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY (DEIA)<\/strong>
\nDEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility)<\/a> has become a very hot topic in American politics, education and business since President Trump took office again in 2025. His executive orders undercut long-standing benefits of DEIA policies and legislation<\/a> for a wide spectrum of out-group people who have benefited from those policies<\/a>. Trump’s orders\u00a0have had wide impact throughout the public, private and non-profit sectors.\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

Trump’s orders are designed to eradicate government policies that he calls “reverse discrimination.”\u00a0 They are designed to appeal to his in-group followers<\/a> who feel that they are personally disadvantaged by existing DEIA legislation that gives equal access to minority populations. He justifies these moves by emphasizing alternative “merit-based” systems that would end what he calls “divisive” policies, impacting areas like education, government, military recruitment, and private corporations. This objective appeals to conservative voters but is at odds with the Preamble and bible.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

SOCIAL DOMINANCE ORIENTATION (SDO)<\/strong>
\nSocial Dominance Orientation (SDO) theory measures an individual’s preference for hierarchical social structures and group-based inequality. Social dominance theory assumes that societies naturally create hierarchies based on arbitrary factors such as age, gender, race, skin color or class. Group conflicts like racism or sexism stem from a predisposition for or against these hierarchies. People who score low on the SDO spectrum will typically score low on the SDO spectrum because they prefer governmental systems where certain in-groups dominate out-groups.\u00a0<\/span>In effect, SDO measures a person’s support for inequality between groups.<\/span><\/p>\n

When codified in law or tradition, these distinctions award benefits to in-groups while creating injustice for out-groups. <\/span>Everyone fits somewhere, from low to high on the spectrum of SDO.<\/p>\n

High SDO<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Americans who rate high on the SDO spectrum favor social systems and governments where dominant in-groups maintain power over subordinate out-groups. Americans like President Trump, Republicans in general and MAGA in particular score high in SDO because they view inequality as natural and favor policies that establish or expand distinctions between different populations in the social system. Globally, government leaders who score high in SDO also favor Right-Wing Authoritarianism (R-WA).<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

High SDO correlates with prejudice, low empathy, and support for authoritarianism. High SDO correlates with support for hierarchy-enhancing policies, such as strict immigration controls or reduced welfare, that weaken democratic inclusivity. It links to political illiberalism<\/a>, favoring autocratic “strongman” rule over democratic checks and balances.\u00a0<\/span>\u200bThis “anti-egalitarian” orientation is the opposite of democratic principles represented in the Preamble to the Constitution.<\/span><\/p>\n

Low-SDO <\/span><\/p>\n

Low SDO links to democratic government, egalitarianism and outgroup empathy. Low SDO people favor equality, cooperation, and social justice, often aligning with openness to experience<\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n

The SDO spectrum describes a personality trait that reflects how strongly individuals lean toward authoritarian hierarchy on one end and egalitarian fairness on the other. High\u2011SDO individuals tend to prefer group dominance and seek advantages for their in\u2011group over out\u2011groups, while low\u2011SDO individuals prioritize equality and often show a bias toward fairness for lower\u2011status or marginalized groups. These opposing orientations toward hierarchy and equality are the root cause of the deep partisan divide in American politics, shaping how different groups interpret justice, rights, and social change.\u200b<\/span>\u200b<\/span><\/p>\n

It should not be surprising that high Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) generally conflicts with core democratic principles like equality and fairness. People who rank high on the SDO spectrum prioritize group hierarchies, which undermines democratic egalitarianism.<\/p>\n

It may be surprising to Christians who rank high on the SDO scale that this trait is inconsistent with what the bible says. This will be discussed later in this page.\u200b<\/span><\/p>\n

\u200bUnlike hierarchical or traditional systems, d<\/span>emocratic societies score lower in the SDO spectrum because they promote cooperation and concern for others. High SDO is associated with lower support for democratic norms and a greater willingness to endorse political or social aggression when it is perceived as necessary to maintain in-group dominance. These tendencies help explain why some Americans express openness to actions that could weaken constitutional safeguards or democratic institutions when they believe such steps are required to protect their in\u2011group\u2019s status.<\/p>\n

High SDO links to power-seeking, low empathy, and support for policies preserving inequality. Low SDO correlates with empathy, social justice advocacy, and correction of structural social\/government inequalities imposed on disadvantaged out-groups by in-groups with unchecked political, social and economic power.<\/p>\n

Here is a summary of key SDO concepts:<\/p>\n