Power 权力 This formulation is strikingly close to Nydes' characterization of the paranoid character, who renounces love for the sake of power(Nydes, 1963). Conflicts over power are at the center of the authoritarian attitude. Fromm puts this very graphically: 这一提法与尼德斯对偏执型性格的刻画惊人地相似，偏执型性格的人为了权力而放弃爱(尼德斯，1963)。权力冲突是专制主义态度的核心。弗洛姆生动地说明了这一点: For the authoritarian character there exist, so to speak, two sexes: the powerful ones and the powerless ones. His love, admiration and readiness for submission are automatically aroused by power, whether of a person or of an institution. Power fascinates him not for any values for which a specific power may stand, but just because it is power, Just as his "love" is automatically aroused by power, so powerless people or institutions automatically arouse his contempt (1941, pp.190-191). 对于专制的性格，可以说存在着两种性别:强势的和弱势的。无论是一个人还是一个机构的权力，都会自动激起他的爱、钦佩和服从的意愿。权力之所以吸引他，并不是因为某一特定权力所代表的任何价值观，而是因为它就是权力，就像他的“爱”被权力自动地唤起一样，所以无权的人或机构会自动地引起他的蔑视(1941年，第190-191页)。 Thus the authoritarian character admires authority as a source of power and tends to submit to it—simultaneously, however, wishing to be an authority himself and to have others submit to him. 因此，专制型性格崇拜权威作为权力的来源，并倾向于服从它，然而，同时希望自己成为一个权威，并让别人服从他。 Because of the authoritarian's concern and sensitivity to issues of control and power, he maintains an attitude of suspicion, generalized hostility, lack of trust, and critical cynicism. Projection of such impulses colors the environment with a variety of dangers and hostile threats, and makes the necessity for clinging to positions and control all the more pressing. The continual projection of aggressive and hostile impulses and the reaction to other individuals as threatening, hurtful, dangerous, or untrustworthy brings the authoritarian character very close on the pathological spectrum to the paranoid character. 由于专制主义者对控制和权力问题的关注和敏感，他保持着怀疑、普遍敌意、缺乏信任和批判性犬儒主义的态度。这种冲动的投射使环境充满各种危险和敌对威胁，使坚持立场和控制的必要性更加紧迫。不断投射出攻击性和敌意的冲动，以及对其他个体的反应，如威胁、伤害、危险或不值得信任，使专制性格在病态谱系上与偏执性格非常接近。 The implications of such attitudes on many levels of social interaction and for the functioning of social structures in general are very rich and have been discussed elsewhere(Meissner,1970a). I would only point out in a very general fashion that the authoritarian attitude represents one of the significant polarities in some of the most significant dichotomies and conflicts that have marked human history. If we juxtapose the authoritarian insistence on power, organization, control, and structure to the contrary parameters of spontaneity, flexibility, and freedom, we can immediately recognize that these parameters have been operative and influential in almost all areas of human endeavor. They represent what Nietzsche called the Apollonian and the Dionysian. From the political point of view, they represent the dichotomy of the totalitarian vs. the democratic. In religious matters, they represent the dichotomy between dogmatic rigidity and insistence on unchanging truth, which demands the submission of the faithful, on one hand, and the openness to religious understanding and historical consciousness, on the other, in which faith is a search for truth rather than a submission to it. Authoritarian attitudes are thus part of the warp and woof of human thought and experience. 这种态度对社会互动的许多层面以及对社会结构的运作所产生的影响是非常丰富的，已经在其他地方讨论过(Meissner,1970a)。我只想以一种非常普遍的方式指出，威权主义态度代表着人类历史上一些最重要的两分法和冲突中的一个重要的、不可理喻的极性。如果我们把对权力、组织、控制和结构的专制坚持与自发性、灵活性和自由的相反特性放在一起看，我们可以立即认识到，这些参数在人类努力的几乎所有领域都发挥了作用和影响。他们代表了尼采所说的阿波罗主义者和酒神主义者。从政治的角度来看，它们代表了极权主义与民主主义的对立。在宗教问题上，它们代表了教条僵化与坚持不变真理之间的二分法，一方面要求信徒的顺服，另一方面要求对宗教理解和历史意识的开放。对于后者，信仰是对真相的追寻而非屈服于它。 因此，专制态度是人类思想和经验经纬线的一部分。