The Authoritarian Culture & Legacy of Austin, Texas

The history of slavery in Texas, as a colonial territory, later Republic in 1836, and U.S. state in 1845, had begun slowly, as the Spanish did not rely on it for labor during their years in Spanish Texas. Slavery was present in Spanish America and Mexico prior to the arrival of American settlers, but it was not highly developed. The governors feared the growth in the Anglo-American population in Texas, and for various reasons, by the early 19th century, they and their superiors in Mexico City disapproved of expanding slavery. In 1829 the Guerrero decree conditionally abolished slavery throughout Mexican territories. It was a decision that increased tensions with slaveholders among the Anglo-Americans. On June 19, 1865, Union General Gordon Granger and over 2,000 federal troops arrived at Galveston Island to take possession of the state and enforce the two-year-old Emancipation Proclamation. (Source: History of slavery in Texas - Wikipedia )

Unfairness and authoritarianism go hand in hand Linking social (in)tolerance to attitudes about democracy and draws from what social and political psychologists know about group identification and how group identification leads to discrimination against out-groups. If social intolerance involves high levels of expressive identity, then people who feel threatened by racial or ethnic diversity ought to feel less positively toward systems of governance that extend political access to these individuals. Thus, white Americans who exhibit social intolerance may actually prefer undemocratic alternatives because democracy provides the political pretext for persons belonging to “undesirable” out-groups to accumulate resources or power that undercut the perceived well-being of the intolerant person. (Source: Nicholas T. Davis and Steven Miller)

“When I first was running for Mayor back in 1997…... I remember very vividly campaigning in downtown church and realizing that I didn’t really know anything substantiate about the issue [Homelessness]. After I took office I was struck immediately by two things 1.) the severity of the problem 2.) the shocking inability, or refusal of so many people including people I like, respect, and usually agree with to address it [Homelessness]. We beat back the strong – orchestrated - well financed effort to sweep up the Homeless and dump them in East Austin or some other part of the region where they (homeless) could be easily and guiltlessly ignored and forgotten.” ~Texas Senator Kirk Watson

The long since saturated institution of the authoritarian mind-set and methods of dominating individuals still reigns free to this day in Austin, Texas. There are various examples throughout the general population community, though very prevalent in the homeless community and it’s non-profit human services agencies. Individuals have been stifled from moving beyond homelessness as the result of non-profit human services agencies using the commodities of homeless individuals to corral them into programs or directions which are not conducive to a particular individual’s needs. Components present in these scenarios are: 1.) Service Providers are not qualified to effectively address and meet the needs of the homeless 2.) Service Providers perpetuate homelessness out of fear of scarcity in order to maintain a level of funding and maintain the size of their organizations. In recent times we have seen Front Steps Executive Director get a non-performance based pay raise of additional $40 per year and Ending Community Homeless Coalition Executive Director giving herself a $20K non-performance based pay raise per year all-the-while the City of Austin’s Auditors Office had rated both agencies operating just barely above a 50% efficiency rate. So hypothetically, why the raises?? Despite hundreds, if not thousands of data documentation from Clients, Stakeholders, Committees, and highly paid consultants, the city government and non-profit agencies are STILL unwilling to read the writing on the wall. One must ask if this is deliberate? It would be typical for donors of these types of services to second guess the authentic motive as to (WHY?), despite all the donations given as well as increasing Federal grants, such institutions are unable to perform properly in addition to ALWAYS needing money. The City of Austin’s audit report earlier this year competently demonstrates these facts.

Other examples of modern-day practices of authoritarian rule compromised democracy, where individuals are exploited for the benefit of the self-proclaimed elite, are China, Venezuela, Cambodia, North Korea, and Russia.