Authoritarianism

Authoritarianism

Authoritarianism is a way that some governments control a country. In these governments, leaders have strong power and do not allow many different opinions or choices. They might limit what people can do, like joining groups or voting freely. Leaders may say they are needed to solve big problems.

An expert named Juan Linz described four main features of authoritarian governments. First, there is limited chance for different political groups to operate. Second, these governments often claim they are necessary to fix important issues. Third, they try to stop people from organizing against them. Fourth, the leader's powers are not clearly defined and can change.

Before the year 2000, many authoritarian governments began after a sudden change called a coup. Since 2000, more often, leaders who were elected by people later changed the rules to keep power for themselves, moving away from democratic ways.

Characteristics

Authoritarianism is a way of governing where power is held by just a few leaders. In this system, leaders use strong control to keep things the same and limit people’s freedom to challenge the government. Sometimes, these leaders start by winning elections, but once they are in charge, they often don’t allow fair competition or change.

Authoritarian governments might seem similar to democracies, for example by having a constitution. But these rules often do not work as they should. They may hold elections, but these are usually not fair or open. Leaders control what people can say or do, and often stay in power for a long time without letting people choose new leaders freely. These governments often rely on support from groups like the military or political parties to stay in power.

Typologies

According to Yale professor Juan José Linz there are three main types of political systems today: democracies, totalitarian regimes, and authoritarian regimes, which are in between the two.

According to University of Michigan professor Dan Slater, modern forms of authoritarianism are different from older forms of rule without democracy. He connects modern authoritarianism to the time of mass politics, which started with the French Revolution.

Similar terms

• An authoritarian regime has a lot of power in one leader or a small group, but they are not responsible to the people by law. Unlike totalitarian states, they allow some social and economic groups to operate without government control, and they usually rely on people accepting things quietly instead of active support.
• An Autocracy is a government where one person has unlimited power.
• A Totalitarian state controls every part of life and uses strong measures to make people follow its rules. It is ruled by one party of loyal supporters. Unlike autocracies, which just want total political power, totalitarian states want to control every part of everyone’s life.
• A Fascist state is autocratic and based on a strong political belief system. It exalts the nation and often race above the individual, with a dictatorial leader and strict control of opposition.
• Authoritarian personality is a type of person who obeys authority figures very closely.
• Authoritarian ethics believes that only a leader can decide what is right or wrong.

Subtypes

Several types of authoritarian regimes have been identified. Linz pointed to two main types: traditional authoritarian regimes and bureaucratic-military authoritarian regimes.

• Traditional authoritarian regimes keep power through old traditions, personal connections, and control by people who are loyal to the ruler. An example is Ethiopia under Haile Selassie I.

• Bureaucratic-military authoritarian regimes are ruled by military leaders and experts who act in a practical way within their limits. Mark J. Gasiorowski suggests that simple military authoritarian regimes can be different from bureaucratic authoritarian regimes where experts use the government to develop the economy, such as South Korea under Park Chung-hee.

According to Barbara Geddes, there are seven types of authoritarian regimes: dominant party regimes, military regimes, personalist regimes, monarchies, oligarchic regimes, indirect military regimes, or mixes of the first three.

Types of authoritarian regimes identified by Linz include corporatist, racial and ethnic “democracy,” and post-totalitarian.

• Corporatist authoritarian regimes use institutions to control powerful groups. This has been studied most in Latin America.
• Racial and ethnic “democracies” are systems where some racial or ethnic groups have full rights while others do not, like South Africa under apartheid.
• Post-totalitarian authoritarian regimes keep some totalitarian institutions but have less strict rules, less control, and less mass mobilization. Examples include the Russian Federation and Soviet Eastern Bloc states in the mid-1980s.

Authoritarian regimes can also be grouped by whether they are more personal or populist. Personalistic authoritarian regimes use personal networks and force instead of formal rules. Populist authoritarian regimes have a strong leader who rules with support from lower-class groups. Examples include Argentina under Juan Perón, and Venezuela under Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro.

A way to group authoritarian regimes by political scientists Brian Lai and Dan Slater includes four types:

• machine (oligarchic party dictatorships);
• bossism (autocratic party dictatorships);
• juntas (oligarchic military dictatorships); and
• strongman (autocratic military dictatorships).

Lai and Slater say that single-party regimes are better than military regimes at building institutions that help the regime stay in power and reduce challenges.

John Duckitt links authoritarianism to collectivism, saying both focus on group goals over individual rights.

Authoritarianism and democracy

Authoritarianism and democracy are not exact opposites; they can exist on a scale. Some democracies have authoritarian elements, and some authoritarian systems have democratic elements. Authoritarian regimes may listen to some citizen concerns, but only if those concerns do not threaten the regime’s stability. An illiberal democracy, or procedural democracy, lacks features like the rule of law, protection for minority groups, an independent judiciary, and separation of powers.

Authoritarianism and fascism

Authoritarianism is a key part of fascism. Scholars say that while all fascist regimes are authoritarian, not all authoritarian regimes are fascist. More traits are needed to call a regime fascist.

Authoritarianism and totalitarianism

Totalitarianism is a very strict form of authoritarianism. The ruling group, often led by one dictator, controls almost every part of society. Linz pointed out differences between new authoritarian forms and personalistic dictatorships or totalitarian states. Unlike personalistic dictatorships, new authoritarian forms have institutions that represent many groups. Unlike totalitarian states, authoritarian regimes rely on quiet acceptance rather than active support. Authoritarian regimes differ from totalitarian ones because they do not control every part of life and do not try to change human nature.

Economic effects

Some studies show that countries with democratic systems often grow better over time. They also tend to have better health and are less likely to face big shortages of food.

A few scholars think that some authoritarian governments might have advantages when a country is just starting to grow. But overall, research suggests that democratic systems tend to do better in the long run. Civil liberties in democracies help stop corruption and misuse of resources.

Military effects

Some experts think that countries with strong democratic systems might do better in battles. They say democratic soldiers may fight harder, and democratic countries often work together in wars. They also think democracies can spend more money on fighting.

But others believe that winning or losing a war depends more on a country's overall strength than whether it is a democracy. Some say that in certain situations, countries without full democracy might have an advantage because they can ask their soldiers for complete loyalty. This was seen in the Vietnam War.

Historical trends

Pre-World War II

Before World War II, many countries had leaders with a lot of power. These leaders did not allow many different opinions.

Post-World War II anti-authoritarianism

Main article: Anti-authoritarianism

After World War II ended in 1945 and the Cold War ended in 1991, many countries changed. They moved from having strong leaders to having more open governments. World War II ended the power of countries like Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. After the war, many places in Europe worked to allow more freedom.

In the years after the war, many people in Europe and other places worked against having strong leaders. This idea spread to many parts of the world. In South America, countries like Argentina and Chile moved toward letting people choose their leaders.

When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, many more countries began to try new ways of governing.

In 2010, people in several Middle Eastern countries began to speak up against leaders who did not allow freedom. This was known as the Arab Spring. Some countries changed leaders.

21st-century

Since around 2005, some people have noticed that strong leadership and less freedom have been growing again in many places. Reports in 2020 showed that many countries were losing points for how free they were.

Some reasons for this change include changes in how the world economy works, the rise of groups with strong opinions, and the influence of countries like the People's Republic of China. Social media has also made it harder to know what is true.

Different groups have tried to understand how to measure how free countries are. Many experts think that some countries, including the United States, are moving away from having open governments.