Authoritarianism

Authoritarianism is a political system focused on concentrated central power. It is defined by the rejection of political plurality, which means many different political groups are not allowed. These regimes work to preserve the existing political status quo. They often reduce democracy, the separation of powers, and the rule of law. They also limit civil liberties, which are the basic freedoms of citizens. Such systems can be autocratic, ruled by one person, or oligarchic, ruled by a small group.

In 1964, political scientist Juan Linz described four specific qualities of these regimes. First, they feature limited political pluralism by constraining legislatures and interest groups. Second, they use political legitimacy based on appeals to emotion. They may claim to be a necessary evil to solve problems like underdevelopment. Third, they require minimal political mobilization and suppress anti-regime activities. Finally, they use ill-defined executive powers to extend the authority of the leader. These vague powers allow the executive branch to grow without clear limits.

Authoritarian regimes often use institutions that look like democratic ones. They may have legislatures, judiciaries, and constitutions. However, these tools serve different purposes than in a democracy. A constitution might act as an "operating manual" for the government. It can also be a "billboard" to signal intent or "window dressing" to hide a lack of real freedom. Some constitutions do not set direct limits on executive authority. Legal scholar Mark Tushnet calls some of these "authoritarian constitutionalist" regimes. He uses Singapore as an example of a state that allows some criticism while ensuring the ruling party prevails.

Elections are a major way these regimes maintain control. While democratic elections are inclusive and competitive, authoritarian elections often involve fraud. Leaders might use tactics like imprisoning political opposition or paying election monitors. Some regimes use "electoral autocracies" to imitate democracies and receive foreign aid. Since the end of the Cold War, about two-thirds of authoritarian elections allow some opposition. However, these systems are structured to heavily favor the person already in power. In 2020, almost half of all authoritarian systems actually had multi-party governments.

History shows how the rise and fall of these states have changed. Since 1946, the number of authoritarian states increased until the mid-1970s. This share of the international system declined from then until the year 2000. Before 2000, most dictatorships began with a coup, which is a sudden seizure of power. Since 2000, many regimes begin through democratic backsliding. This happens when a democratically elected leader slowly establishes an authoritarian regime.

Maintaining stability requires a constant balancing act. Authoritarian leaders must manage both the masses and other powerful elites. They use "carrots and sticks," which means using rewards and punishments. They might use co-optation to bring outsiders into the government to divide the opposition. Alternatively, they use repression to stop revolts. A study by Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman suggests a modern shift. They found that regimes are becoming less reliant on mass violence. Instead, they increasingly use the manipulation of information to maintain control.

Economic factors also play a role in how these systems function. Some scholars argue that economic development increases the chance of democratization. Others suggest that development can actually boost support for authoritarian regimes in the short term. Authoritarian governments might also use land reform to gain control. They may implement these programs and then withhold property rights from the people. This gives the regime coercive leverage over rural populations. Understanding these complex connections helps explain how power is held and used globally.