{{Short description|Political system}} {{About|authoritarianism in political science and organizational studies|authoritarianism in psychology|Authoritarian personality|a form of government where power is held by a single individual|Autocracy}} {{Pp-vandalism|small=yes}} {{Use American English|date=February 2024}} {{Use dmy dates|date=February 2024}} {{Forms of government}}
'''Authoritarianism''' is a [[political system]] characterized by the rejection of [[political plurality]], the use of strong central power to preserve the political ''[[status quo]]'', and reductions in [[democracy]], [[separation of powers]], [[civil liberties]], and the [[rule of law]].<ref name="Kalu2019">{{cite book | first = Kalu N. | last = Kalu | year= 2019 | title = A Functional Theory of Government, Law, and Institutions | publisher = Rowman & Littlefield | pages = 161– | isbn = 978-1-4985-8703-7 | oclc = 1105988740 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=BhaeDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA161}}</ref><ref name="Cerutti">{{cite book|title=Conceptualizing Politics: An Introduction to Political Philosophy|first=Furio|last=Cerutti|page=17|year=2017|publisher=Routledge|quote=Political scientists have outlined elaborated typologies of authoritarianism, from which it is not easy to draw a generally accepted definition; it seems that its main features are the non-acceptance of conflict and plurality as normal elements of politics, the will to preserve the ''status quo'' and prevent change by keeping all political dynamics under close control by a strong central power, and lastly, the erosion of the rule of law, the division of powers, and democratic voting procedures.}}</ref> Authoritarian [[regime]]s may be either [[autocratic]] or [[oligarchic]] and may be based upon the rule of a [[Dominant-party system|party]], the [[Military dictatorship|military]], or the concentration of power in a single person.<ref name=EscrowFrantz>{{cite book|publisher=[[Continuum International Publishing Group|Continuum]]|first1=Natasha M.|last1=Ezrow|first2=Erica|last2=Frantz|year=2011|title=Dictators and Dictatorships: Understanding Authoritarian Regimes and Their Leaders|isbn= |page=17}}</ref><ref name=LaiSlater>{{cite journal|first1=Brian |last1=Lai |first2=Dan|last2=Slater|title=Institutions of the Offensive: Domestic Sources of Dispute Initiation in Authoritarian Regimes, 1950–1992|journal=American Journal of Political Science|pages=113–126|date=2006|volume=50|issue=1|jstor=3694260|doi=10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00173.x}}</ref> States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have sometimes been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "[[hybrid regimes]]" or "competitive authoritarian" states.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Levitsky |first1=Steven |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/competitive-authoritarianism/20A51BE2EBAB59B8AAEFD91B8FA3C9D6 |title=Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War |last2=Way |first2=Lucan A. |date=2010 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-88252-1 |series=Problems of International Politics |location=Cambridge |doi=10.1017/cbo9780511781353 |archive-date=18 October 2022 |access-date=2 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221018130236/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/competitive-authoritarianism/20A51BE2EBAB59B8AAEFD91B8FA3C9D6 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Diamond |first=Larry |date=2002 |title=Elections Without Democracy: Thinking About Hybrid Regimes |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/17195 |journal=Journal of Democracy |volume=13 |issue=2 |pages=21–35 |doi=10.1353/jod.2002.0025 |s2cid=154815836 |issn=1086-3214 |archive-date=7 October 2022 |access-date=2 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221007135923/https://muse.jhu.edu/article/17195 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gunitsky |first=Seva |date=2015 |title=Lost in the Gray Zone: Competing Measures of Democracy in the Former Soviet Republics |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2506195 |journal=Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance |pages=112–150 |language=en |publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/CBO9781316161555.006 |isbn=978-1-107-09813-8 |ssrn=2506195 |url-access=subscription }}</ref>
The political scientist [[Juan Linz]], in an influential<ref>Richard Shorten, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=8ffbV8ZpQ3MC Modernism and Totalitarianism: Rethinking the Intellectual Sources of Nazism and Stalinism, 1945 to the Present] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200109112534/https://books.google.com/books?id=8ffbV8ZpQ3MC&printsec=frontcover |date=2020-01-09 }}'' (Palgrave Macmillan, 2012), p. 256 (note 67): "For a long time the authoritative definition of authoritarianism was that of Juan J. Linz."</ref> 1964 work, ''An Authoritarian Regime: Spain'', defined authoritarianism as possessing four qualities:
# Limited [[Pluralism (political philosophy)|political pluralism]], which is achieved with constraints on the [[legislature]], [[Political party|political parties]] and [[interest group]]s. # [[Political legitimacy]] based on appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as [[underdevelopment]] or [[insurgency]]." # Minimal [[political mobilization]], and suppression of anti-regime activities. # Ill-defined executive powers, often vague and shifting, used to extend the power of the executive.<ref>Juan J. Linz, "An Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Spain," in [[Erik Allardt]] and Yrjö Littunen, eds., ''Cleavages, Ideologies, and Party Systems: Contributions to Comparative Political Sociology'' (Helsinki: Transactions of the Westermarck Society), pp. 291–342. Reprinted in Erik Allardt & Stine Rokkan, eds., ''Mas Politics: Studies in Political Sociology'' (New York: Free Press, 1970), pp. 251–283, 374–381.{{ISBN?}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|first=Gretchen|last=Casper|year=1995|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7ZVDjmr18f4C|title=Fragile Democracies: The Legacies of Authoritarian Rule|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200109112527/https://books.google.com/books?id=7ZVDjmr18f4C&printsec=frontcover|archive-date=2020-01-09|publisher=[[University of Pittsburgh Press]]|pp=40–50|isbn=0-8229-3857-X}} (citing Linz 1964)</ref>
Minimally defined, an authoritarian government lacks free and competitive [[direct election]]s to [[legislature]]s, free and competitive direct or [[indirect election]]s for [[Executive (government)|executives]], or both.<ref name="Svolik2223">{{Cite book|url=https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|title=The Politics of Authoritarian Rule|first=Milan W.|last=Svolik|publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2012|pages=22–23|quote=I follow Przeworski et al. (2000), Boix (2003), and Cheibub et al. (2010) in defining a ''dictatorship'' as an independent country that fails to satisfy at least one of the following two criteria for democracy: (1) free and competitive legislative elections and (2) an executive that is elected either directly in free and competitive presidential elections or indirectly by a legislature in parliamentary systems. Throughout this book, I use the terms ''dictatorship'' and ''authoritarian regime'' interchangeably and refer to the heads of these regimes' governments as simply ''dictators'' or ''authoritarian leaders'', regardless of their formal title.|access-date=2019-10-21|archive-date=2019-10-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021220420/https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Geddes |first1=Barbara |last2=Wright |first2=Joseph |last3=Frantz |first3=Erica |date=2014 |title=Autocratic Breakdown and Regime Transitions: A New Data Set |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/abs/autocratic-breakdown-and-regime-transitions-a-new-data-set/EBDB9E5E64CF899AD50B9ACC630B593F |journal=Perspectives on Politics |language=en |volume=12 |issue=2 |pages=313–331 |doi=10.1017/S1537592714000851 |s2cid=145784357 |issn=1537-5927 |archive-date=27 January 2023 |access-date=19 August 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127111603/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/abs/autocratic-breakdown-and-regime-transitions-a-new-data-set/EBDB9E5E64CF899AD50B9ACC630B593F |url-status=live |url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Gehlbach |first1=Scott |last2=Sonin |first2=Konstantin |last3=Svolik |first3=Milan W. |date=2016 |title=Formal Models of Nondemocratic Politics |journal=Annual Review of Political Science |language=en |volume=19 |issue=1 |pages=565–584 |doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-042114-014927 |s2cid=143064525 |issn=1094-2939|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Cheibub |first1=José Antonio |last2=Gandhi |first2=Jennifer |last3=Vreeland |first3=James Raymond |date=2010 |title=Democracy and dictatorship revisited |journal=Public Choice |volume=143 |issue=1/2 |pages=67–101 |doi=10.1007/s11127-009-9491-2 |jstor=40661005 |s2cid=45234838 |issn=0048-5829 }}</ref> Broadly defined, authoritarian states include countries that lack [[human rights]] such as [[freedom of religion]], or countries in which the government and the [[Opposition (politics)|opposition]] do not alternate in power at least once following free elections.<ref name="Svolik20">{{Cite book|url=https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|title=The Politics of Authoritarian Rule|first=Milan W.|last=Svolik|publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2012|page=20|quote=More demanding criteria may require that governments respect certain civil liberties{{snd}}such as the freedom of religion (Schmitter and Karl 1991; Zakaria 1997){{snd}}or that the incumbent government and the opposition alternate in power at least once after the first seemingly free election (Huntington 1993; Przeworski et al. 2000; Cheibib et al. 2010).|access-date=2019-10-21|archive-date=2019-10-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021220420/https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|url-status=live}}</ref> Authoritarian states might contain nominally democratic institutions such as political parties, legislatures and elections which are managed to entrench authoritarian rule and can feature fraudulent, non-competitive elections.<ref name="SvolikNominal">{{cite book|url=https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|title=The Politics of Authoritarian Rule|first=Milan W.|last=Svolik|publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2012|pages=8, 12, 22, 25, 88, 117|access-date=2019-10-21|archive-date=2019-10-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021220420/https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|url-status=live}}</ref>
Since 1946, the share of authoritarian states in the international political system increased until the mid-1970s but declined from then until 2000.<ref name="Svolik25">{{Cite book|url=https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|title=The Politics of Authoritarian Rule|first=Milan W.|last=Svolik|publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2012|page=25|access-date=2019-10-21|archive-date=2019-10-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021220420/https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|url-status=live}}</ref> Prior to 2000, dictatorships typically began with a [[Coup d'état|coup]] and replaced a pre-existing authoritarian regime.<ref name="Geddes-2024">{{cite book |last=Geddes |first=Barbara |chapter=How New Dictatorships Begin |date=2024 |title=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics |editor-last=Wolf |editor-first=Anne |publisher=Oxford University Press |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.3 |isbn=978-0-19-887199-6}}</ref> Since 2000, dictatorships are most likely to begin through [[democratic backsliding]] whereby a democratically elected leader established an authoritarian regime.<ref name="Geddes-2024" />
== Characteristics == Authoritarianism is characterized by highly concentrated and [[centralized government]] power maintained by [[political repression]] and the exclusion of potential or supposed challengers by armed force. It uses [[Political party|political parties]] and mass organizations to mobilize people around the goals of the regime.<ref name="Vestal">Theodore M. Vesta, ''[{{Google books|plainurl=yes|id=XWXtXOl56KkC&c|page=17}} Ethiopia: A Post-Cold War African State]''. Greenwood, 1999, p. 17.</ref> [[Adam Przeworski]] has theorized that "authoritarian equilibrium rests mainly on lies, fear and economic prosperity."<ref>{{cite book|title=Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America|url=https://archive.org/details/democracymarket00prze|url-access=registration|page=[https://archive.org/details/democracymarket00prze/page/58 58]|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year= 1991|isbn=978-0-521-42335-9|first=Adam|last=Przeworski}}</ref>
Authoritarianism also tends to embrace the informal and unregulated exercise of [[Power (politics)|political power]], a leadership that is "self-appointed and even if elected cannot be displaced by citizens' free choice among competitors", the arbitrary deprivation of [[civil liberties]] and little tolerance for meaningful [[Opposition (politics)|opposition]].<ref name="Vestal"/> A range of [[social control]]s also attempt to stifle [[civil society]] while political stability is maintained by control over and support of the [[armed forces]], a bureaucracy staffed by the regime and creation of [[allegiance]] through various means of [[socialization]] and indoctrination.<ref name="Vestal"/> [[Pippa Norris]] and [[Ronald Inglehart]] identify authoritarianism in politicians and political parties by looking for values of security, conformity, and obedience.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Norris |first1=Pippa |title=Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and the rise of authoritarian-populism |last2=Inglehart |first2=Ronald |date=2018 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-42607-7 |location=New York, NY |page=14}}</ref>
Authoritarianism is marked by "indefinite political tenure" of the ruler or [[ruling party]] (often in a [[one-party state]]) or other authority.<ref name="Vestal"/> The transition from an authoritarian system to a more [[Democracy|democratic]] form of government is referred to as [[democratization]].<ref name="Vestal"/>
=== Constitutions in authoritarian regimes === Authoritarian regimes often adopt "the institutional trappings" of democracies such as [[constitution]]s.<ref>Michael Albertus & Victor Menaldo, "The Political Economy of Autocratic Constitutions", in ''Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes'' (eds. Tom Ginsburg & Alberto Simpser: Cambridge University Press, 2014), p. 80.</ref> Constitutions in authoritarian states may serve a variety of roles, including "operating manual" (describing how the government is to function); "billboard" (signal of regime's intent), "blueprint" (outline of future regime plans), and "window dressing" (material designed to obfuscate, such as provisions setting forth freedoms that are not honored in practice).<ref>Tom Ginsburg & Alberto Simpser, ''Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes'' (Cambridge University Press, 2014), pp. 3–10.</ref> Authoritarian constitutions may help legitimize, strengthen, and consolidate regimes.<ref>Michael Albertus & Victor Menaldo, ''Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes'' (eds. Tom Ginsburg & Alberto Simpser: Cambridge University Press, 2014), p. 54.</ref> An authoritarian constitution "that successfully coordinates government action and defines popular expectations can also help consolidate the regime's grip on power by inhibiting re coordination on a different set of arrangements."<ref>Davis S. Law & Mila Versteeg, "Constitutional Variation Among Strains of Authoritarianism" in ''Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes'' (eds. Tom Ginsburg & Alberto Simpser: Cambridge University Press, 2014), p. 173.</ref> Unlike democratic constitutions, authoritarian constitutions do not set direct limits on executive authority; however, in some cases such documents may function as ways for elites to protect their own property rights or constrain autocrats' behavior.<ref>Michael Albertus & Victor Menaldo, ''Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes'' (eds. Tom Ginsburg & Alberto Simpser: Cambridge University Press, 2014), pp. 54, 80.</ref>
The [[Soviet Russia Constitution of 1918]], the first charter of the new [[Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic]] (RSFSR), was described by [[Vladimir Lenin]] as a "revolutionary" document. It was, he said, unlike any constitution drafted by a nation-state.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/constitution-1918|title=Constitution of 1918|website=Encyclopedia.com|access-date=30 May 2022|archive-date=5 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200805084630/https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/constitution-1918|url-status=live}}</ref> The concept of "authoritarian constitutionalism" has been developed by legal scholar [[Mark Tushnet]].<ref name=Tushnet>Tushnet, Mark (January 2015). [https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4654&context=clr "Authoritarian Constitutionalism"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200117092344/https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4654&context=clr |date=2020-01-17 }}. ''Cornell Law Review''. Cambridge University Press. '''100''' (2): 36–50. {{doi|10.1017/CBO9781107252523.004}}.</ref> Tushnet distinguishes authoritarian constitutionalist regimes from "liberal constitutionalist" regimes ("the sort familiar in the modern West, with core commitments to human rights and self-governance implemented by means of varying institutional devices") and from purely authoritarian regimes (which reject the idea of human rights or constraints on leaders' power).<ref name=Tushnet/> He describes authoritarian constitutionalist regimes as (1) authoritarian [[Dominant-party system|dominant-party]] states that (2) impose sanctions (such as libel judgments) against, but do not [[Arbitrary arrest and detention|arbitrarily arrest]], political dissidents; (3) permit "reasonably open discussion and criticism of its policies"; (4) hold "reasonably free and fair elections", without systemic intimidation, but "with close attention to such matters as the drawing of election districts and the creation of party lists to ensure as best it can that it will prevail{{snd}}and by a substantial margin"; (5) reflect at least occasional responsiveness to public opinion; and (6) create "mechanisms to ensure that the amount of dissent does not exceed the level it regards as desirable." Tushnet cites [[Singapore]] as an example of an authoritarian constitutionalist state, and connects the concept to that of [[hybrid regimes]].<ref name=Tushnet/>
=== Current list of countries === The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of states characterized as authoritarian, as seen in the sources in the Notes and references column. Countries listed also are not rated as democracies by [[The Economist Democracy Index]], as 'free' by [[Freedom House|Freedom House's]] [[Freedom in the World]] index or reach a high score{{Clarify|date=September 2025}} at [[V-Dem Democracy Indices]]. <!-- DO NOT ADD NEW ENTRIES OR MODIFY TEXT WITHOUT A REFERENCE FROM A RELIABLE (PREFERABLY ACADEMIC) SOURCE--> {|class="wikitable sortable" !width=200px|State !width=75px|Time period !Ruling group or person !Notes and references |- |{{flag|Afghanistan}} |[[Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (1996–2001)|1996–2001]]; 2021– |[[Taliban]] |[[Totalitarianism|Totalitarian]] [[theocratic state]]. It has reached the last place in [[The Economist Democracy Index]].<ref>*{{cite journal |last1=Sakhi |first1=Nilofar |title=The Taliban Takeover in Afghanistan and Security Paradox |journal=Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs |date=December 2022 |volume=9 |issue=3 |pages=383–401 |doi=10.1177/23477970221130882 |s2cid=253945821 |quote=Afghanistan is now controlled by a militant group that operates out of a totalitarian ideology.}} *{{cite web |last1=Madadi |first1=Sayed |title=Dysfunctional centralization and growing fragility under Taliban rule |url=https://www.mei.edu/publications/dysfunctional-centralization-and-growing-fragility-under-taliban-rule |website=[[Middle East Institute]] |access-date=28 November 2022 |date=6 September 2022 |quote=In other words, the centralized political and governance institutions of the former republic were unaccountable enough that they now comfortably accommodate the totalitarian objectives of the Taliban without giving the people any chance to resist peacefully. }} *{{cite web |last1=Sadr |first1=Omar |title=Afghanistan's Public Intellectuals Fail to Denounce the Taliban |url=https://www.fairobserver.com/region/central_south_asia/omar-sadr-afghanistan-taliban-rule-totalitarianism-human-rights-news-2441/ |website=Fair Observer |access-date=28 November 2022 |date=23 March 2022 |quote=The Taliban government currently installed in Afghanistan is not simply another dictatorship. By all standards, it is a totalitarian regime. }} *{{cite web |title=Dismantlement of the Taliban regime is the only way forward for Afghanistan |url=https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/southasiasource/dismantlement-of-the-taliban-regime-is-the-only-way-forward-for-afghanistan/ |website=[[Atlantic Council]] |access-date=28 November 2022 |date=8 September 2022 |quote=As with any other ideological movement, the Taliban's Islamic government is transformative and totalitarian in nature. }} *{{cite web |last1=Akbari |first1=Farkhondeh |title=The Risks Facing Hazaras in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan |url=https://extremism.gwu.edu/risks-facing-hazaras-taliban-ruled-afghanistan |website=[[George Washington University]] |access-date=28 November 2022 |date=7 March 2022 |quote=In the Taliban's totalitarian Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, there is no meaningful political inclusivity or representation for Hazaras at any level. |archive-date=14 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230114164914/https://extremism.gwu.edu/risks-facing-hazaras-taliban-ruled-afghanistan }}</ref> |- |{{flag|Angola}} |1975– |[[MPLA]] |Authoritarian party system<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/angola|access-date=19 April 2018|title=Freedom in the World Angola Report|archive-date=6 February 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180206004843/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/angola|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Azerbaijan}} |1993– |[[New Azerbaijan Party]] |Authoritarian party under Aliyev Family<ref>{{cite news|last=Vincent|first=Rebecca|title=When the music dies: Azerbaijan one year after Eurovision|url=http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/05/2013519690697916.html|access-date=10 June 2013|date=19 May 2013|agency=[[Al Jazeera English|Al Jazeera]]|quote=Over the past several years, Azerbaijan has become increasingly authoritarian, as the authorities have used tactics such as harassment, intimidation, blackmail, attack and imprisonment to silence the regime's critics, whether journalists, bloggers, human rights defenders, political activists or ordinary people taking to the streets in protest.|archive-date=7 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130607163333/http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/05/2013519690697916.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Stocks |first=Tom |author2=Miranda Patrucic |author3=Ilya Lozovsky |author4=Kelly Bloss |title=Azerbaijan's Ruling Aliyev Family and Their Associates Acquired Dozens of Prime London Properties Worth Nearly $700 Million |url=https://www.occrp.org/en/the-pandora-papers/azerbaijans-ruling-aliyev-family-and-their-associates-acquired-dozens-of-prime-london-properties-worth-nearly-700-million |access-date=2024-01-22 |website=OCCRP |language=en |quote=The Aliyev family's rule over Azerbaijan began with Ilham's father Heydar Aliyev, a longtime Soviet official who took control of the country two years after it gained its independence in 1991. The elder Aliyev was an authoritarian leader, and under his watch Azerbaijan began developing into a corrupt petro-state.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Jamgochian |first=Nevdon |date=2021-02-28 |title=Artwashing a Dictatorship |url=http://hyperallergic.com/615519/artwashing-a-dictatorship/ |access-date=2024-01-22 |website=Hyperallergic |language=en-US |quote=This family, the Aliyevs, have ruled Azerbaijan in some manner for 50 years.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Horan |first=John |date=2023-12-07 |title=Azerbaijan's Aliyev calls snap presidential election for February -- Spoiler alert: He's going to be re-elected by a huge margin. |work=Eurasianet |quote=Aliyev effectively inherited the Azerbaijani presidency after his father Heydar's death in 2003. Heydar Aliyev had been president since 1993. He was also the head of Soviet Azerbaijan in 1969-82. So if Ilham wins in February and serves out his fifth term through 2031, the Aliyev dynasty will have led Azerbaijan in one form or another for more than 50 years in a span of just over 61 years.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-09-21 |title=Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: Who is Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev? |url=https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20230921-nagorno-karabakh-conflict-who-is-azerbaijan-s-president-ilham-aliyev |access-date=2024-01-22 |website=France 24 |language=en |quote=The next generation of the Aliyev dynasty looks set to continue the family's leading role in Azerbaijani politics.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-02-14 |title=Azerbaijan's opposition sidelined by snap presidential election |url=https://europeanforum.net/azerbaijans-opposition-sidelined-by-snap-presidential-election/ |access-date=2023-09-28 |website=European Forum for Democracy and Solidarity |language=en-US}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Bahrain}} |1783– |[[House of Khalifa]] |Effective monarchy<ref>Nebil Husayn, [http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/Bahrain%20AMSS%20-%20Abstract%20-%20Outline_0.pdf Authoritarianism in Bahrain: Motives, Methods and Challenges] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728150718/https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/Bahrain%20AMSS%20-%20Abstract%20-%20Outline_0.pdf |date=2020-07-28 }}, AMSS 41st Annual Conference (29 September 2012); [http://cddrl.stanford.edu/events/parliamentary_elections_and_authoritarian_rule_in_bahrain Parliamentary Elections and Authoritarian Rule in Bahrain] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131217061803/http://cddrl.stanford.edu/events/parliamentary_elections_and_authoritarian_rule_in_bahrain |date=2013-12-17 }} (13 January 2011), Stanford University</ref> |- |{{flag|Belarus}} |1994– |[[Alexander Lukashenko]] |Authoritarian ruler<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/07/belarus-inside-europes-last-dictatorship|access-date=7 August 2014|title=Belarus: inside Europe's last dictatorship|location=London|work=The Guardian|first=Sigrid|last=Rausing|date=7 October 2012|archive-date=26 July 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140726110421/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/07/belarus-inside-europes-last-dictatorship|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="reuters1">{{cite news | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-belarus-dicator-idUSTRE8230T320120304 | work=[[Reuters]] | title=Belarus's Lukashenko: "Better a dictator than gay" | quote=...German Foreign Minister's branding him 'Europe's last dictator' | location=Berlin | date=4 March 2012 | access-date=30 June 2017 | archive-date=6 October 2015 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151006194656/http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/04/us-belarus-dicator-idUSTRE8230T320120304 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Profile: Alexander Lukashenko|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3882843.stm|access-date=7 August 2014|work=BBC News|publisher=BBC|date=9 January 2007|quote=..an authoritarian ruling style is characteristic of me [Lukashenko]|archive-date=23 October 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071023013357/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3882843.stm|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="HRW">{{cite book |chapter-url=http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/belaru9878.htm |title=Essential Background – Belarus |chapter=Belarus: Events of 2004 |access-date=26 March 2006 |year=2005 |publisher=Human Rights Watch |archive-date=26 March 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060326230454/https://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/belaru9878.htm }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.amnesty.org/en/region/europe-and-central-asia/eurasia/belarus |title=Human rights by country – Belarus |access-date=22 December 2007 |year=2007 |website=Amnesty International Report 2007 |publisher=[[Amnesty International]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071212011715/http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/europe-and-central-asia/eurasia/belarus |archive-date=12 December 2007 |url-status=live }}</ref> |- |{{Flagicon|Burundi}} [[Burundi]] |2005– |[[National Council for the Defense of Democracy – Forces for the Defense of Democracy|CNDD–FDD]] |Authoritarian ethnic party<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/pierre-nkurunziza-burundi-president-who-led-authoritarian-regime-dies-at-55/2020/06/09/f1a582e4-aa60-11ea-a9d9-a81c1a491c52_story.html|title=Pierre Nkurunziza, Burundian president who led authoritarian regime, dies at 55|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|first=Matt |last=Schudel|date=10 June 2020|access-date=10 June 2020 }}</ref> |- |{{flag|Cambodia}} |1979– |[[Cambodian People's Party]] |<ref>{{cite news |first=Elisabeth |last=Bumiller |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/world/asia/in-cambodia-panetta-reaffirms-ties-with-authoritarian-government.html |title=In Cambodia, Panetta Reaffirms Ties With Authoritarian Government |newspaper=[[The New York Times]] |date=16 November 2012 |access-date=26 February 2017 |archive-date=2 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502174611/https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/world/asia/in-cambodia-panetta-reaffirms-ties-with-authoritarian-government.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=The Rise of Sophisticated Authoritarianism in Southeast Asia|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/rise-of-sophisticated-authoritarianism-in-southeast-asia/DD69532BF1B97F138A79368A5C941915|last=Morgenbesser|first=Lee|date=2020|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/9781108630061|isbn=978-1-108-63006-1|s2cid=219095209|access-date=1 May 2020|archive-date=1 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200501153240/https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/rise-of-sophisticated-authoritarianism-in-southeast-asia/DD69532BF1B97F138A79368A5C941915|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Cameroon}} |1982– |[[Paul Biya]] |Authoritarian ruler<ref name="Freedom House">{{cite book |url=https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FH_FITW_Report_2016.pdf |title=Freedom in the World 2016: Anxious Dictators, Wavering Democracies: Global Freedom Under Pressure |publisher=Freedom House |year=2016}}</ref><ref name="Amnesty International">{{cite web|publisher=[[Amnesty International]]|title=Amnesty International Report 2009: State of the World's Human Rights|year=2009|url=http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/africa/cameroon|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111008000900/http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/africa/cameroon|archive-date=2011-10-08}}</ref> |- |{{Flag|Chad}} |1990- |Déby family |[[Hereditary dictatorship]] under Déby family.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-05-13 |title=Chad: Political Transition Ends with Déby’s Election {{!}} Human Rights Watch |url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/13/chad-political-transition-ends-debys-election |access-date=2026-05-13 |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{flag|China}} |1949– |[[Chinese Communist Party]] | China received 9 out of 100 points in Freedom House's 2024 Global Freedom Score.<ref>{{Cite web |title=China: Freedom in the World 2024 Country Report |url=https://freedomhouse.org/country/china/freedom-world/2024 |access-date=2024-05-07 |website=Freedom House |language=en}}</ref> The party promotes itself as 'consultative' on local issues and some scholars describe the Chinese system as "a fragmented authoritarianism" ([[Kenneth Lieberthal|Lieberthal]]), "a negotiated state", or "a consultative authoritarian regime."<ref>Ming Xia, [https://www.nytimes.com/ref/college/coll-china-politics.html China Rises Companion: Political Governance] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170221015447/http://www.nytimes.com/ref/college/coll-china-politics.html |date=2017-02-21 }}, ''The New York Times''. See also Cheng Li, [http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2012/09/shifting-power-china-lic The End of the CCP's Resilient Authoritarianism? A Tripartite Assessment of Shifting Power in China] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150327142730/http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2012/09/shifting-power-china-lic |date=2015-03-27 }} (September 2012), ''The China Quarterly'', Vol. 211; Perry Link and Joshua Kurlantzick, [https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124319304482150525 China's Modern Authoritarianism] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170716230948/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124319304482150525 |date=2017-07-16 }} (25 May 2009), ''The Wall Street Journal''; Ariana Eunjung Cha, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062604343.html China, Cuba, Other Authoritarian Regimes Censor News From Iran] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200918034318/https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062604343.html |date=2020-09-18 }} (27 June 2009), ''The Washington Post''.{{cite journal |last1=Kennedy |first1=John |last2=Nagao |first2=Haruka |last3=Liu |first3=Hongyan |year=2018 |title=Voting and Values: Grassroots Elections in Rural and Urban China |journal=Politics and Governance |volume=6 |issue=2 |page=90 |doi=10.17645/pag.v6i2.1331 |doi-access=free}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Republic of the Congo}} |1969–1992; 1997– |[[Congolese Party of Labour]] |Under authoritarian ruler<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/congo-republic-brazzaville|access-date=19 April 2018|title=Freedom in the World Republic of Congo Report|archive-date=21 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180421030556/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/congo-republic-brazzaville|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Cuba}} |1959– |[[Castrism]] |Totalitarian ideology that maintains the one-party system<ref>Ariana Eunjung Cha, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062604343.html China, Cuba, Other Authoritarian Regimes Censor News From Iran] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200918034318/https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062604343.html|date=2020-09-18}} (27 June 2009), ''The Washington Post''; [[Shanthi Kalathil]] and Taylor Boas, [http://carnegieendowment.org/2001/07/16/internet-and-state-control-in-authoritarian-regimes-china-cuba-and-counterrevolution/1ic4 Internet and State Control in Authoritarian Regimes: China, Cuba and the Counterrevolution] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728165201/https://carnegieendowment.org/2001/07/16/internet-and-state-control-in-authoritarian-regimes-china-cuba-and-counterrevolution/1ic4|date=2020-07-28}} (16 July 2001), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.</ref> |- |{{flag|Djibouti}} |1977– |[[People's Rally for Progress]] |<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Metelits|first1=Claire|title=Democratic Contestation on the Margins: Regimes in Small African Countries|last2=Matti|first2=Stephanie|publisher=Lexington Books|year=2015|isbn=978-0-7391-9343-3|location=Lanham, Maryland|pages=99–122|chapter=Authoritarianism and Geostrategic Policies in Djibouti}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Metelits|first1=Claire|last2=Matti|first2=Stephanie|date=12 July 2013|title=Deserting Democracy: Authoritarianism and Geo-Strategic Politics in Djibouti|journal=Presented at the African Studies Association Annual Conference, November 2013}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Egypt}} |2014– |[[Abdel Fattah el-Sisi]] |Authoritarian ruler<ref>Amr Adly, [http://carnegie-mec.org/publications/?fa=55804 The Economics of Egypt's Rising Authoritarian Order] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728153720/https://carnegie-mec.org/publications/?fa=55804 |date=2020-07-28 }}, [[Carnegie Middle East Center]], 18 June 2014; Nathan J. Brown & Katie Bentivoglio, [http://carnegieendowment.org/2014/10/09/egypt-s-resurgent-authoritarianism-it-s-way-of-life Egypt's Resurgent Authoritarianism: It's a Way of Life] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728172111/https://carnegieendowment.org/2014/10/09/egypt-s-resurgent-authoritarianism-it-s-way-of-life |date=2020-07-28 }}, [[Carnegie Endowment for International Peace]], 9 October 2014; [[Roula Khalaf]], [https://www.ft.com/content/8127ef6e-c38e-11e6-9bca-2b93a6856354 Sisi's Egypt: The march of the security state] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200726123544/https://www.ft.com/content/8127ef6e-c38e-11e6-9bca-2b93a6856354 |date=2020-07-26 }}, ''Financial Times'' (19 December 2016); [[Peter Hessler]], [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/02/egypts-failed-revolution Egypt's Failed Revolution] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200702002308/https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/02/egypts-failed-revolution |date=2020-07-02 }}, ''New Yorker'', 2 January 2017.</ref> |- |{{flag|El Salvador}} |2019– |[[Nayib Bukele]] |Populist-authoritarian ruler<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/18/bukele-el-salvador-biden-human-rights-watch-authoritarianism/|title=The U.S. can stop El Salvador's slide to authoritarianism. Time to act.|last1=Vivanco|first1=José Miguel|last2=Pappier|first2=Juan|access-date=22 June 2021|date=18 May 2021|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|archive-date=22 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210622221805/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/18/bukele-el-salvador-biden-human-rights-watch-authoritarianism/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.undispatch.com/better-know-nayib-bukele-the-hipster-millennial-and-authoritarian-president-of-el-salvador/|title=Better Know Nayib Bukele, the Hipster, Millennial and Authoritarian President of El Salvador|last=Goldberg|first=Mark Leon|date=20 June 2021|website=UN Dispatch|access-date=20 June 2021|archive-date=22 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210622222353/https://www.undispatch.com/better-know-nayib-bukele-the-hipster-millennial-and-authoritarian-president-of-el-salvador/|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Equatorial Guinea}} |1979– |[[Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo]] |Authoritarian ruler<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/equatorial-guinea|access-date=19 April 2018|title=Freedom in the World Equatorial Guinea Report|archive-date=24 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180624150407/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/equatorial-guinea|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Eritrea}} |1993–{{efn|Eritrea gained ''de facto'' independence in 1991; ''de jure'' independence was achieved in 1993.}} |[[Isaias Afwerki]] |Eritrea is considered a totalitarian dictatorship without elections.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Walker|first=Steve|date=5 September 2022|title=Totalitarianism Is Still With Us|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/09/eritrea-totalitarian-state-diplomatic-relations/671306/|access-date=14 April 2023|website=The Atlantic}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Eswatini}} |1968– |[[House of Dlamini]] |Effective monarchy<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/country/eswatini/freedom-world/2022|access-date=16 July 2023|title= Freedom in the World Eswatini Report|website=Freedom House}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Ethiopia}} |2018– |[[Abiy Ahmed]] |Abiy Ahmed and his party considered "authoritarian" by some activists and dissents.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-09-25 |title=Ethiopia's PM Abiy Ahmed loses his shine |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/the-shine-comes-off-ethiopias-pm-abiy-ahmed/ |access-date=2023-08-09 |website=POLITICO |language=en}}</ref> He is considered by some a "charming dictator".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Teshome |first=Moges Zewdu |date=2023-06-15 |title=Charming Abiy Ahmed, a very modern dictator |url=https://www.ethiopia-insight.com/2023/06/15/charming-abiy-ahmed-a-very-modern-dictator/ |access-date=2023-08-09 |website=Ethiopia Insight |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Mackintosh |first=Eliza |date=2021-09-07 |title=From Nobel laureate to global pariah: How the world got Abiy Ahmed and Ethiopia so wrong |url=https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/07/africa/abiy-ahmed-ethiopia-tigray-conflict-cmd-intl/index.html |access-date=2023-08-09 |website=CNN |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Hong Kong}} <small>(Special administrative region of {{flag|China}})</small> |2020– |[[Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong)]] |Since the enactment of the [[2020 Hong Kong national security law|Hong Kong National Security Law]], the Hong Kong government began cracking down on pro-democracy activists, politicians, and news outlets. Which is considered by many to be a sign of rising authoritarianism in Hong Kong.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-12-29 |title=How democracy was dismantled in Hong Kong in 2021 |url=https://apnews.com/article/china-hong-kong-beijing-democracy-national-security-9e3c405923c24b6889c1bcf171f6def4 |access-date=2024-03-28 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-05-22 |title=What is Hong Kong's national security law? |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52765838 |access-date=2024-03-28 |website=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Yang |first=Joshua |date=2023-09-25 |title=Hong Kong's Bureaucrats Don't Make Good Authoritarians |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/25/hong-kong-authoritarian-crackdown-censorship-china-ccp/ |access-date=2024-03-28 |website=Foreign Policy |language=en-US}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Iran|1979}} |1979– |[[Assembly of Experts]] |After the [[Iranian Revolution]], Iran became a [[Totalitarianism|totalitarian]] [[clericalism|clerical]] state (nominally an "[[Islamic republic]]") based on the absolute authority of the unelected [[Supreme Leader of Iran]], based on the strict [[Shia Islam|Shia]] concept of [[Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist]].If it has the opportunity, this legal body will remove reformist politicians.<ref>Mehrdad Kia, [https://books.google.com/books?id=BaE3AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA75 The Making of Modern Authoritarianism in Contemporary Iran], in ''Modern Middle East Authoritarianism: Roots, Ramifications, and Crisis'' (Routledge: 2013; eds. Noureddine Jebnoun, Mehrdad Kia & Mimi Kirk), pp. 75–76.</ref><ref>Mehran Tamadonfar, ''Islamic Law and Governance in Contemporary Iran: Transcending Islam for Social, Economic, and Political Order'' (Lexington Books, 2015), pp. 311–313.</ref> In 2000, Juan José Linz wrote that "it is difficult to fit the Iranian regime into the existing typology, as it combines the ideological bent of totalitarianism with the limited pluralism of authoritarianism and holds regular elections in which candidates advocating differing policies and incumbents are often defeated."<ref>Juan José Linz, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=8cYk_ABfMJIC&pg=PA36 Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200726124833/https://books.google.com/books?id=8cYk_ABfMJIC&pg=PA36 |date=2020-07-26 }}'' (Lynne Rienner, 2000), p. 36.</ref> |- |{{flag|Israel}} |1996–1999;<br />2009–2021;<br />2022– |[[Benjamin Netanyahu]] and [[Likud]] |Although it has boasted of being the "only democracy in the Middle East" the treatment in reference to Palestinians is strictly authoritarian, such as the prohibition of commemorating the [[Nakba]] to members of the [[Knesset]], the prohibition of blocking a state sovereign Palestinian or not abiding by UN resolutions.<ref>{{cite web | last1=Mehta | first1=Jonaki | last2=Intagliata | first2=Christopher | last3=Kelly | first3=Mary Louise | title=What Israel's new judicial law says about its democracy | website=NPR | date=24 July 2023 | url=https://www.npr.org/2023/07/24/1189831534/what-israels-new-judicial-law-says-about-its-democracy | access-date=24 February 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/24/middleeast/israel-supreme-court-power-stripped-intl | title=Israel passes law to strip Supreme Court of power to block government decisions, defying months of protests | date=24 July 2023 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfire/2023/01/israel-benjamin-netanyahu-authoritarian-government | title=We are watching Israel build an authoritarian government in real time | date=17 January 2023 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | last1=Leifer | first1=Joshua | url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/30/israel-hasnt-been-a-democracy-for-a-long-time-now-israelis-need-to-face-this-fact | title=Israel hasn't been a democracy for a long time. Now, Israelis need to face this fact | Israel | the Guardian | work=The Guardian | date=30 March 2023 }}</ref> |- |{{flag|Jordan}} |1946– |[[Hashemites]] |Effective monarchy<ref name="wasp">{{cite news|last1=Yom|first1=Sean|title=Why Jordan and Morocco are doubling down on royal rule|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/16/why-jordan-and-morocco-are-doubling-down-on-royal-rule/|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|date=16 May 2017|access-date=27 September 2017|archive-date=2 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171002220932/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/16/why-jordan-and-morocco-are-doubling-down-on-royal-rule/|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Laos}} |1975– |[[Lao People's Revolutionary Party]] |Sole party system<ref name=":0">Beckert, Jen. "Communitarianism." International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology. London: Routledge, 2006. 81.</ref> |- |{{flag|Mali}} |2020– |[[Assimi Goita]] |Military dictatorship |- |{{flag|Morocco}} |1957– |[[Alaouite dynasty]] |Effective Monarchy<ref name="wasp"/><ref>{{cite news |title=Governance of Morocco |url=https://fanack.com/morocco/governance/ |work=Fanack.com |access-date=2018-07-19 |archive-date=2018-07-19 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180719175256/https://fanack.com/morocco/governance/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Morocco: The Promise of Democracy and the Reality of Authoritarianism |url=http://www.iai.it/en/pubblicazioni/morocco-promise-democracy-and-reality-authoritarianism |work=IAI Istituto Affari Internazionali |date=27 April 2016 |language=it |access-date=19 July 2018 |archive-date=28 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728140545/https://www.iai.it/en/pubblicazioni/morocco-promise-democracy-and-reality-authoritarianism |url-status=live }}</ref> |- |{{flag|Mozambique}} |1975– |[[FRELIMO]] |Dominant Party, but respect term limits.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Can Mozambique's march to authoritarianism be stopped?|url=https://issafrica.org/iss-today/can-mozambiques-march-to-authoritarianism-be-stopped|access-date=2022-11-16|website=issafrica.org|date=16 November 2022 |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Myanmar}} |1962– |[[Tatmadaw]] |The Tatmadaw allowed a democratically elected administration to exercise some power from 2016 to 2021, without allowing civilian control of the military.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Beech |first1=Hannah |title=Myanmar's Army Is Back in Charge. It Never Truly Left. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/world/asia/myanmar-military-coup.html |access-date=1 May 2023 |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=2 March 2021}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Nicaragua}} |1979–1990; 2007– |[[Daniel Ortega]] |Totalitarian ruler<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/01/two-years-after-nicaraguas-mass-uprising-started-why-is-daniel-ortega-still-power/ |title=Two years after Nicaragua's mass uprising started, why is Daniel Ortega still in power? |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=2020-10-01 |archive-date=2020-12-23 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201223062831/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/01/two-years-after-nicaraguas-mass-uprising-started-why-is-daniel-ortega-still-power/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Human rights vs. authoritarianism in Nicaragua|url=https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/human-rights-vs-authoritarianism-in-nicaragua/|access-date=2020-10-03|website=openDemocracy|language=en|archive-date=2020-10-20|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201020192410/https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/human-rights-vs-authoritarianism-in-nicaragua/|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|North Korea}} |1949– |[[Workers' Party of Korea]] under [[Kim family (North Korea)|Kim Dynasty]] |Some scholars consider North Korea to be the most totalitarian country.<ref name=":9">{{cite news|date=9 April 2018 |title=North Korea country profile |work=[[BBC News]] |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15256929}}</ref><ref name=":10">{{cite news|title=Kim Jong Un's North Korea: Life inside the totalitarian state |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/world/north-korea-defectors/ |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Oman}} |1970– |[[House of Al Said]] |[[Absolute monarchy]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/oman|title=Oman|date=2017-01-24|website=freedomhouse.org|language=en|access-date=2019-10-23|archive-date=2017-05-09|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170509105056/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/oman|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Palestine}} |1964– |[[Palestine Liberation Organization]] and [[Hamas]] |<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20141011-authoritarianism-in-palestine/|title=Authoritarianism in Palestine|date=2014-10-11|website=Middle East Monitor|language=en-GB|access-date=2019-10-23|archive-date=2017-09-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170923091341/https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20141011-authoritarianism-in-palestine/|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{Flag|Qatar}} |1971– |[[House of Thani]] |Effective Monarchy<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/blog/dictators-continue-score-international-sporting-events|title=Dictators Continue to Score in International Sporting Events|work=Freedom House|access-date=2017-10-19|archive-date=2019-11-11|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191111091533/https://freedomhouse.org/blog/dictators-continue-score-international-sporting-events|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Russia}} |2000– |[[Vladimir Putin]] |Ruled since 2000, like [[Prime minister of Russia]] to period 2008-2012<ref>Way, Lucan. "The Evolution of Authoritarian Organization in Russia under Yeltsin and Putin." (2008). ''Kellogg Institute for International Studies'' https://kellogg.nd.edu/sites/default/files/old_files/documents/352_0.pdf</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Kolesnikov |first=Andrei |author-link=Andrey Vladimirovich Kolesnikov |date=2022-04-19 |title=Putin's War Has Moved Russia From Authoritarianism to Hybrid Totalitarianism |url=https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/04/19/putin-s-war-has-moved-russia-from-authoritarianism-to-hybrid-totalitarianism-pub-86921 |access-date=2023-02-13 |website=[[Carnegie Endowment for International Peace]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Vock |first=Ido |date=2022-03-09 |title=How Russia descended into authoritarianism |url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2022/03/how-russia-descended-into-authoritarianism |access-date=2023-02-13 |website=[[New Statesman]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Countries and Territories |url=https://freedomhouse.org/countries/nations-transit/scores |access-date=2023-02-13 |website=[[Freedom House]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Rosefielde |first1=Steven |last2=Hedlund |first2=Stefan |title=Russia Since 1980 |date=2009 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-84913-5 |page=174 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lNSiw3S8NIUC&dq=rubber+stamp+%22federal+assembly%22+of+russia+inpublisher:university+inpublisher:press&pg=PA174 |access-date=23 September 2023|quote=Duma election of 2003, reducing the legislature to a rubber stamp.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last1=Troianovski|first1=Anton|author-link=Anton Troianovski|last2=Nechepurenko|first2=Ivan|author-link2=Ivan Nechepurenko|date=2021-09-19|title=Russian Election Shows Declining Support for Putin's Party|language=en|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/19/world/europe/russia-election-google.html|access-date=2021-09-27|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=2021-09-20|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210920000513/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/19/world/europe/russia-election-google.html }}</ref> |- |{{flag|Rwanda}} |2000– |[[Paul Kagame]] |Authoritarian ruler supported by own [[Tutsi|ethnic group]]<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/rwanda|access-date=19 April 2018|title=Freedom in the World Rwanda Report|archive-date=6 January 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180106063931/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/rwanda|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Saudi Arabia}} |1934– |[[House of Saud]] |[[Absolute Monarchy]]. Also the construction of non-Islamic places of worship is prohibited.<ref>Toby Craig Jones, ''Desert Kingdom: How Oil and Water Forged Modern Saudi Arabia'' (2011), Harvard University Press, pp. 5, 14–15; Kira D. Baiasu, [http://groups.northwestern.edu/njia/?p=85 Sustaining Authoritarian Rule] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130102104633/http://groups.northwestern.edu/njia/?p=85 |date=2 January 2013 }} Fall 2009, Volume 10, Issue 1 (30 September 2009), ''Northwestern Journal of International Affairs''.</ref> |- |{{flag|Serbia}} |2012– |[[Serbian Progressive Party]] under [[Aleksandar Vučić]] |Dominant party system headed by populist-authoritarian leader<ref>{{Cite web |last=Eror |first=Aleks |date=2019-05-14 |title=Two Decades After the Fall of Milosevic, Dictatorship Is Returning to Serbia |url=https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/two-decades-after-the-fall-of-milosevic-dictatorship-is-returning-to-serbia/ |access-date=2026-04-13 |website=World Politics Review |language=en-US}}</ref> |- |{{flag|South Sudan}} |2011– |[[Sudan People's Liberation Movement]] under [[Salva Kiir Mayardit]] |Power vacuum<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/south-sudan|access-date=19 April 2018|title=Freedom in the World South Sudan Report|archive-date=21 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180421030458/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/south-sudan|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Sudan}} |2021– |[[Abdel Fattah al-Burhan]] |[[War in Sudan (2023-present)|Failed state]] in a [[Military dictatorship]]<ref name="bti-indices">{{cite web|title=BTI 2022|url=https://bti-project.org/en/downloads|website=Bertelsmann Transformation Index|publisher=Bertelsmann Stiftung|access-date=7 May 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230314164629/https://bti-project.org/en/downloads|archive-date=14 March 2023|location=Gütersloh|language=en|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Tajikistan}} |1994– |[[Emomali Rahmon]] |Authoritarian ruler<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/tajikistan|access-date=19 April 2018|title=Freedom in the World Tajikistan Report|archive-date=20 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180420074519/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/tajikistan|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Togo}} |1967– |Eyadema Family |Effective hereditary dictatorship. After reaching the term limit, Gnassingbe transformed the presidential system into a parliamentary one with himself at the head of the council of ministers.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.ips-journal.eu/regions/africa/togos-dynasty-lives-on-4111/|title=Togo's dynasty lives on |date=28 February 2020 }}</ref> |- |{{flag|Tunisia}} |2019– |[[Kais Saied]] |See also [[2019 Tunisian presidential election]] and [[2021 Tunisian self-coup]]. |- |{{flag|Turkey}} |2003– |[[Justice and Development Party (Turkey)|Justice and Development Party]] under [[Recep Tayyip Erdoğan]] |It has been described by observers as a "competitive authoritarian regime". Erdoğan changed the parliamentary system to a presidential one with him as president.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Esena |first1=Berk |last2=Gumuscu |first2=Sebnem |year=2016|title=Rising competitive authoritarianism in Turkey |journal=[[Third World Quarterly]] |volume=37|issue=9|pages=1581–1606|doi=10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732 |hdl=11693/36632 |s2cid=155983134 |hdl-access=free}}; Ramazan Kılınç, [https://www.opendemocracy.net/ramazan-k-l-n/turkey-from-conservative-democracy-to-popular-authoritarianism Turkey: from conservative democracy to popular authoritarianism] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160722133458/https://www.opendemocracy.net/ramazan-k-l-n/turkey-from-conservative-democracy-to-popular-authoritarianism |date=2016-07-22 }}, [[openDemocracy]] (5 December 2015).</ref> |- |{{flag|Turkmenistan}} |2006– |[[Berdimuhamedow|Berdimuhamedow Family]] |Effectively a totalitarian [[hereditary dictatorship]].<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Turkmenistan: Freedom in the World 2021 Country Report |url=https://freedomhouse.org/country/turkmenistan/freedom-world/2021 |access-date=2022-12-28 |website=Freedom House |language=en}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Turkmenistan: Freedom in the World 2022 Country Report |url=https://freedomhouse.org/country/turkmenistan/freedom-world/2022 |access-date=2023-01-01 |website=Freedom House |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{flag|United Arab Emirates}} |1971– |[[Royal families of the United Arab Emirates]] |Effective diarchic monarchies<ref>{{cite web|url=https://newint.org/blog/2015/09/07/uae-human-rights|title=The dark side of the United Arab Emirates|date=7 September 2015|website=newint.org|access-date=22 October 2017|archive-date=10 September 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150910005021/https://newint.org/blog/2015/09/07/uae-human-rights|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-14703998|title=United Arab Emirates profile|work=BBC News |date=29 August 2017|access-date=22 October 2017|archive-date=27 February 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140227121303/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-14703998|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Uganda}} |1986– |[[Yoweri Museveni]] |Autocratic ruler<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.africaresearchinstitute.org/newsite/blog/subtleties-authoritarianism-musevenis-uganda/|title = The subtleties of authoritarianism in Museveni's Uganda|publisher=Africa Research Institute}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Uzbekistan}} |1989– |[[Uzbekistan Liberal Democratic Party]] |Autocratic Party<ref>Neil J. Melvin, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=BmF4AgAAQBAJ Uzbekistan: Transition to Authoritarianism on the Silk Road] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210119120723/https://books.google.com/books?id=BmF4AgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover |date=2021-01-19 }}'' (Harwood Academic, 2000), pp. 28–30.</ref><ref>[[Shahram Akbarzadeh]], "Post-Soviet Central Asia: The Limits of Islam" in ''Constitutionalism in Islamic Countries: Between Upheaval and Continuity'' (Oxford University Press, 2012: eds. Rainer Grote & Tilmann J. Röder), p. 428.</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/asia/2017/12/14/an-uzbek-spring-has-sprung-but-summer-is-still-a-long-way-off|title=An Uzbek spring has sprung, but summer is still a long way off|date=2017-12-14|newspaper=The Economist|access-date=2019-10-23|issn=0013-0613|archive-date=2019-08-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190807163906/https://www.economist.com/asia/2017/12/14/an-uzbek-spring-has-sprung-but-summer-is-still-a-long-way-off|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Venezuela}} |1999– |[[Chavismo]] |This ideology ended the [[Republic of Venezuela|democratic period in Venezuela]] through free elections.<ref>Human Rights Watch, [https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/03/05/venezuela-chavez-s-authoritarian-legacy Venezuela: Chávez's Authoritarian Legacy: Dramatic Concentration of Power and Open Disregard for Basic Human Rights] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150610184150/http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/03/05/venezuela-chavez-s-authoritarian-legacy |date=2015-06-10 }}, 5 March 2013; Kurt Weyland, [http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/Weyland-24-3.pdf Latin America's Authoritarian Drift: The Threat from the Populist Left] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181001214521/http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/Weyland-24-3.pdf |date=2018-10-01 }}, ''Journal of Democracy'', Vol. 24, No. 3 (July 2013), pp. 18–32.</ref> |- |{{flag|Vietnam}} |1976– |[[Vietnamese Communist Party]] |Sole party system<ref>Thomas Fuller, [https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/24/world/asia/vietnam-clings-to-one-party-rule-as-dissent-rises-sharply.html In Hard Times, Open Dissent and Repression Rise in Vietnam] (23 April 2013), ''The New York Times''</ref> |- |{{flag|Zimbabwe}} |1980– |[[ZANU-PF]] |Authoritarian party system<ref>Daniel Compagnon, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=Ff-F2wS_YW4C A Predictable Tragedy: Robert Mugabe and the Collapse of Zimbabwe] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161114114542/https://books.google.com/books/about/A_Predictable_Tragedy.html?id=Ff-F2wS_YW4C |date=2016-11-14 }}'' ([[University of Pennsylvania Press]], 2011).</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2019-03-07|title=Zimbabwe's slither towards increased authoritarianism|url=https://www.thezimbabwean.co/2019/03/zimbabwes-slither-towards-increased-authoritarianism/|access-date=2020-10-03|website=The Zimbabwean|language=en-US|archive-date=2020-10-28|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201028200309/https://www.thezimbabwean.co/2019/03/zimbabwes-slither-towards-increased-authoritarianism/|url-status=live}}</ref> |}
=== Historical === The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of states which were historically authoritarian.<!-- DO NOT ADD NEW ENTRIES OR MODIFY TEXT WITHOUT A REFERENCE FROM A RELIABLE (PREFERABLY ACADEMIC) SOURCE. --> {|class="wikitable sortable" !width=200px|State !width=75px|Time period !Ruling group or person !Notes and references |- |{{Flag icon|People's Socialist Republic of Albania}} [[People's Socialist Republic of Albania|Albania]] |1946–1992 |One party rule under [[Enver Hoxha]] and [[Ramiz Alia]] |<ref>{{Cite web |title=Enver Hoxha: the lunatic who took over the asylum |url=https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/enver-hoxha-lunatic-who-took-over-asylum/ |access-date=2026-04-12 |website=openDemocracy |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Algeria}} |{{nowrap|1999–2019}} |[[Abdelaziz Bouteflika]] |<ref>{{cite news |title=Freedom in the World Algeria Report |url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/algeria |access-date=19 April 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180421030652/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/algeria |archive-date=21 April 2018}}</ref> |- |rowspan="4"|{{Flag|Argentina}} |1946–1955 |[[Justicialist Party]] under [[Juan Perón]] |See also [[Peronism]].<ref name=":4">Todd L. Edwards, ''Argentina: A Global Studies Handbook'' (2008), pp. 45–46; Steven E. Sanderson, [https://books.google.com/books?id=_xWYSJw3aAQC The Politics of Trade in Latin American Development] (1992), Stanford University Press, p. 133; William C. Smith, ''Reflections on the Political Economy of Authoritarian Rule and Capitalist Reorganization in Contemporary Argentina'', in ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=r0PoAAAAIAAJ Generals in Retreat: The Crisis of Military Rule in Latin America]'' (1985), eds. Philip J. O'Brien & Paul A. Cammack, Manchester University Press.</ref><ref name=":5">Guillermo A. O'Donnell, ''Bureaucratic Authoritarianism: Argentina, 1966–1973, in Comparative Perspective'' (University of California Press, 1988); James M. Malloy, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=BHxRrTrLSokC Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern]'', in ''Democracy in Latin America: Patterns and Cycles'' (1996; ed. Roderic A. Camp), p. 122; Howard J. Wiards, ''Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great "ism"'' (1997), pp. 113–114.</ref>
|- |1966–1973 |[[Military government]] |See also the [[Argentine Revolution]].<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":5" /> |- |1973–1976 |Justicialist Party under Juan and [[Isabel Perón]] |<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":5" /> |- |1976–1983 |[[Jorge Rafael Videla]] |See also the [[National Reorganization Process]].<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":5" /> |- |{{Flag|Austria}} |1933–1938 |[[Christian Social Party (Austria)|Christian Social Party]] under [[Engelbert Dollfuß]] and [[Fatherland Front (Austria)|Fatherland Front]] under [[Kurt Schuschnigg]] |See also the [[Federal State of Austria]] and [[Ständestaat]]. |- |{{flag|Bangladesh}} |2009–2024 |[[Awami League]] under [[Sheikh Hasina]] |<ref>{{Cite news |title=Bangladesh is now in effect a one-party state |url=https://www.economist.com/asia/2024/01/08/bangladeshs-prime-minister-sheikh-hasina-wins-a-fifth-term |access-date=2024-01-09 |newspaper=The Economist |issn=0013-0613 |archive-date=9 January 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240109014943/https://www.economist.com/asia/2024/01/08/bangladeshs-prime-minister-sheikh-hasina-wins-a-fifth-term |url-status=live }}</ref> |- |rowspan="2"|{{flagicon image|Flag of Brazil (1889-1960).svg}} [[Brazil]] |1937–1945 |[[Getúlio Vargas]] |See also the [[Vargas Era]].<ref name=":7">James M. Malloy, ''Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern, in Democracy in Latin America: Patterns and Cycles'' (ed. Roderic A. Camp), p. 122; Thomas E. Skidmore, ''The Political Economy of Policy-making in Authoritarian Brazil, 1967–70'', in ''Generals in Retreat: The Crisis of Military Rule in Latin America'' (1985), eds. Philip J. O'Brien & Paul A. Cammack, Manchester University Press.</ref> |- |1964–1985 |[[Military dictatorship in Brazil]] |Started with the [[1964 Brazilian coup d'état]].<ref name=":7" /> |- | rowspan="2" |{{Flag icon|Bulgaria}} {{Flag icon|PR Bulgaria}} [[Bulgaria]] |1878–1944 |[[House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha-Koháry]]. Later de facto authoritarian rule under [[Boris III of Bulgaria|Boris III]] |Authoritarian rule more prevalent after 1935 after the counter-coup to the [[1934 Bulgarian coup d'état|1934 coup d'état]]<ref>{{Cite news |date=1943-08-29 |title=BORIS WAS PUPPET OF HITLER'S ORDER; But Pro-Russian Sentiment in Country Barred His Sending Troops Against Soviet LONG ASSASSINS' TARGET |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1943/08/29/archives/boris-was-puppet-of-hitlers-order-but-prorussian-sentiment-in.html |access-date=2026-04-12 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> |- |1944–1990 |Communist one-party state rule, particularly under [[Todor Zhivkov]] |<ref>{{Cite web |title=Chairman of the State Council of Bulgaria, Todor Zhivkov |url=https://www.wiesbaden.de/en/kultur/stadtgeschichte/goldenes-buch-artikel/todor-schiwkow |access-date=2026-04-12 |website=State capital Wiesbaden |language=en-US}}</ref> |- |{{flagicon image|Flag of Myanmar (1974-2010).svg}} [[Burma]] |1962–2011 |Military government and the [[Burma Socialist Programme Party]] |Started with the [[1962 Burmese coup d'état]] and ended with the [[2011–2012 Burmese political reforms]].<ref>Thomas Carothers, [http://carnegieendowment.org/2012/04/02/is-burma-democratizing/a62j Q&A: Is Burma Democratizing?] (2 April 2012), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; [http://asiafoundation.org/news/2013/04/asia-foundation-president-discusses-burmamyanmar-in-transition-at-world-affairs-council-sacramento/ President Discusses Burma/Myanmar in Transition at World Affairs Council Sacramento] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130426034624/http://asiafoundation.org/news/2013/04/asia-foundation-president-discusses-burmamyanmar-in-transition-at-world-affairs-council-sacramento/|date=2013-04-26}} (3 April 2013), Asia Foundation; Louise Arbour, [https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/opinion/in-myanmar-sanctions-have-had-their-day.html In Myanmar, Sanctions Have Had Their Day] (5 March 2012), ''The New York Times''.</ref> |- |{{flag|Burundi}} |1961–1993 |[[UPRONA]] |{{citation needed|date=August 2025}} |- |{{flag|Confederate States of America}} |1861–1865 |[[Jefferson Davis]] |[[Herrenvolk democracy|Herrenvolk]] republic with a "democracy of the white race".<ref name="Dal Lago2018">{{Cite book|last=Dal Lago|first=Enrico|title=Civil War and Agrarian Unrest: The Confederate South and Southern Italy|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|year=2018|isbn=978-1-108-34062-5|page=79|quote=...The slaveholding elites' project of Confederate nation building... the idea that the Confederacy was a "herrenvolk democracy" or "democracy of the white race"}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=McCurry |first1=Stephanie |date=21 June 2020 |title=The Confederacy Was an Antidemocratic, Centralized State |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/confederacy-wasnt-what-you-think/613309/ |access-date=10 July 2022 |website=The Atlantic |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Chad}} |1982–1990 |[[Hissène Habré]] |Habré was deposed by [[Idriss Déby]], he was tried in Senegal for crimes against his country and died in prison months after the man who removed him from power died in combat. |- |{{Flag|Chile}} |1973–1990 |[[Government Junta of Chile (1973)|Government Junta]] under [[Augusto Pinochet]] |Started with the [[1973 Chilean coup d'état]].<ref>Steven E. Sanderson, ''The Politics of Trade in Latin American Development'' (1992), Stanford University Press, p. 133; Carlos Huneeus, ''Political Mass Mobilization Against Authoritarian Rule: Pinochet's Chile, 1983–88'', in ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=ymAVDAAAQBAJ&q=authoritarianism Civil Resistance and Power Politics:The Experience of Non-violent Action from Gandhi to the Present]'' (2009), Oxford University Press (eds. Adam Roberts & Timothy Garton Ash).</ref> |- |{{flagicon image|Flag of the Republic_of China.svg}} [[Republic of China (1912–1949)|Republic of China]] |1927–1949 |[[Kuomintang]] and [[Nationalist government]] under [[Chiang Kai-shek]] |The Republic of China on Taiwan is listed further below. |- |{{Flag icon|Democratic Kampuchea}} [[Democratic Kampuchea]] |1975–1979 |[[Khmer Rouge]] rule of [[Cambodia]] under [[Pol Pot]] |Totalitarian one-party regime that instigated the Cambodian genocide.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2010-07-19 |title=Khmer Rouge: Cambodia's years of brutality |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-10684399 |access-date=2026-05-22 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Democratic Republic of the Congo}} |1997–2019 |[[Laurent-Désiré Kabila]] and [[Joseph Kabila]] |Zaire is listed further below.<ref name="DRoCK">{{cite news |title=Freedom in the World Democratic Republic of Congo Report |url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/congo-democratic-republic-kinshasa |access-date=19 April 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502155712/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/congo-democratic-republic-kinshasa |archive-date=2 May 2019}}</ref> |- | rowspan="2" |{{Flagicon image|Flag_of_Croatia_(1941–1945).svg}}{{Flag|Croatia}} |1941–1945 |[[Ustaše]] under [[Ante Pavelić]] |See also [[Independent State of Croatia]] |- |1990–1999 |[[Croatian Democratic Union]] under [[Franjo Tuđman]] |<ref>{{cite web |date=13 December 1999 |title=Franjo Tudjman, Authoritarian leader whose communist past and nationalist obsessions fuelled his ruthless pursuit of an independent Croatia |url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/1999/dec/13/guardianobituaries.iantraynor |access-date=5 January 2019 |work=The Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Franjo Tuđman |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Franjo-Tudjman |access-date=5 January 2019 |publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica}}</ref> |- |{{Flag|Czechoslovakia}} |1938–1939 |[[Party of National Unity (Czechoslovakia)|Party of National Unity]] |{{citation needed|date=August 2025}} |- |{{flag|Egypt}} |1952–2011 |[[Gamal Abdel Nasser]], [[Anwar Sadat]], and [[Hosni Mubarak]] |<ref>Maye Kassem, ''Egyptian Politics: The Dynamics of Authoritarian Rule'' (2004); Andrea M. Perkins, [http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2736&context=etd Mubarak's Machine: The Durability of the Authoritarian Regime in Egypt] (M.A. thesis, 8 April 2010, University of South Florida).</ref> |- |{{flag|Equatorial Guinea}} |1968–1979 |[[Francisco Macias Nguema]] |{{citation needed|date=August 2025}} |- |{{flag|Ethiopia|1974}} |1974–1991 |[[Mengistu Haile Mariam]] and the [[Workers' Party of Ethiopia]] |<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dw.com/en/quest-to-extradite-ethiopias-dictator-mengistu-as-mugabe-departs/a-41719005|title = Quest to extradite Ethiopia's dictator Mengistu as Mugabe departs | DW | 11.12.2017|website = [[Deutsche Welle]]}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Ethiopia}} |1991–2019 |[[Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front]] |<ref>{{cite news|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/ethiopia|access-date=19 April 2018|title=Freedom in the World Ethiopia Report|archive-date=20 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180420074309/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/ethiopia}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Fiji}} |2006–2022 |[[FijiFirst]]{{efn|While FijiFirst's leader, [[Frank Bainimarama]], still forms government in Fiji, democratic elections were held again in 2014 after eight years without elections following the [[2006 Fijian coup d'état]].}} |<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.abc.net.au/pacific/programs/pacificbeat/is-fijian-style-authoritarianism-spreading/6662582 | title=Is Fijian-style authoritarianism spreading? | website=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]] | date=30 July 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | chapter-url=https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/OXAN-ES239981/full/html | doi=10.1108/OXAN-ES239981 | chapter=Fiji election renews semi-authoritarian rule | title=Emerald Expert Briefings | year=2018 | s2cid=239819858 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://fijilive.com/news/2022/09/an-authoritarian-government-rabuka/78385.Fijilive | title=Fijilive – an authoritarian government: Rabuka Gateway to Fiji, Fiji News, Fiji Rugby, Fiji Football, Fiji Sports, Fiji Picture Gallery, Fiji Business, etc }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ajph.12458 | doi=10.1111/ajph.12458 | title=The Politics of Transition in Fiji: Is it Charting a Democratic Course? | year=2018 | last1=Carnegie | first1=Paul | last2=Tarte | first2=Sandra | journal=Australian Journal of Politics & History | volume=64 | issue=2 | pages=277–292 | url-access=subscription }}</ref> |- |{{flag|France}} |1793–1794 |[[Committee of Public Safety]], a provisional government during the [[Reign of Terror]] under [[Maximilien Robespierre]]. |See also the [[French Revolution]]. |- |{{flag|Gabon}} |1961–2023 |[[Gabonese Democratic Party]] |Ali Bongo is overthrown in a military coup. |- |{{flag|Gambia}} |1994–2017 |[[Yahya Jammeh]] |Jammeh is overthrown by democratic elections and is forced to resign. |- |{{flag|Nazi Germany}} |1933–1945 |[[National Socialist German Workers' Party]] |See also [[Nazism]]. |- | rowspan="2" |{{Flag icon|Greek junta}} [[Greece]] |1936–1941 |Fascist rule under [[Ioannis Metaxas]] |<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ioannis Metaxas {{!}} History {{!}} Research Starters {{!}} EBSCO Research |url=https://www.ebsco.com/ |access-date=2026-04-12 |website=EBSCO |language=en}}</ref> |- |1967–1974 |[[Greek junta|Military junta]] under [[Constantine II of Greece|Constantine II]], [[Georgios Zoitakis]], and [[Georgios Papadopoulos]] |<ref>{{Cite web |title=Greek Coup Leads to Military Dictatorship {{!}} History {{!}} Research Starters {{!}} EBSCO Research |url=https://www.ebsco.com/ |access-date=2026-04-12 |website=EBSCO |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Guinea}} |1958–2021 |[[Ahmed Sekou Touré]], [[Lansana Conté]], [[Moussa Dadis Camara]] and [[Alpha Condé]] |Guinea was marked by a series of authoritarian rulers who denounced previous regimes on democratic issues. |- |{{flag|Guinea-Bissau}} |1980–1999 |[[João Bernardo Vieira]] |Nino Vieira would govern in an authoritarian manner in the 80s and 90s until his overthrow, in 2005 he returned to the presidency until his assassination in 2009. |- | rowspan="2" |{{Flag icon|Kingdom of Hungary}}{{Flag icon|Hungary}} [[Hungary]] |1920–1944 |[[Miklós Horthy]] and the [[Unity Party (Hungary)|Unity Party]] |<ref>{{cite book |last1=Fischer-Galati |first1=Stephen |url=https://archive.org/details/authoritarianism00berg |title=Authoritarianism and Democracy in Europe, 1919–39: Comparative Analyses |date=2002 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |isbn=978-1-349-42826-7 |editor1-last=Berg-Schlosser |editor1-first=Dirk |editor1-link=Dirk Berg-Schlosser |pages=[https://archive.org/details/authoritarianism00berg/page/n79 67]–68 |chapter=Sources of Authoritarianism in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe |editor2-last=Mitchell |editor2-first=Jeremy |url-access=registration}}</ref> |- |2010–2026 |[[Fidesz]] under [[Viktor Orbán]] |Dominant party system headed by populist-authoritarian leader.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220909IPR40137/meps-hungary-can-no-longer-be-considered-a-full-democracy |title=MEPs: Hungary can no longer be considered a full democracy |publisher=European Parliament |date=2022-09-15 |access-date=2023-08-12}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.eurotopics.net/en/288575/rule-of-law-in-hungary-eu-threatens-to-cut-billions |title=Rule of law in Hungary: EU threatens to cut billions |website=eurotopics.net |date=2022-09-20 |access-date=2023-08-12}}</ref> See also [[Orbanism]]. |- |{{Flag|Indonesia}} |1959–1998 |[[Sukarno]] and [[Suharto]] |See also the [[Guided Democracy in Indonesia|Guided Democracy era]] and the [[New Order (Indonesia)|New Order]]. |- |{{flag|Iran|1925}} |1925–1979 |[[Pahlavi dynasty]] |<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1979/01/17/archives/years-of-autocratic-rule-by-the-shah-threw-iran-into-turbulence.html|title=Years of Autocratic Rule by the Shah Threw Iran Into Turbulence|last=Ibrahim|first=Youssef M.|date=17 January 1979|work=The New York Times|access-date=23 October 2019|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> |- |{{flagicon image|Flag of Iraq (1991–2004).svg}} [[Iraq]] |1968–2003 |[[Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Iraq Region]] under [[Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr]] and [[Saddam Hussein]] | |- |{{flagicon|Fascist Italy (1922–1943)|size=22px}} [[Fascist Italy (1922–1943)|Italy]] |1922–1943 |[[National Fascist Party]] |<ref>Waxman, Olivia B. (10 November 2020). [https://time.com/5908244/strongman-fascism-history/ "Historian: Today's Authoritarian Leaders Aren't Fascists{{snd}}But They Are Part of the Same Story"]. ''Time''. Retrieved 3 August 2021.</ref> |- |{{flagicon image|Flag of Japan (1870–1999).svg}} [[Empire of Japan]] |1931–1945 |[[Hirohito]] and the [[Imperial Rule Assistance Association]] | |- |rowspan="2"|{{flag|Liberia}} |1886–1980 |[[True Whig Party]] |Party that ruled Liberia for more than 100 years and the monopoly was overthrown by the 1980 Liberian coup. |- |1980–1990 |[[Samuel Doe]] |The Liberian president ends up captured and executed for a long time in the middle of a [[First Liberian Civil War|Civil war]]. |- |{{flag|Kazakhstan}} |1990–2022 |[[Amanat (political party)|Amanat]] |Formerly named Nur Otan. The incumbent president [[Kassym-Jomart Tokayev]] renounced his party membership, establishing in the amendments of the second republic that no president should have affiliation with any party.<ref name="Freedom House"/> |- |{{flagicon image|Flag of Libya (1977-2011).svg}} [[Libya]] |1969–2011 |[[Muammar Gaddafi]] |Started with the [[1969 Libyan coup d'état]] and ended with the [[2011 Libyan Civil War]].<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/gaddafis-rule-timeline/ Gaddafi's 41-Year-Long Rule], ''The Washington Post''; Martin Asser, [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12688033 The Muammar Gaddafi Story] (21 October 2011), BBC News; Alistair Dawber, [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/one-libyan-in-three-wants-return-to-authoritarian-rule-6950631.html One Libyan in three wants return to authoritarian rule] (16 February 2012), ''Independent''.</ref> |- |{{Flag|Lithuania}} |1926–1940 |[[Antanas Smetona]] |Ended in the [[Soviet occupation of the Baltic states (1940)|Soviet occupation]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Misiunas |first=Romuald J. |year=1970 |title=Fascist Tendencies in Lithuania |journal=Slavonic and East European Review |volume=48 |issue=110 |pages=88–109 |jstor=4206165}}</ref> |- |{{flag|MKD|name=Macedonia}} |2006–2016 |[[Nikola Gruevski]] |<ref>Matthew Brunwasser, [https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/14/world/europe/concerns-grow-about-authoritarianism-in-macedonia.html Concerns Grow About Authoritarianism in Macedonia], ''The New York Times'', 13 October 2011.</ref><ref>Andrew MacDowall, [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/27/fears-macedonias-fragile-democracy-amid-coup-wiretap-claims Fears for Macedonia's fragile democracy amid 'coup' and wiretap claims], ''The Guardian'', 27 February 2015.</ref> |- |{{Flag|Mali}} |1968–1991 |[[Moussa Traoré]] |Moussa is deposed in the [[1991 Malian coup d'état]] and sentenced to death twice, exonerated in May 2002. |- |[[File:Red_Ensign_of_England_(Square_Canton).svg|25x25px]] [[Massachusetts Bay Colony]] |1630–1691 |[[John Winthrop]] |<ref name="Rolfs 2009 p. 18">{{cite book | last=Rolfs | first=D. | title=No Peace for the Wicked: Northern Protestant Soldiers and the American Civil War | publisher=University of Tennessee Press | year=2009 | isbn=978-1-57233-662-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZEHxKad3SDcC&pg=PA18 | access-date=2023-01-13 | page=18}}</ref><ref name="Smith 2022 pp. 71–111">{{cite book | last=Smith | first=Haig Z. | title=Religion and Governance in England's Emerging Colonial Empire, 1601–1698 | chapter=The Plymouth Company and Massachusetts Bay Company (1622–1639): Establishing Theocratic Corporate Governance | publisher=Springer International Publishing | publication-place=Cham | year=2022 | isbn=978-3-030-70130-7 | doi=10.1007/978-3-030-70131-4_3 | pages=71–111| s2cid=245822590 }}</ref> |- | rowspan="13" |{{flag|Mexico}} |17 May–4 June 1833 | rowspan="11" |[[Antonio López de Santa Anna|Santa Anna]] | rowspan="11" | |- |18 June–5 July 1833 |- |27 October–December 1833 |- |1834–1835 |- |20 March–10 July 1839 |- |1841–1842 |- |14 May–6 September 1843 |- |4 June–12 September 1844 |- |21 March–2 April 1847 |- |20 May–15 September 1847 |- |1853–1855 |- |1876–1911 |[[Porfirio Díaz]], [[Juan N. Méndez|Juan Méndez]], and [[Manuel González Flores|Manuel Flores]]. |See also [[Porfiriato]]. |- |1929–2000 |[[Institutional Revolutionary Party|PRI]] |Mexico was very authoritarian when PRI was the ruling party in Mexico but in 2000 after about 70 years of ruling they lost the [[2000 Mexican general election|2000 Mexican presidential election]]. They eventually came back to power in 2012 by winning the [[2012 Mexican general election|Mexican presidential election]] but eventually lost power in the [[2018 Mexican general election|2018 Mexican presidential election]] as their candidate finished 3rd. See also [[Tlatelolco massacre]] and the rigged [[1988 Mexican general election|1988 Mexican presidential election]]. |- | rowspan="2" |{{flagicon image|Flag of the Ottoman Empire (1844–1922).svg}} [[Ottoman Empire]] |1878–1908 |[[Abdul Hamid II]] | |- |1913–1918 |The [[Three Pashas]] | |- |{{flag|Montenegro}} |1990–2023 |[[Democratic Party of Socialists of Montenegro]], under [[Milo Đukanović]] |<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/world/europe/montenegro-milo-djukanovic-resigns.html|title=Montenegro's Prime Minister Resigns, Perhaps Bolstering Country's E.U. Hopes|date=26 October 2016|work=The New York Times|access-date=12 December 2018|archive-date=3 June 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190603002953/https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/world/europe/montenegro-milo-djukanovic-resigns.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rferl.org/a/djukanovic-looks-to-extend-dominance-in-montenegro-s-presidential-vote/29167866.html|title=Montenegro's Djukanovic Declares Victory In Presidential Election|date=16 April 2018|publisher=Radio Free Europe|access-date=12 December 2018|archive-date=26 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200726114533/https://www.rferl.org/a/djukanovic-looks-to-extend-dominance-in-montenegro-s-presidential-vote/29167866.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://eastwest.eu/it/opinioni/european-crossroads/elezioni-presidenziali-montenegro-vittoria-djukanovic|title=Djukanovic si riprende il Montenegro con la benedizione di Bruxelles|date=17 April 2018|publisher=eastwest.eu|access-date=12 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502141532/https://eastwest.eu/it/opinioni/european-crossroads/elezioni-presidenziali-montenegro-vittoria-djukanovic|archive-date=2 May 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dw.com/bs/%C4%91ukanovi%C4%87-posljednji-autokrat-balkana/a-16888850|title=Đukanović – posljednji autokrat Balkana|date=18 June 2013|publisher=Deutsche Welle|access-date=12 December 2018|archive-date=26 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200726113715/https://www.dw.com/bs/%C4%91ukanovi%C4%87-posljednji-autokrat-balkana/a-16888850|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.france24.com/en/20180319-montenegro-veteran-pm-djukanovic-run-presidency|title=Montenegro veteran PM Djukanovic to run for presidency|date=19 March 2018|publisher=France 24|access-date=12 December 2018|archive-date=18 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200418033923/https://www.france24.com/en/20180319-montenegro-veteran-pm-djukanovic-run-presidency|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{Flag|Nicaragua}} |1936–1979 |[[Somoza Family]] |The Somoza clan loses power in the [[Sandinista revolution]]. |- |{{Flag|Paraguay}} |1954–1989 |[[Alfredo Stroessner]] |Ended with [[1989 Paraguayan coup d'état]]. Stroessner's Colorado party continues to dominate Paraguayan politics, however. |- |rowspan="2"|{{Flag|Philippines}} |1965–1986 |[[Ferdinand Marcos]] |Marcos was elected democratically, but used [[Martial law under Ferdinand Marcos|martial law]] to expand his powers. Ended with the [[People Power Revolution]]. |- |2016–2022 |[[Rodrigo Duterte]] |<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Regilme|first1=Salvador Santino F. Jr.|title=Contested spaces of illiberal and authoritarian politics: Human rights and democracy in crisis|journal=Political Geography|date=June 2021|volume=89|issue=3|article-number=102427|doi=10.1016/j.polgeo.2021.102427|doi-access=free|hdl=1887/3188354|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Democratic expressions amidst fragile institutions: Possibilities for reform in Duterte's Philippines|url=https://www.brookings.edu/articles/democratic-expressions-amidst-fragile-institutions-possibilities-for-reform-in-dutertes-philippines/|last=Curato|first=Nicole|website=The Brookings Institution|date=22 January 2021 |access-date=22 June 2021|language=en|archive-date=22 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210622215045/https://www.brookings.edu/articles/democratic-expressions-amidst-fragile-institutions-possibilities-for-reform-in-dutertes-philippines/|url-status=live}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Poland|1928}} |1926–1939 |[[Sanation]] |See also the [[May Coup (Poland)|May Coup]]. |- |rowspan="2"|{{Flag|Portugal}} |1926–1933 |Military government |See also the [[National Dictatorship]]. |- |1933–1974 |[[Estado Novo (Portugal)|Estado Novo]] regime under [[António de Oliveira Salazar]] and [[Marcelo Caetano]] |Ended with the [[Carnation Revolution]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Pinto |first=António Costa |year=2006 |title=Authoritarian legacies, transitional justice and state crisis in Portugal's democratization |journal=Democratization |volume=13 |issue=2 |pages=173–204 |doi=10.1080/13510340500523895 |s2cid=218523656}} [http://www.ics.ul.pt/publicacoes/workingpapers/wp2005/wp2005_3.pdf Working paper].</ref> |- | rowspan="2" |{{Flag icon|Kingdom of Romania}}{{Flag icon|SR Romania}} [[Socialist Republic of Romania|Romania]] |1940–1944 |Fascist rule by the [[Iron Guard]] and later groups |Christo-fascist Iron Guard rule in government from 1940–1941, with later fascist groups retaining power until late 1944.<ref>{{Cite journal |title=The sacralised politics of the Romanian Iron Guard: Politics, Religion & Ideology: Vol 5 , No 3 - Get Access |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1469076042000312203 |journal=Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions |language=en |doi=10.1080/1469076042000312203|url-access=subscription }}</ref> |- |1947–1989 |Communist party rule, especially under [[Nicolae Ceaușescu]] |<ref>{{Cite web |title=Nicolae Ceauşescu {{!}} History {{!}} Research Starters {{!}} EBSCO Research |url=https://www.ebsco.com/ |access-date=2026-04-12 |website=EBSCO |language=en}}</ref> |- |{{Flag|Russian State}} |1918–1920 |[[White movement]] under [[Alexander Kolchak]] | |- |{{flag|Rwanda|1962}} |1961–1994 |[[Gregoire Kayibanda]] and [[Juvenal Habyarimana]] | |- |{{Flag icon|Slovak State}} [[Slovak Republic (1939–1945)|Slovakia]] |1939–1945 |Fascist rule by the [[Slovak People's Party]] under [[Jozef Tiso]]. |Totalitarian religious rule and [[Nazi Germany|Nazi]] puppet.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ward |first=James Mace |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt1xx5xz |title=Priest, Politician, Collaborator: Jozef Tiso and the Making of Fascist Slovakia |date=2013 |publisher=Cornell University Press |isbn=978-0-8014-4988-8 |doi=10.7591/j.ctt1xx5xz}}</ref> |- |{{flag|Somalia}} |1969–1991 |[[Siad Barre]] | |- |{{flagicon image|Flag of South Africa (1928-1994).svg}} [[South Africa]] |1948–1994 |[[National Party (South Africa)|National Party]] |Ended with the end of [[apartheid]].<ref>Tracy Kuperus, [https://books.google.com/books?id=J-n5URXKPRoC&pg=PA77 Building a Pluralist Democracy: An Examination of Religious Associations in South Africa and Zimbabwe], in ''Race and Reconciliation in South Africa: A Multicultural Dialogue in Comparative Perspective'' (eds. William E. Van Vugt & G. Daan Cloete), Lexington Books, 2000.</ref><ref>''[https://books.google.com/books?id=pQf1AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA27 The South Africa Reader: History, Culture, Politics]'' (eds. Clifton Crais & Thomas V. McClendon; Duke University Press, 2014), p. 279.</ref> |- |rowspan="2"|{{Flag|South Korea}} |1948–1960 |[[Syngman Rhee]] | rowspan="2" |<ref>[http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-other-rok-memories-authoritarianism-democratic-south-korea The Other R.O.K.: Memories of Authoritarianism in Democratic South Korea] (11 October 2011), [[Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars]]; Sangmook Lee, [http://www.tfd.org.tw/docs/dj0301_new/099-126-Sangmook%20Lee.pdf Democratic Transition and the Consolidation of Democracy in South Korea] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121224195621/http://www.tfd.org.tw/docs/dj0301_new/099-126-Sangmook%20Lee.pdf|date=24 December 2012}} July 2007, ''Taiwan Journal of Democracy'', Volume 3, No. 1, pp. 99–125.</ref><ref>Hyug Baeg Im, [http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=44F94BAE852A3B2B3E02069091C16DFC.journals?fromPage=online&aid=7616752 The Rise of Bureaucratic Authoritarianism in South Korea], ''World Politics'' Vol. 39, Issue 2 (January 1987), pp. 231–257</ref> |- |1961–1987 |[[Park Chung-hee]] and [[Chun Doo-hwan]] |- |{{flag|Soviet Union|}} |1922–1991 |[[Communist Party of the Soviet Union]] |See also [[authoritarian socialism]]. |- |{{flagicon image|Flag of Spain (1945 - 1977).svg}} [[Francoist Spain]] |1936–1977 |[[Francisco Franco]] under [[FET y de las JONS]] |Until the [[Spanish transition to democracy]].<ref>Richard Gunther, ''The Spanish Model Revisited'', in ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=JhStAgAAQBAJ The Politics and Memory of Democratic Transition: The Spanish Model]'', (eds. Diego Muro & Gregorio Alonso), Taylor & Francis 2010, p. 19.</ref> |- |{{flag|Sudan}} |1969–2019 |[[Jaafar Nimeiry]] and [[Omar al-Bashir]] |Ousted in [[2019 Sudanese coup d'état]].<ref name="Freedom House" /> |- |{{flag|Syria|1980}} |1963–2024 |[[Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region]] under [[al-Assad family]] |Totalitarian [[police state]]<ref>{{Cite book |first=Bilal |last=Sukkar |chapter=International Conflict Mediation in Syria |title=Actors and Dynamics in the Syrian Conflict's Middle Phase |publisher=Routledge |year=2022 | editor-first=Jasmine K. |editor2-first=Raymond |editor-last= Gani |editor2-last=Hinnebusch | isbn=978-1-03-218502-6 |location=New York, NY | doi= 10.4324/9781003254904-6 | page= 95|s2cid=246317699 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=The Concise Encyclopedia of Democracy |publisher=Routledge |year=2013 |isbn=978-1-57958-268-5 |location=New York, NY | chapter= Totalitarianism| page= 391}}</ref><ref name=uj>{{Cite book |title=Syrian Gulag: Inside Assad's Prison System |publisher=I. B. Tauris |year=2023 | first1 = Jaber |first2=Ugur |last1 = Baker |last2=Ümit Üngör | isbn=978-0-7556-5020-0 |location=Dublin, Ireland | chapter=10: Secret Prisons | page= 95}}</ref> under a hereditary dictatorship |- |{{Flag|Taiwan}} |1945–1987 |[[Kuomintang]] under [[Chiang Kai-shek]] and [[Chiang Ching-kuo]] |The Republic of China (1927–1949) is listed further above.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Leng |first1=Shao-chuan |last2=Lin |first2=Cheng-yi |year=1993 |title=Political Change on Taiwan: Transition to Democracy? |journal=[[The China Quarterly]] |volume=136 |issue=136 |pages=805–839 |doi=10.1017/S0305741000032343 |issn=0305-7410 |jstor=655592 |s2cid=154907110}}; Shirley A. Kan, Congressional Research Service, [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41263.pdf Democratic Reforms in Taiwan: Issues for Congress] (26 May 2010); ''Taiwan's Electoral Politics and Democratic Transition: Riding the Third Wave'' (1996), eds. Charles Chi-Hsiang Chang & Hung-Mao Tien; [[Edward Steinfeld|Edward S. Steinfeld]], ''Playing Our Game:Why China's Rise Doesn't Threaten the West'' (2010), Oxford University Press, pp. 217–222.</ref> |- |rowspan="4"|{{flag|Thailand}} |1948–1957 |[[Plaek Phibunsongkhram]] |Ended with the [[1957 Thai coup d'état]]. |- |1958–1973 |[[Sarit Thanarat]] and [[Thanom Kittikachorn]] |Ended with the [[1973 Thai popular uprising]]. |- |2014–2023 |[[Prayut Chan-o-cha]] |<ref>{{Cite book|title=Cultural Rights as Collective Rights: An International Law Perspective|last=Jakubowski|first=Andrzej|publisher=Brill – Nijhoff|year=2016|isbn=978-90-04-31201-2|page=196}}</ref> |- |2019–2024 |[[Senate of Thailand]] |The 250-member Senate, appointed by the [[National Council for Peace and Order|military junta]], has considerable power, they have the right to approve the appointment of the Prime Minister and the [[House of Representatives (Thailand)|House of Representatives]] has often been intervene by the Senate. In the 2023 election, even though the [[Move Forward Party]] with [[Pita Limjaroenrat]] as the leader will have the most votes. However, the Senate rejected Pita as Prime Minister.<ref>[https://www.nationthailand.com/thailand/politics/40027738|What role will senators play in naming Thailand's next PM?]</ref> |- |{{flag|Tunisia}} |1987–2011 |[[Zine El Abidine Ben Ali]] |See also [[Tunisian Revolution]]. |- |{{Flag|Turkey}} |1923–1950 |[[Republican People's Party (Turkey)|Republican People's Party]] |<ref>Erik J. Zürcher, [https://books.google.com/books?id=qaC24BFy4JQC Turkey: A Modern History] (I.B. Tauris: rev. ed. 1997), pp. 176–206.</ref><ref>Ayşe Gül Altınay, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=keLIAAAAQBAJ The Myth of the Military-Nation: Militarism, Gender, and Education in Turkey]'' (Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), pp. 19–20.</ref> |- |{{flag|Turkmenistan}} |1991–2006 |[[Democratic Party of Turkmenistan]] under [[Saparmurat Niyazov]] |Effectively a totalitarian dictatorship.<ref name=":2"/><ref name=":3"/> |- | rowspan="2" |{{flag|Ukraine}} |1992–2005 |[[Leonid Kuchma]] |Ended in the [[Orange Revolution]]{{According to whom|date=November 2023}}. |- |2010–2014 |[[Party of Regions]] under [[Viktor Yanukovych]] |Ended in the [[Revolution of Dignity]]{{According to whom|date=November 2023}}. |- |{{Flag|Ukrainian State}} |1918 |[[Pavlo Skoropadskyi]] |Started with the [[1918 Ukrainian coup d'état]] and ended with the [[Anti-Hetman Uprising]]. |- |{{Flag|Uganda}} |1971–1979 |[[Idi Amin Dada]] | |- | rowspan="3" |{{flagicon|Kingdom of Yugoslavia}}{{flagicon|SFR Yugoslavia}} [[Yugoslavia]] |1929–1934 |[[Alexander I of Yugoslavia|Alexander I]] and the [[Yugoslav Radical Peasants' Democracy|JRSD]] |See also the [[6 January Dictatorship]]. |- |1934–1941 |[[Milan Stojadinović]] and the [[Yugoslav Radical Union|JRZ]] | |- |1944–1990 |[[League of Communists of Yugoslavia]] under [[Josip Broz Tito]] (–1980) |See also the [[death and state funeral of Josip Broz Tito]].<ref name="Andjelic">{{cite book |last=Andjelic |first=Neven |title=Bosnia-Herzegovina: The End of a Legacy |publisher=Frank Cass |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-7146-5485-0 |page=36}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=McGoldrick |first=Dominic |title=Accommodating National Identity: New Approaches in International and Domestic Law |publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publishers |year=2000 |isbn=978-90-411-1400-6 |editor-last=Tierney |editor-first=Stephen |page=17 |chapter=Accommodating National Identity in National Law and International Law |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SAyizpsg-Z8C}}</ref> |- |{{flagicon|FR Yugoslavia}} [[Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]] |1992–2000 |[[Socialist Party of Serbia]] under [[Slobodan Milošević]] |See also the [[overthrow of Slobodan Milošević]].<ref>{{cite web |date=30 March 2001 |title=Milosevic: Serbia's fallen strongmany |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/931018.stm |access-date=12 December 2018 |publisher=BBC}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Pribićević |title="Serbia{{snd}}From Authoritarian Regime to Democracy." Serbian Studies: Journal of the North American Society for Serbian Studies |publisher=Project MUSE}}</ref> |- |{{Flag|Zaire}} |1965–1997 |[[Mobutu Sese Seko]] |The Democratic Republic of the Congo after 1997 is listed above.<ref name="DRoCK" /> |}
=== Economy === Scholars such as [[Seymour Martin Lipset|Seymour Lipset]],<ref>{{cite journal|last=Lipset|first=Seymour Martin|s2cid=53686238|date=1959|title=Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy|journal=The American Political Science Review|volume=53|issue=1|pages=69–105|doi=10.2307/1951731|issn=0003-0554|jstor=1951731}}</ref> Carles Boix, [[Susan Stokes (political scientist)|Susan Stokes]],<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Boix|first1=Carles|last2=Stokes|first2=Susan C.|date=July 2003|title=Endogenous Democratization|journal=World Politics|language=en|volume=55|issue=4|pages=517–549|doi=10.1353/wp.2003.0019|s2cid=18745191|issn=0043-8871}}</ref> Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Evelyne Stephens and John Stephens<ref>{{cite book|title=Capitalist Development and Democracy|publisher=University Of Chicago Press|isbn= |page = |year=1992}}</ref> argue that economic development increases the likelihood of democratization. [[Adam Przeworski]] and [[Fernando Limongi]] argue that while economic development makes democracies less likely to turn authoritarian, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that development causes democratization (turning an authoritarian state into a democracy).<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Przeworski|first1=Adam|last2=Limongi|first2=Fernando|date=1997|title=Modernization: Theories and Facts|journal=World Politics|volume=49|issue=2|pages=155–183|issn=0043-8871|jstor=25053996|doi=10.1353/wp.1997.0004|s2cid=5981579}}</ref>
Eva Bellin argues that under certain circumstances the [[bourgeoise]] and [[Labour movement|labor]] are more likely to favor democratization, but less so under other circumstances.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Bellin|first=Eva|date=January 2000|title=Contingent Democrats: Industrialists, Labor, and Democratization in Late-Developing Countries|journal=World Politics|language=en|volume=52|issue=2|pages=175–205|doi=10.1017/S0043887100002598|s2cid=54044493|issn=1086-3338}}</ref> Economic development can boost public support for authoritarian regimes in the short-to-medium term.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/voting-for-autocracy/F6671D230EC7C458A30035ADB20F9289|title=Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and its Demise in Mexico|last=Magaloni|first=Beatriz|year=2006|publisher=Cambridge Core|doi=10.1017/CBO9780511510274|isbn=978-0-511-51027-4|language=en|access-date=2019-12-17|archive-date=2020-04-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200405121924/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/voting-for-autocracy/F6671D230EC7C458A30035ADB20F9289|url-status=live}}</ref>
According to Michael Albertus, most [[Land reform|land reform programs]] tend to be implemented by authoritarian regimes that subsequently withhold [[Right to property|property rights]] from the beneficiaries of the land reform. Authoritarian regimes do so to gain coercive leverage over rural populations.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Albertus|first=Michael|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/property-without-rights/C9DDCF77AE8E55C573242F4552A8DDA2|title=Property without Rights: Origins and Consequences of the Property Rights Gap|date=2021|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-1-108-83523-7|doi=10.1017/9781108891950|s2cid=241385526|archive-date=4 April 2023|access-date=12 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230404082007/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/property-without-rights/C9DDCF77AE8E55C573242F4552A8DDA2|url-status=live}}</ref>
[[Unemployment]] and [[inflation]] tend to be associated with increased authoritarian attitutes.<ref name="b184">{{cite journal | last1=Onraet | first1=Emma | last2=van Hiel | first2=Alain | last3=Cornelis | first3=Ilse | title=Threat and Right‐Wing Attitudes: A Cross‐National Approach | journal=Political Psychology | volume=34 | issue=5 | date=2013 | issn=0162-895X | doi=10.1111/pops.12014 | pages=791–803 | url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pops.12014 | access-date=2026-04-15}}</ref>
=== Institutions === Authoritarian regimes typically incorporate similar political institutions to that of democratic regimes, such as legislatures and judiciaries, although they may serve different purposes.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Williamson |first1=Scott |last2=Magaloni |first2=Beatriz |date=2020 |title=Legislatures and Policy Making in Authoritarian Regimes |url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020912288 |journal=Comparative Political Studies |language=EN |volume=53 |issue=9 |pages=1525–1543 |doi=10.1177/0010414020912288 |issn=0010-4140|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Citation |last=Gandhi |first=Jennifer |title=Political Opposition in Authoritarian Institutions |date=2024 |work=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics |editor-last=Wolf |editor-first=Anne |url=https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/55828/chapter/454404092 |publisher=Oxford University Press |language=en |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.53 |isbn=978-0-19-887199-6|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Democratic regimes are marked by institutions that are essential to economic development and individual freedom, including representative legislatures and competitive political parties.<ref name="WhatEveryoneNeedstoKnow">{{cite book |last1=Frantz |first1=Erica |title=Authoritarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know |date=4 September 2018 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York, NY |doi=10.1093/wentk/9780190880194.003.0005 |isbn=978-0-19-088019-4 }}</ref><ref name="Carnegie">{{cite web |last1=Pei |first1=Minxin |title=Economic Institutions, Democracy, and Development |url=https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/1999/02/economic-institutions-democracy-and-development?lang=en |website=Carnegie Endowment for International Peace |date=26 February 1999 |access-date=3 March 2023}}</ref> Most authoritarian regimes embrace these political structures, but use it in a way that reinforces their power.<ref name="WhatEveryoneNeedstoKnow"/> Authoritarian legislatures, for example, are forums through which leaders may enhance their bases of support, share power, and monitor elites.<ref name="Legislative">{{cite journal |last1=Bonvecchi |first1=Alejandro |last2=Simison |first2=Emilia |title=Legislative Institutions and Performance in Authoritarian Regimes. |journal=Comparative Politics |date=1 July 2017 |volume=49 |issue=4 |pages=521–544 |doi=10.5129/001041517821273099 |hdl=11336/76721 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Additionally, authoritarian party systems are extremely unstable and unconducive to party development, largely due to monopolistic patterns of authority.<ref name="Golosov">{{cite journal |last1=Golosov |first1=Grigorii V. |title=Authoritarian Party Systems: Patterns of Emergence, Sustainability and Survival |journal=Comparative Sociology |date=1 January 2013 |volume=12 |issue=5 |pages=617–644 |doi=10.1163/15691330-12341274 }}</ref> Judiciaries may be present in authoritarian states where they serve to repress political challengers, institutionalize punishment, and undermine the rule of law.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Shen-Bayh |first=Fiona Feiang |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/undue-process/D4FFC5257A81B574BA91D141712CB1B8 |title=Undue Process: Persecution and Punishment in Autocratic Courts |date=2022 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-009-19713-7 |doi=10.1017/9781009197151 |archive-date=27 May 2024 |access-date=27 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240527181504/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/undue-process/D4FFC5257A81B574BA91D141712CB1B8 |url-status=live }}</ref>
Authoritarian regimes may allow multi-party elections. Since the end of the [[Cold War]], there has been a significant rise in multi-party elections in authoritarian regimes.<ref>{{Citation |last=Ahmad Way |first=Lucan |title=Multiparty Elections in Autocracies |date=2025 |work=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics |editor-last=Wolf |editor-first=Anne |url=https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/55828/chapter/526761113 |publisher=Oxford University Press |language=en |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.17 |isbn=978-0-19-887199-6 |last2=Tolvin |first2=Amelie|url-access=subscription }}</ref> However, democratic and authoritarian differ prominently in their elections. Democratic elections are generally inclusive, competitive, and fair.<ref name="Kirk">{{cite journal |last1=Kirkpatrick |first1=Jeane J. |title=Democratic Elections and Government |journal=World Affairs |date=1984 |volume=147 |issue=2 |pages=61–69 |jstor=20672013 }}</ref> In most instances, the elected leader is appointed to act on behalf of the general will. Authoritarian elections, on the other hand, are frequently subject to [[electoral fraud|fraud]] and extreme constraints on the participation of opposing parties.<ref name="Golosov"/> Autocratic leaders employ tactics like murdering and/or imprisoning political opposition and paying election monitors to ensure victory.<ref name="WhatEveryoneNeedstoKnow"/><ref name="Fraud">{{cite journal |last1=Magaloni |first1=Beatriz |title=The Game of Electoral Fraud and the Ousting of Authoritarian Rule. |journal=American Journal of Political Science |date=21 June 2010 |volume=54 |issue=3 |pages=751–765 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00458.x }}</ref> The proportion of authoritarian regimes with elections and support parties has risen in recent years.<ref name="WhatEveryoneNeedstoKnow"/> This is largely due to the increasing popularity of democracies and electoral autocracies, leading authoritarian regimes to imitate democratic regimes in hopes of receiving [[aid|foreign aid]] and dodging criticism.<ref name="WhatEveryoneNeedstoKnow"/><ref name="Data">{{cite journal |last1=Herre |first1=Bastian |last2=Ortiz-Ospina |first2=Esteban |title=Democracy |url=https://ourworldindata.org/democracy?insight=the-world-has-become-much-more-democratic-over-the-last-t |journal=Our World in Data |date=15 March 2013 |access-date=3 March 2023 |archive-date=11 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230311184003/https://ourworldindata.org/democracy?insight=the-world-has-become-much-more-democratic-over-the-last-t |url-status=live }}</ref> Flawed elections also give authoritarians a controlled way to monitor public sentiment.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Gehlbach |first1=Scott |last2=Luo |first2=Zhaotian |last3=Shirikov |first3=Anton |last4=Vorobyev |first4=Dmitriy |date=2025 |title=Is there really a dictator's dilemma? Information and repression in autocracy |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12952 |journal=American Journal of Political Science |article-number=ajps.12952 |language=en |doi=10.1111/ajps.12952 |issn=1540-5907 |archive-date=11 February 2025 |access-date=11 February 2025 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250211140624/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12952 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription }}</ref>
According to a 2018 study, most party-led dictatorships regularly hold popular elections. Prior to the 1990s, most of these elections had no alternative parties or candidates for voters to choose. Since the end of the Cold War, about two-thirds of elections in authoritarian systems allow for some opposition, but the elections are structured in a way to heavily favor the incumbent authoritarian regime.<ref name="Geddes-2018">{{Cite book|last1=Geddes|first1=Barbara|title=How Dictatorships Work|last2=Wright|first2=Joseph|last3=Frantz|first3=Erica|date=2018|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-1-316-33618-2|pages=137–140|doi=10.1017/9781316336182|s2cid=226899229}}</ref> In 2020, almost half of all authoritarian systems had multi-party governments.<ref name="Bokobza-2024">{{Cite journal |last1=Bokobza |first1=Laure |last2=Nyrup |first2=Jacob |date=2024 |title=Authoritarian multiparty governments |journal=Democratization |volume=31 |issue=8 |pages=1669–1694 |language=en |doi=10.1080/13510347.2024.2338858 |pmid=39611165 |issn=1351-0347|pmc=11601049 }}</ref> Cabinet appointments by an authoritarian regime to outsiders can consolidate their rule by dividing the opposition and co-opting outsiders.<ref name="Bokobza-2024" />
Hindrances to free and fair elections in authoritarian systems may include:<ref name="Geddes-2018"/> * Control of the media by the authoritarian incumbents. * Interference with opposition campaigning. * Electoral fraud. * Violence against opposition. * Large-scale spending by the state in favor of the incumbents. * Permitting of some parties, but not others. * Prohibitions on opposition parties, but not independent candidates. * Allowing competition between candidates within the incumbent party, but not those who are not in the incumbent party.
=== Interactions with other elites and the masses === The foundations of stable authoritarian rule are that the authoritarian prevents contestation from the masses and other elites. The authoritarian regime may use co-optation or [[Political repression|repression]] (or carrots and sticks) to prevent revolts.<ref name="Svolik21523"/><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/coercive-distribution/9C80A3A49C2197C4A7A01BC39E104A67|title=Coercive Distribution by Michael Albertus|last1=Albertus|first1=Michael|last2=Fenner|first2=Sofia|date=2018|series=Elements in the Politics of Development|language=en|access-date=5 November 2019|last3=Slater|first3=Dan|doi=10.1017/9781108644334|isbn=978-1-108-64433-4|archive-date=25 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200425034222/https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/coercive-distribution/9C80A3A49C2197C4A7A01BC39E104A67|url-status=live}}</ref> Authoritarian rule entails a balancing act whereby the ruler has to maintain the support of other elites (frequently through the distribution of state and societal resources) and the support of the public (through distribution of the same resources): the authoritarian rule is at risk if the balancing act is lopsided, as it risks a coup by the elites or an uprising by the mass public.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Frye|first=Timothy|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qdoBEAAAQBAJ|title=Weak Strongman: The Limits of Power in Putin's Russia|date=2021|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-0-691-21698-0|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Mesquita|first1=Bruce Bueno de|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1PlRlcgQdpMC|title=The Logic of Political Survival|last2=Smith|first2=Alastair|last3=Morrow|first3=James D.|last4=Siverson|first4=Randolph M.|date=2005|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=978-0-262-52440-7|language=en}}</ref>
[[Public opinion research]] indicates that many authoritarian regimes enjoy substantial public support.<ref name=":1">{{Citation |last=Yang |first=Tony Zirui |title=Public Opinion in Authoritarian Regimes |date=2026 |work=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics |editor-last=Wolf |editor-first=Anne |url=https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/55828/chapter/554891629 |archive-url=https://tonyziruiyang.org/img/Public_Opinion_in_Autocracy.pdf |archive-date=April 22, 2026 |publisher=Oxford University Press |language=en |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.0066 |isbn=978-0-19-887199-6 |last2=Williamson |first2=Scott|url-access=subscription }}</ref> There may be varied explanations for this, including preference falsification, manipulation of information by authoritarian regimes, [[propaganda]], and [[Political censorship|censorship]] and repression of dissenting perspectives.<ref name=":1" /> Authoritarian regimes tend to care about public opinion, as public grievances against the regime can risk rebellion or coups.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":6">{{Citation |last=Albertus |first=Michael |title=Authoritarian Redistribution |date=2024 |work=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics |editor-last=Wolf |editor-first=Anne |url=https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/55828/chapter/437498912 |publisher=Oxford University Press |language=en |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.22 |isbn=978-0-19-887199-6|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Authoritarian regimes may resort to redistribution to boost public support for the regime.<ref name=":6" />
According to a 2019 study by [[Sergei Guriev]] and [[Daniel Treisman]], authoritarian regimes have over time become less reliant on violence and mass [[Political repression|repression]] to maintain control. The study shows instead that authoritarians have increasingly resorted to [[media manipulation|manipulation of information]] as a means of control. Authoritarians increasingly seek to create an appearance of good performance, conceal state repression, and imitate democracy.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Guriev|first1=Sergei|last2=Treisman|first2=Daniel|author1-link=Daniel Treisman|date=2019|title=Informational Autocrats|journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives|volume=33|issue=4|pages=100–127|doi=10.1257/jep.33.4.100|issn=0895-3309|doi-access=free}}</ref> While authoritarian regimes invest considerably in propaganda out of a belief that it enhances regime survival, scholars have offered mixed views as to whether propaganda is effective.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rosenfeld |first1=Bryn |last2=Wallace |first2=Jeremy |date=2024 |title=Information Politics and Propaganda in Authoritarian Societies |journal=Annual Review of Political Science |language=en |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=263–281 |doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-035951 |s2cid=267602602 |issn=1094-2939 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
=== Systemic weakness and resilience === [[File:Anarchist placard, 2011.jpg|thumb|[[Anarchist]] protest with sign reading "just say no to authoritarian rule"]] [[Andrew J. Nathan]] notes that "regime theory holds that authoritarian systems are inherently fragile because of weak legitimacy, overreliance on coercion, over-[[centralization]] of decision making, and the predominance of personal power over institutional norms. ... Few authoritarian regimes{{snd}}be they communist, fascist, corporatist, or personalist{{snd}}have managed to conduct orderly, peaceful, timely, and stable successions."<ref name="NathanAuthoritarian">Andrew J. Nathan, [https://muse.jhu.edu/article/38546/summary "Authoritarian Resilience"]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181005030724/https://muse.jhu.edu/article/38546/summary|date=2018-10-05}}, ''Journal of Democracy'', 14.1 (2003), pp. 6–17.</ref>
Political scientist Theodore M. Vestal writes that authoritarian political systems may be weakened through inadequate responsiveness to either popular or elite demands and that the authoritarian tendency to respond to challenges by exerting tighter control, instead of by adapting, may compromise the [[legitimacy (political)|legitimacy]] of an authoritarian state and lead to its collapse.<ref name="Vestal"/>
One exception to this general trend is the endurance of the authoritarian rule of the [[Chinese Communist Party]] which has been unusually resilient among authoritarian regimes. Nathan posits that this can be attributed to four factors such as (1) "the increasingly norm-bound nature of its succession politics"; (2) "the increase in meritocratic as opposed to factional considerations in the promotion of political elites"; (3) "the differentiation and functional specialization of institutions within the regime"; and (4) "the establishment of institutions for political participation and appeal that strengthen the CCP's legitimacy among the public at large."<ref name="NathanAuthoritarian"/>
Some scholars have challenged notions that authoritarian states are inherently brittle systems that require [[Political repression|repression]] and propaganda to make people comply with the authoritarian regime. [[Adam Przeworski]] has challenged this, noting that while authoritarian regimes do take actions that serve to enhance regime survival, they also engage in mundane everyday governance and their subjects do not hold a posture towards the regime at all moments of their life. He writes, "People in autocracies do not incessantly live under the shadow of dramatic historical events; they lead everyday routine lives."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Przeworski |first=Adam |date=2023 |title=Formal Models of Authoritarian Regimes: A Critique |journal=Perspectives on Politics |language=en |volume=21 |issue=3 |pages=979–988 |doi=10.1017/S1537592722002067 |s2cid=252446987 |issn=1537-5927|doi-access=free }}</ref> Similarly, [[Thomas Pepinsky]] has challenged the common mental image of an authoritarian state as one of grim totalitarianism, desperate hardship, strict censorship, and dictatorial orders of murder, torture and disappearances. He writes, "life in authoritarian states is mostly boring and tolerable."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pepinsky |first=Thomas |date=2017-01-09 |title=Life in authoritarian states is mostly boring and tolerable |url=https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/1/9/14207302/authoritarian-states-boring-tolerable-fascism-trump |website=Vox |language=en |access-date=7 September 2023 |archive-date=23 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201123054603/https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/1/9/14207302/authoritarian-states-boring-tolerable-fascism-trump |url-status=live }}</ref>
=== Violence === Yale University political scientist Milan Svolik argues that violence is a common characteristic of authoritarian systems. Violence tends to be common in authoritarian states because of a lack of independent third parties empowered to settle disputes between the dictator, regime allies, regime soldiers and the masses.<ref name="Svolik21523">{{Cite book|url=https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|title=The Politics of Authoritarian Rule|first=Milan W.|last=Svolik|publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2012|isbn= |pages=2, 15, 23|access-date=2019-10-21|archive-date=2019-10-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021220420/https://campuspress.yale.edu/svolik/the-politics-of-authoritarian-rule/|url-status=live}}</ref>
Authoritarians may resort to measures referred to as ''[[Coup d'état#Coup-proofing|coup-proofing]]'' (structures that make it hard for any small group to seize power). Coup-proofing strategies include strategically placing family, ethnic, and religious groups in the military; creating of an armed force parallel to the regular military; and developing multiple internal security agencies with overlapping jurisdiction that constantly monitor one another.<ref>{{cite journal |url=https://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/RP844.html |title=Coup-Proofing: Its Practice and Consequences in the Middle East |last=Quinlivan |first=James T. |date=1999 |journal=International Security |volume=42 |issue=2 |pages=131–165 |doi=10.1162/016228899560202 |s2cid=57563395 |access-date=2019-10-21 |archive-date=2019-10-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021225444/https://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/RP844.html |url-status=live|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Research shows that some coup-proofing strategies reduce the risk of coups occurring<ref>{{cite journal|last=Powell|first=Jonathan|s2cid=54646102|date=1 December 2012|title=Determinants of the Attempting and Outcome of Coups d'état|journal=Journal of Conflict Resolution|volume=56|issue=6|pages=1017–1040|doi=10.1177/0022002712445732|issn=0022-0027}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Braithwaite|first1=Jessica Maves|last2=Sudduth|first2=Jun Koga|date=1 January 2016|title=Military purges and the recurrence of civil conflict|journal=Research & Politics|volume=3|issue=1|article-number=2053168016630730|doi=10.1177/2053168016630730|issn=2053-1680|doi-access=free}}</ref> and reduce the likelihood of mass protests.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Chin |first1=John |last2=Song |first2=Wonjun |last3=Wright |first3=Joseph |date=2022 |title=Personalization of Power and Mass Uprisings in Dictatorships |journal=British Journal of Political Science |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=25–44 |language=en |doi=10.1017/S0007123422000114 |s2cid=249976554 |issn=0007-1234|doi-access=free }}</ref> However, coup-proofing reduces military effectiveness,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Talmadge |first=Caitlin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XRhJCgAAQBAJ |title=The Dictator's Army: Battlefield Effectiveness in Authoritarian Regimes |date=2015 |publisher=Cornell University Press |isbn=978-1-5017-0175-7 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Narang|first1=Vipin|last2=Talmadge|first2=Caitlin|date=31 January 2017|title=Civil-military Pathologies and Defeat in War|journal=Journal of Conflict Resolution|volume=62|issue=7|pages=1379–1405|doi=10.1177/0022002716684627|s2cid=151897298}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Brown|first1=Cameron S.|last2=Fariss|first2=Christopher J.|last3=McMahon|first3=R. Blake|date=1 January 2016|title=Recouping after Coup-Proofing: Compromised Military Effectiveness and Strategic Substitution|journal=International Interactions|volume=42|issue=1|pages=1–30|doi=10.1080/03050629.2015.1046598|s2cid=214653333|issn=0305-0629}}{{subscription required}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Bausch|first=Andrew W.|title=Coup-proofing and Military Inefficiencies: An Experiment|journal=International Interactions|year=2017 |pages=1–32|doi=10.1080/03050629.2017.1289938|issn=0305-0629|volume=44|issue=1 |s2cid=157891333}}</ref> and limits the rents that an incumbent can extract.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Leon|first=Gabriel|date=1 April 2014|title=Soldiers or politicians? Institutions, conflict, and the military's role in politics|journal=Oxford Economic Papers|volume=66|issue=2|pages=533–556|citeseerx=10.1.1.1000.7058|doi=10.1093/oep/gpt024|issn=0030-7653}}</ref> A 2016 study shows that the implementation of [[Order of succession|succession rules]] reduce the occurrence of coup attempts.<ref name="Frantz-2016">{{cite journal|last1=Frantz|first1=Erica|last2=Stein|first2=Elizabeth A.|date=4 July 2016|title=Countering Coups Leadership Succession Rules in Dictatorships|journal=Comparative Political Studies|volume=50|issue=7|pages=935–962|doi=10.1177/0010414016655538|s2cid=157014887|issn=0010-4140}}</ref> Succession rules are believed to hamper [[Coordination game|coordination efforts]] among coup plotters by assuaging elites who have more to gain by patience than by plotting.<ref name="Frantz-2016"/> According to political scientists Curtis Bell and Jonathan Powell, coup attempts in neighboring countries lead to greater coup-proofing and coup-related [[Political repression|repression]] in a region.<ref>{{cite news|first1=Curtis |last1=Bell |first2=Jonathan|last2=Powell|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/30/will-turkeys-coup-attempt-prompt-others-nearby/|title=Will Turkey's coup attempt prompt others nearby?|newspaper=Washington Post|date=30 July 2016|access-date=21 October 2019|archive-date=21 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021225446/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/30/will-turkeys-coup-attempt-prompt-others-nearby/|url-status=live}}</ref> A 2017 study finds that countries' coup-proofing strategies are heavily influenced by other countries with similar histories.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Böhmelt|first1=Tobias|last2=Ruggeri|first2=Andrea|last3=Pilster|first3=Ulrich|date=1 April 2017|title=Counterbalancing, Spatial Dependence, and Peer Group Effects*|url=http://repository.essex.ac.uk/15571/1/Counterbalancing_Spatial_Dependence_and.pdf|journal=Political Science Research and Methods|volume=5|issue=2|pages=221–239|doi=10.1017/psrm.2015.55|hdl=20.500.11850/130560 |s2cid=56130442|issn=2049-8470|access-date=21 October 2019|archive-date=22 September 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170922003642/http://repository.essex.ac.uk/15571/1/Counterbalancing_Spatial_Dependence_and.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> A 2018 study in the ''[[Journal of Peace Research]]'' found that leaders who survive coup attempts and respond by purging known and potential rivals are likely to have longer tenures as leaders.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Easton|first1=Malcolm R.|last2=Siverson|first2=Randolph M.|date=2018|title=Leader survival and purges after a failed coup d'état|journal=Journal of Peace Research|volume=55|issue=5|pages=596–608|doi=10.1177/0022343318763713|s2cid=117585945}}</ref> A 2019 study in ''Conflict Management and Peace Science'' found that [[personalist]] dictatorships are more likely to take coup-proofing measures than other authoritarian regimes; the authors argue that this is because "personalists are characterized by weak institutions and narrow support bases, a lack of unifying ideologies and informal links to the ruler."<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Escribà-Folch|first1=Abel|last2=Böhmelt|first2=Tobias|last3=Pilster|first3=Ulrich|date=2019-04-09|title=Authoritarian regimes and civil–military relations: Explaining counterbalancing in autocracies|journal=Conflict Management and Peace Science|volume=37|issue=5|language=en|pages=559–579|doi=10.1177/0738894219836285|s2cid=159416397|issn=0738-8942|hdl=10230/46774|hdl-access=free}}</ref>
According to a 2019 study, personalist dictatorships are more repressive than other forms of dictatorship.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Frantz|first1=Erica|last2=Kendall-Taylor|first2=Andrea|last3=Wright|first3=Joseph|last4=Xu|first4=Xu|title=Personalization of Power and Repression in Dictatorships|journal=The Journal of Politics|volume=82|pages=372–377|doi=10.1086/706049|issn=0022-3816|year=2020|s2cid=203199813}}</ref>
== Typologies == According to [[Yale]] professor [[Juan José Linz]] there a three main types of political regimes today: [[democracies]], [[totalitarian regimes]] and, sitting between these two, authoritarian regimes (with [[hybrid regime]]s).<ref name="LinzLinz2000">{{cite book | author1 = Juan José Linz| author1-link = Juan José Linz | date = 2000 | title = Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes | publisher =Lynne Rienner Publisher | page = 143| isbn = 978-1-55587-890-0 | oclc = 1172052725 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=8cYk_ABfMJIC&pg=PA143}}</ref><ref name="Michie2014">{{cite book | editor-first = Jonathan | editor-last = Michie | year=2014 | title = Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences | publisher = Routledge | page = 95 | isbn = 978-1-135-93226-8 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=ip_IAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA95}}</ref>
According to University of Michigan professor Dan Slater, modern forms of authoritarianism are fundamentally dissimilar from historical forms of nondemocratic rule. He links modern authoritarianism to the era of [[mass politics]], which began with the [[French Revolution]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Slater |first=Dan |chapter=Authoritarianism's Historical Entanglements |date=2024 |title=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics |publisher=Oxford University Press |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.2 |isbn=978-0-19-887199-6}}</ref>
===Similar terms=== * An authoritarian regime has "a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people".<ref>{{cite web |title=Definition of authoritarian |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authoritarian |website=Merriam Webster |access-date=11 April 2022 |archive-date=5 March 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080305222719/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authoritarian |url-status=live }}</ref> Unlike totalitarian states, they will allow social and economic institutions not under governmental control,<ref name="Sondrol"/> and tend to rely on passive mass acceptance rather than active popular support.<ref name=Landman-SHR-2003-71/> * An [[Autocracy]] is a state/government in which one person possesses "unlimited power". * A [[Totalitarian]] state is "based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (such as censorship and terrorism)".<ref>{{cite web |title=Definition of totalitarian |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/totalitarian |website=Merriam Webster |access-date=11 April 2022 |archive-date=24 April 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090424141216/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/totalitarian |url-status=live }}</ref> and are ruled by a single ruling party made up of loyal supporters.<ref name="britannica-Totalitarianism-autocracy">{{cite web |title=Totalitarianism and autocracy |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/totalitarianism/Totalitarianism-and-autocracy |access-date=11 April 2022 |website=Britannica |archive-date=11 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220411222240/https://www.britannica.com/topic/totalitarianism/Totalitarianism-and-autocracy |url-status=live }}</ref> Unlike autocracies, which "seek only to gain absolute political power and to outlaw opposition",<ref name="according to [[Hannah Arendt]]"/> totalitarian states are characterized by an official ideology, which "seek only to gain absolute political power and to outlaw opposition",<ref name="according to [[Hannah Arendt]]">(according to [[Hannah Arendt]])</ref> and "seek to dominate every aspect of everyone's life as a prelude to world domination".<ref name="according to [[Hannah Arendt]]"/> * A [[Fascist]] state is autocratic and based on a political philosophy/movement, (such as that of the Fascisti of pre-WWII Italy) "that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition".<ref>{{cite web |title=Definition of fascism |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism |website=Merriam Webster |access-date=11 April 2022 |archive-date=22 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170822084905/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism |url-status=live }}</ref> * [[Authoritarian personality]] is the [[personality type]] treating [[authority figure]]s with [[Obedience (human behavior)|obedience]]. A study found evidence for both [[Authoritarian socialism|left-wing]] and [[right-wing authoritarianism]].<ref name="i006">{{cite journal | last1=Conway III | first1=Lucian Gideon | last2=Zubrod | first2=Alivia | last3=Chan | first3=Linus | last4=McFarland | first4=James D. | last5=Van de Vliert | first5=Evert | title=Is the myth of left-wing authoritarianism itself a myth? | journal=Frontiers in Psychology | volume=13 | date=8 Feb 2023 | issn=1664-1078 | pmid=36846476 | pmc=9944136 | doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1041391 | doi-access=free | article-number=1041391 }}</ref> * Authoritarian ethics views an [[authority]] can determine the only true [[ethics]].<ref name="d986">{{cite book | last=Fromm | first=Erich | title=Man for Himself | publisher=Routledge |year=2013| orig-year=1947 | isbn=978-1-136-32172-6 | doi=10.4324/9781315009827}}</ref>
===Subtypes=== Several subtypes of authoritarian regimes have been identified by Linz and others.<ref name="Gasiorowski">Mark J. Gasiorowski, [{{Google books |plainurl=yes |id=uxO2QHFzlZsC |page=105 }} The Political Regimes Project], in ''On Measuring Democracy: Its Consequences and Concomitants'' (ed. Alex Inketes), 2006, pp. 110–111.</ref> Linz identified the two most basic subtypes as traditional authoritarian regimes and bureaucratic-military authoritarian regimes: * Traditional authoritarian regimes are those "in which the ruling authority (generally a single person)" is maintained in power "through a combination of appeals to traditional legitimacy, [[Clientelism|patron-client ties]] and repression, which is carried out by an apparatus bound to the ruling authority through personal loyalties." An example is [[Ethiopia]] under [[Haile Selassie I]].<ref name="Gasiorowski"/>[[File:Card Stunt for Park Chung-hee.jpg|thumb|Honoring South Korean President [[Park Chung-hee]] in Army Parade at [[Armed Forces Day#South Korea|Armed Forces Day]] on 1 October 1973]] * Bureaucratic-military authoritarian regimes are those "governed by a [[military junta|coalition of military officers]] and technocrats who act pragmatically (rather than ideologically) within the limits of their bureaucratic mentality."<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> [[Mark J. Gasiorowski]] suggests that it is best to distinguish "simple military authoritarian regimes" from "bureaucratic authoritarian regimes" in which "a powerful group of technocrats uses the state apparatus to try to rationalize and develop the economy" such [[South Korea]] under [[Park Chung-hee]].<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> According to [[Barbara Geddes]], there are seven typologies of authoritarian regimes: dominant party regimes, military regime, personalist regimes, monarchies, oligarchic regimes, indirect military regimes, or hybrids of the first three.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Geddes|first1=Barbara|last2=Wright|first2=Joseph|last3=Frantz|first3=Erica|date=2014|title=Autocratic Breakdown and Regime Transitions: A New Data Set|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/abs/autocratic-breakdown-and-regime-transitions-a-new-data-set/EBDB9E5E64CF899AD50B9ACC630B593F|journal=Perspectives on Politics|language=en|volume=12|issue=2|pages=313–331|doi=10.1017/S1537592714000851|s2cid=145784357|issn=1537-5927|archive-date=27 January 2023|access-date=19 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127111603/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/abs/autocratic-breakdown-and-regime-transitions-a-new-data-set/EBDB9E5E64CF899AD50B9ACC630B593F|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref>
Subtypes of authoritarian regimes identified by Linz are [[Corporatism|corporatist]] or organic-statistic, racial and ethnic "democracy" and post-totalitarian.<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> * Corporatist authoritarian regimes "are those in which corporatism institutions are used extensively by the state to coopt and demobilize powerful interest groups." This type has been studied most extensively in [[Latin America]].<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> * Racial and ethnic "democracies" are those in which "certain racial or ethnic groups enjoy full democratic rights while others are largely or entirely denied those rights", such as in [[South Africa under apartheid]].<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> * Post-totalitarian authoritarian regimes are those in which totalitarian institutions (such as the party, [[secret police]] and state-controlled mass media<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Heinrich |first1=Andreas |last2=Pleines |first2=Heiko |title=The Meaning of 'Limited Pluralism' in Media Reporting under Authoritarian Rule |journal=Politics and Governance |volume=6 |issue=2 |page=103 |doi=10.17645/pag.v6i2.1238 |year=2018 |doi-access=free }}</ref>) remain, but where "ideological orthodoxy has declined in favor of routinization, [[Political repression|repression]] has declined, the state's top leadership is less personalized and more secure, and the level of mass mobilization has declined substantially."<ref name="Gasiorowski" /> Examples include the [[Russian Federation]] and [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] [[Eastern Bloc]] states in the mid-1980s.<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> The post-[[Mao Zedong]] [[China|People's Republic of China]] was viewed as post-totalitarian in the 1990s and early 2000s, with a limited degree of increase in pluralism and civil society.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Dissent and the emergence of civil society in post-totalitarian China|first=Maire|last=O'Brien|journal=Journal of Contemporary China|pages=153–166|date=1998|volume=7|issue=17|doi=10.1080/10670569808724310}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author=Lai |first=H. H. |date=2006 |title=Religious policies in post-totalitarian China: Maintaining political monopoly over a reviving society |journal=Journal of Chinese Political Science |volume=11 |pages=55–77 |doi=10.1007/BF02877033 |s2cid=154504959 |doi-access=}}</ref> however, in the 2010s, particularly after [[Xi Jinping]] succeeded as [[General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party]] and [[Succession of power in China|rose to power]] in 2012, Chinese state repression sharply increased, aided by [[digital authoritarianism|digital control]] and [[mass surveillance]].<ref>{{cite news|first1=Paul |last1=Mozur |first2=Aaron|last2=Krolik|title=A Surveillance Net Blankets China's Cities, Giving Police Vast Powers|date=17 December 2019|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/technology/china-surveillance.html|newspaper=New York Times|access-date=27 February 2020|archive-date=3 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200303084626/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/technology/china-surveillance.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|first=Xiao|last=Qiang|title=The rise of China as a digital totalitarian state|date=21 February 2018|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theworldpost/wp/2018/02/21/china-internet/|newspaper=Washington Post|access-date=27 February 2020|archive-date=28 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200328102144/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theworldpost/wp/2018/02/21/china-internet/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|first=Michael|last=Clarke|title=In Xinjiang, China's 'Neo-Totalitarian' Turn Is Already a Reality|work=The Diplomat|url=https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/in-xinjiang-chinas-neo-totalitarian-turn-is-already-a-reality/|date=10 March 2018|access-date=27 February 2020|archive-date=27 February 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200227151827/https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/in-xinjiang-chinas-neo-totalitarian-turn-is-already-a-reality/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[File:18th Summit of Non-Aligned Movement gets underway in Baku 026.jpg|thumb|Azerbaijan's President [[Ilham Aliyev]] and Venezuela's President [[Nicolas Maduro]] on 25 October 2019]] Authoritarian regimes are also sometimes subcategorized by whether they are more personalistic or [[Populism|populist]].<ref name="Gasiorowski"/>{{Additional citation needed|date=May 2024}} Personalistic authoritarian regimes are characterized by arbitrary rule and [[authority]] exercised "mainly through patronage networks and coercion rather than through institutions and formal rules."<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> Personalistic authoritarian regimes have been seen in post-colonial Africa. By contrast, populist authoritarian regimes "are mobilizational regimes in which a strong, charismatic, manipulative leader rules through a coalition involving key lower-class groups."<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> Examples include [[Argentina]] under [[Juan Perón]],<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> [[Russia]] under [[Vladimir Putin]], [[Egypt]] under [[Gamal Abdel Nasser]]<ref name="Gasiorowski"/> and [[Venezuela]] under [[Hugo Chávez]] and [[Nicolás Maduro]].<ref>Juan de Onis, {{usurped|[https://web.archive.org/web/20180704165440/http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/juan-de-onis/after-chavez-authoritarianism-still-threatens-latin-america "After Chavez, Authoritarianism Still Threatens Latin America"]}}, ''World Affairs'' (15 May 2013): "the followers of the late President Hugo Chávez continue to apply the playbook of authoritarian populism throughout Latin America in their pursuit of more power...one of the Mercosur partners are challenging the basic political practices of authoritarian populism implanted in Venezuela."</ref><ref>Kurt Weyland, [http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/latin-america%E2%80%99s-authoritarian-drift-threat-populist-left "Latin America's Authoritarian Drift: The Threat from the Populist Left"]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181125081115/https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/latin-america%E2%80%99s-authoritarian-drift-threat-populist-left|date=2018-11-25}}, ''[[Journal of Democracy]]'', Vol. 23, Issue 3 (July 2013), pp. 18–32.</ref>
A typology of authoritarian regimes by political scientists Brian Lai and Dan Slater includes four categories: * machine (oligarchic party dictatorships); * bossism (autocratic party dictatorships); * [[military junta|juntas]] (oligarchic military dictatorships); and * [[Strongman (politics)|strongman]] (autocratic military dictatorships).<ref name=LaiSlater/> Lai and Slater argue that single-party regimes are better than military regimes at developing institutions (e.g. [[mass mobilization]], patronage networks and coordination of elites) that are effective at continuing the regime's incumbency and diminishing domestic challengers; Lai and Slater also argue that military regimes more often initiate military conflicts or undertake other "desperate measures" to maintain control compared to single-party regimes.<ref name=LaiSlater/><ref name=EscrowFrantz/>
John Duckitt suggests a link between authoritarianism and [[Collectivism and individualism|collectivism]], asserting that both stand in opposition to [[individualism]].<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Duckitt | first1 = J. | title = Authoritarianism and Group Identification: A New View of an Old Construct | jstor = 3791588 | journal = Political Psychology | volume = 10 | issue = 1 | pages = 63–84 | year = 1989 | doi = 10.2307/3791588 }}</ref> Duckitt writes that both authoritarianism and collectivism submerge [[individual rights]] and goals to group goals, expectations and [[Conformity|conformities]].<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Kemmelmeier | first1 = M. | last2 = Burnstein | first2 = E. | last3 = Krumov | first3 = K. | last4 = Genkova | first4 = P. | last5 = Kanagawa | first5 = C. | last6 = Hirshberg | first6 = M. S. | last7 = Erb | first7 = H. P. | last8 = Wieczorkowska | first8 = G. | last9 = Noels | first9 = K. A. | s2cid = 32361036 | title = Individualism, Collectivism, and Authoritarianism in Seven Societies | journal = Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology | volume = 34 | issue = 3 | page = 304 | year = 2003 | doi = 10.1177/0022022103034003005}}</ref>
According to Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way, authoritarian regimes that are created in [[social revolution]]s are far more durable than other kinds of authoritarian regimes.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Levitsky |first1=Steven |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=odRkEAAAQBAJ |title=Revolution and Dictatorship: The Violent Origins of Durable Authoritarianism |last2=Way |first2=Lucan |date=2022 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-16952-1 |language=en}}</ref>
=== Authoritarianism and democracy === {{See also|Democratic backsliding|Democratization}} [[File:Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index 2024.svg|thumb|upright=1.6|[[The Economist Democracy Index|Democracy Index]] by the [[Economist Intelligence Unit]], 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |title=EIU Democracy Index 2020 – World Democracy Report |url=https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2020/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210303040250/https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2020/ |archive-date=2021-03-03 |access-date=2021-03-07 |website=Economist Intelligence Unit}}</ref> Blue countries are democratic, yellow are [[hybrid regime]]s, and brown are authoritarian governments.]] [[File:V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index 2026 World.svg|thumb|upright=1.6|[[V-Dem Democracy Indices]] for 2025<ref name="j496">{{cite web | title=Democracy Report 2026, Unraveling The Democratic Era? | url=https://v-dem.net/documents/75/V-Dem_Institute_Democracy_Report_2026_lowres.pdf | access-date=2026-03-17}}</ref> with blue more democratic and brown more authoritarian]] Authoritarianism and democracy are not necessarily fundamental opposites and may be thought of as poles at opposite ends of a scale, so that it is possible for some democracies to possess authoritarian elements, and for an authoritarian system to have democratic elements.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Frantz |first1=Erica |year=2018 |title=Authoritarian Politics: Trends and Debates |journal=Politics and Governance |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=87–89 |doi=10.17645/pag.v6i2.1498 |via=[[Cogitatio Press]] |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Koesel |first1=Karrie J. |last2=Bunce |first2=Valerie |author-link2=Valerie Jane Bunce |last3=Weiss |first3=Jessica Chen |author-link3=Jessica Chen Weiss |date=2020 |title=In South Carolina, Democrats debated when a dictator is really a dictator. So what's the answer? |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/27/south-carolina-democrats-debated-when-dictator-is-really-dictator-so-whats-answer/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200227142856/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/27/south-carolina-democrats-debated-when-dictator-is-really-dictator-so-whats-answer/ |archive-date=2020-02-27 |access-date=2020-02-27 |newspaper=The Washington Post |type=Monkey Cage}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Koesel |first1=Karrie |url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/citizens-and-the-state-in-authoritarian-regimes-9780190093495?cc=us&lang=en& |title=Citizens and the State in Authoritarian Regimes: Comparing China and Russia |last2=Bunce |first2=Valerie |last3=Weiss |first3=Jessica |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2020 |isbn=978-0-19-009349-5 |location=Oxford, New York |access-date=2020-02-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200227142901/https://global.oup.com/academic/product/citizens-and-the-state-in-authoritarian-regimes-9780190093495?cc=us&lang=en& |archive-date=2020-02-27 |url-status=live}}</ref>{{Verify source|date=May 2024}} Authoritarian regimes may also be partly responsive to citizen grievances, although this is generally only regarding grievances that do not undermine the stability of the regime.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Truex|first=Rory|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/making-autocracy-work/57BB75703B01DB41446C2C4E052B74CF|title=Making Autocracy Work: Representation and Responsiveness in Modern China|date=2016|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-1-107-17243-2|doi=10.1017/cbo9781316771785|archive-date=27 March 2023|access-date=30 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230327231320/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/making-autocracy-work/57BB75703B01DB41446C2C4E052B74CF|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lueders|first=Hans|date=2022|title=Electoral Responsiveness in Closed Autocracies: Evidence from Petitions in the former German Democratic Republic|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/electoral-responsiveness-in-closed-autocracies-evidence-from-petitions-in-the-former-german-democratic-republic/4A5EE12EAE79CA7E93CC5BC4BD2B9C85|journal=American Political Science Review|volume=116|issue=3|pages=827–842|language=en|doi=10.1017/S0003055421001386|s2cid=245452279|issn=0003-0554|archive-date=4 April 2023|access-date=23 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230404082011/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/electoral-responsiveness-in-closed-autocracies-evidence-from-petitions-in-the-former-german-democratic-republic/4A5EE12EAE79CA7E93CC5BC4BD2B9C85|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref> An [[illiberal democracy]], or [[procedural democracy]], is distinguished from [[liberal democracy]], or [[substantive democracy]], in that illiberal democracies lack features such as the [[rule of law]], protections for [[minority group]]s, an [[Judicial independence|independent judiciary]] and the real [[separation of powers]].<ref>Thomas H. Henriksen, ''American Power after the Berlin Wall'' (Palgrave Macmillan: 2007), p. 199: "experts emphasize that elections alone, without the full democratic panoply of an independent judiciary, free press, and viable political parties, constitute, in reality, illiberal democracies, which still menace their neighbors and destabilize their regions."</ref><ref>David P. Forsythe, ''Human Rights in International Relations'' (Cambridge University Press, 2012), p. 231: "Illiberal democracies may have reasonably free and fair national elections based on broad suffrage, but they do not counteract the tyranny of the majority with effective protections for ethnic and religious minorities or various types of dissenters."</ref><ref>Rod Hague & Martin Harrop, ''Political Science: A Comparative Introduction'' (7th ed.: Palgrave Macmillan: 2007), p. 259: "The gradual implementation of the rule of law and due process is an accomplishment of liberal politics, provide a basis for distinguishing liberal from illiberal democracies, and both from authoritarian regimes."</ref><ref>Vladimir Popov, "Circumstances versus Policy Choices: Why Has the Economic Performance of the Soviet Successor States Been So Poor" in ''After the Collapse of Communism: Comparative Lessons of Transition'' (eds. [[Michael McFaul]] & Kathryn Stoner-Weiss: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 20: "The least efficient institutions are in illiberal democracies combining poor rule of law with democracy ... Less democratic regimes with weak rule of law ... appear to do better than illiberal democracies in maintaining institutional capacity."</ref>
A further distinction that liberal democracies have rarely made war with one another; research has extended the theory and finds that more democratic countries tend to have few wars (sometimes called [[militarized interstate dispute]]s) causing fewer battle deaths with one another and that democracies have far fewer [[civil war]]s.<ref> {{cite journal |author=Hegre, Håvard |first2=Tanja |last2=Ellington |first3=Scott |last3=Gates |author4=Nils Petter Gleditsch |name-list-style=amp |title=Towards A Democratic Civil Peace? Opportunity, Grievance and Civil War 1816–1992 |journal=American Political Science Review |year=2001 |volume=95 |pages=33–48 |url=http://www.worldbank.org/research/conflict/papers/peace.htm |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20040406173943/http://www.worldbank.org/research/conflict/papers/peace.htm |archive-date= 2004-04-06|doi=10.1017/S0003055401000119 |s2cid=7521813 |url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Ray, James Lee |title=A Lakatosian View of the Democratic Peace Research Program From Progress in International Relations Theory |editor-first=Colin |editor-last=Elman |editor2=Miriam Fendius Elman |url=http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/files/g/gDf5Ty/6%20ray%20demo%20peace%20FIRST%20PROOFS.pdf |publisher=MIT Press|isbn= |year=2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060625203811/http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/files/g/gDf5Ty/6%20ray%20demo%20peace%20FIRST%20PROOFS.pdf |archive-date=2006-06-25 }}</ref>
Research shows that the democratic nations have significantly less [[democide]] or murder by government. Those were also moderately developed nations before applying liberal democratic policies.<ref>{{cite book |author=Rummel |first=R. J. |author-link=R. J. Rummel |url=https://archive.org/details/powerkillsdemocr00rumm |title=Power kills: democracy as a method of nonviolence |publisher=Transaction Publishers |year=1997 |isbn=978-1-56000-297-0 |location=New Brunswick, New Jersey}}</ref> Research by the [[World Bank]] suggests that political institutions are extremely important in determining the prevalence of [[Political corruption|corruption]] and that parliamentary systems, political stability and [[freedom of the press]] are all associated with lower corruption.<ref>Daniel Lederman, Norman Loayza, & Rodrigo Res Soares, [https://ssrn.com/abstract=632777 "Accountability and Corruption: Political Institutions Matter"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210119120724/https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=632777 |date=2021-01-19 }}, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2708 (November 2001).</ref>
A 2006 study by economist [[Alberto Abadie]] has concluded that terrorism is most common in nations with intermediate [[political freedom]]. The nations with the least [[terrorism]] are the most and least democratic nations, and that "transitions from an authoritarian regime to a democracy may be accompanied by temporary increases in terrorism."<ref>{{cite journal|title=Poverty, Political Freedom, and the Roots of Terrorism|first=Alberto|last=Abadie|journal=American Economic Review|volume=96|issue=2|date=May 2006|pages=50–56|url=https://economics.mit.edu/files/11865|doi=10.1257/000282806777211847|access-date=2019-10-24|archive-date=2019-10-24|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191024142040/https://economics.mit.edu/files/11865|url-status=live}}</ref> Studies in 2013 and 2017 similarly found a nonlinear relationship between political freedom and terrorism, with the most terrorist attacks occurring in partial democracies and the fewest in "strict autocracies and full-fledged democracies."<ref name=Magen>{{cite journal|title=Fighting Terrorism: The Democracy Advantage|first=Amichai|last=Magen|journal=Journal of Democracy|date=January 2018|url=https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/fighting-terrorism-the-democracy-advantage/|volume=29|issue=1|pages=111–125|doi=10.1353/jod.2018.0009|s2cid=158598818|access-date=2020-03-24|archive-date=2020-03-24|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200324175546/https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/fighting-terrorism-the-democracy-advantage/|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref> A 2018 study by Amichai Magen demonstrated that liberal democracies and [[polyarchies]] not only suffer fewer terrorist attacks as compared to other regime types, but also suffer fewer casualties in terrorist attacks as compared to other regime types, which may be attributed to higher-quality democracies' responsiveness to their citizens' demands, including "the desire for physical safety", resulting in "investment in intelligence, infrastructure protection, first responders, social resilience, and specialized medical care" which averts casualties.<ref name=Magen/> Magen also stated that terrorism in closed autocracies sharply increased starting in 2013.<ref name=Magen/>
Within national democratic governments, there may be subnational authoritarian enclaves. A prominent examples of this includes the Southern United States after [[Reconstruction era|Reconstruction]], as well as areas of contemporary Argentina and Mexico.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Gibson |first=Edward L. |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/boundary-control/FA0E9312CAB6FD68F3BF3C67E8CFAB42 |title=Boundary Control: Subnational Authoritarianism in Federal Democracies |date=2013 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-19223-1 |archive-date=26 March 2023 |access-date=28 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230326033142/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/boundary-control/FA0E9312CAB6FD68F3BF3C67E8CFAB42 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Eaton |first1=Kent |last2=Giraudy |first2=Agustina |date=2025 |title=What Can Latin America Tell Us about Subnational Democratic Erosion in the United States? |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/what-can-latin-america-tell-us-about-subnational-democratic-erosion-in-the-united-states/96124FAB1FAC4C00976A613CA283D8CC |journal=Perspectives on Politics |pages=1–11 |language=en |doi=10.1017/S1537592725000015 |issn=1537-5927|url-access=subscription |doi-access=free }}</ref>
==== Competitive authoritarian regimes ==== Another type of authoritarian regime is the competitive authoritarian regime, a type of civilian regime that arose in the post-Cold War era. In a competitive authoritarian regime, "formal democratic institutions exist and are widely viewed as the primary means of gaining power, but ... incumbents' abuse of the state places them at a significant advantage vis-à-vis their opponents."<ref name="Levitsky-2010">{{cite book |last1=Levitsky |first1=Steven |last2=Way |first2=Lucan A. |title=Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War |date=2010 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NZDI05p1PDgC |pages=5–7 |isbn=978-1-139-49148-8 |access-date=2019-07-03 |archive-date=2020-06-12 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200612042246/https://books.google.com/books?id=NZDI05p1PDgC |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mufti |first1=Mariam |title=What Do We Know about Hybrid Regimes after Two Decades of Scholarship? |journal=Politics and Governance |volume=6 |issue=5 |pages=112–119 |doi=10.17645/pag.v6i2.1400 |year=2018|doi-access=free }}</ref> The term was coined by Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way in their 2010 book of the same name to discuss a type of [[hybrid regime]] that emerged during and after the [[Cold War]].<ref name="Levitsky-2010"/><ref name="Tomasky-2019">{{cite news |last1=Tomasky |first1=Michael |title=Do the Republicans Even Believe in Democracy Anymore? |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/opinion/republicans-trump-democracy.html |access-date=3 July 2019 |newspaper=New York Times |date=1 July 2019 |archive-date=2 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190702234600/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/opinion/republicans-trump-democracy.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
Competitive authoritarian regimes differ from fully authoritarian regimes in that elections are regularly held, the opposition can openly operate without a high risk of exile or imprisonment and "democratic procedures are sufficiently meaningful for opposition groups to take them seriously as arenas through which to contest for power."<ref name="Levitsky-2010" /> Competitive authoritarian regimes lack one or more of the three characteristics of democracies such as free elections (i.e. elections untainted by substantial fraud or voter intimidation); protection of civil liberties (i.e. the freedom of speech, press and association) and an even playing field (in terms of access to resources, the media and legal recourse).<ref>Levitsky & Way (2010), pp. 7–12.</ref>
=== Authoritarianism and fascism === Authoritarianism is considered a core concept of [[fascism]]<ref>{{cite book|last=Nolte|first=Ernst|year=1966|orig-year=1963|title=The Three Faces of Fascism: Action Française, Italian Fascism, National Socialism|translator-first=Leila|translator-last=Vennewitz|location=London|publisher=[[Weidenfeld and Nicolson]]|p=300|isbn=978-0-03-052240-6}}</ref><ref>Turner, Henry Ashby (1975). ''Reappraisals of Fascism''. New Viewpoints. p. 162. {{ISBN|978-0-531-05579-3}}. "[Fascism]'s goals of radical and authoritarian nationalism".</ref><ref>Hagtvet, Bernt; Larsen, Stein Ugelvik; Myklebust, Jan Petter, eds. (1984). ''Who Were the Fascists: Social Roots of European Fascism''. [[Columbia University Press]]. p. 424. {{ISBN|978-82-00-05331-6}}. "[...] organized form of integrative radical nationalist authoritarianism".</ref><ref>[[Robert Paxton|Paxton, Robert]] (2004). ''[[The Anatomy of Fascism]]''. Alfred A. Knopf. pp. 32, 45, 173. {{ISBN|978-1-4000-4094-0}}.</ref> and scholars agree that a fascist regime is foremost an authoritarian form of government, although not all authoritarian regimes are fascist. While authoritarianism is a defining characteristic of fascism, scholars argue that more distinguishing traits are needed to make an authoritarian regime fascist.<ref name="Traits-2025">{{multiref2|1={{cite book|last1=Weber|first1=Eugen|title=Varieties of fascism: doctrines of revolution in the twentieth century|year=1982|orig-year=1964|publisher=Van Nostrand|location=New York|isbn=978-0-89874-444-6|edition=reprint}}|2={{cite book|last1=Laclau|first1=Ernesto|title=Politics and ideology in Marxist theory: capitalism, fascism, populism|date=1977|publisher=Verso|location=London|isbn=978-1-84467-788-7|edition=English-language}}|3={{cite book|last1=Fritzsche|first1=Peter|title=Rehearsals for fascism: populism and political mobilization in Weimar Germany|date=1990|publisher=Oxford Univ. Press|location=New York|isbn=978-0-19-505780-5|edition=1st printing}}|4={{cite book|last1=Griffin|first1=Roger|title=The nature of fascism|date=1991|publisher=St. Martin's Press|location=New York|isbn=978-0-312-07132-5|edition=1st American}}|5={{cite book|last1=Payne|first1=Stanley G.|title=A history of fascism, 1914–45|date=1995|publisher=UCL Press|location=London|isbn=978-0-299-14874-4|url=https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780299148744}}|6={{cite book|last1=Eatwell|first1=Roger|title=Fascism: a history|date=1996|publisher=Allen Lane|location=New York|isbn=978-0-7139-9147-5|edition=1st American|url=https://archive.org/details/fascismhistory00eatw}}|7={{cite book|last1=Laqueur|first1=Walter|title=Fascism: past, present, future|url=https://archive.org/details/fascismpastprese00laqu|url-access=registration|date=1996|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=New York|isbn=978-0-19-511793-6|edition=reprint}}|8={{cite book|last1=Reich|first1=Wilhelm|title=The mass psychology of fascism|url=https://archive.org/details/masspsychologyof00reic|url-access=registration|date=2000|publisher=Farrar, Straus & Giroux|location=New York|isbn=978-0-374-50884-5|edition=3rd revised and enlarged}}|9={{cite book|last1=Paxton|first1=Robert|title=The Anatomy of Fascism|date=2004|publisher=Knopf Imprint|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-4094-0|edition=1st|url=https://archive.org/details/anatomyoffascism00paxt_0}}}}</ref>
===Authoritarian socialism=== {{Excerpt|Authoritarian socialism|paragraphs=1|only=paragraphs}}
=== Libertarian authoritarianism === {{main|Libertarian authoritarianism|Liberal autocracy}}
Multiple scholars have identified a form of libertarian authoritarianism emerging in the early 21st century. [[Wendy Brown]] describes it as emerging from neoliberalism, opposing both democracy and public institutions while defining freedom in terms of speech and actions that promote [[homophobia]], [[white supremacy]] and [[male privilege]].<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Wendy|last1=Brown|first2=Jo|last2=Littler|title=Where the fires are|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/248/article/690919/pdf|journal=Soundings: A Journal of Politics and Culture|date=Spring 2018|issn=1741-0797|pages=14–25|volume=68|issue=68 |doi=10.3898/136266218822845619 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|first1=Anne Sisson|last1=Runyan|title=What Is Intersectionality and Why Is It Important?|journal=Academe|date=November–December 2018|issn=0190-2946|pages=10–14|volume=104|issue=6|jstor=26606288 |quote=This political moment is fueled by what political theorist Wendy Brown calls "libertarian authoritarianism." Brown defines libertarian authoritarianism as both an extension and a result of neoliberalism: it simultaneously guts public institutions, undermines democracy, and defines freedom as the freedom to be sexist, racist, homophobic, and xenophobic and to engage in speech and actions that uphold the violence of white male supremacy.}}</ref> Other scholars have connected it to [[QAnon]]<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Roche|last1=Cárcel|first2=Juan|last2=Antonio|title=The Religious Genesis of Conspiracy Theories and Their Consequences for Democracy and Religion: The Case of QAnon|journal=Religions|date=1 June 2023|issn=2077-1444|page=734|volume=14|issue=6|doi=10.3390/rel14060734|doi-access=free |quote=We will conclude by pointing out that QAnon affects the coherence and stability of religious beliefs and democracy; in fact, it can be seen as libertarian authoritarianism and populism, advocating a sick freedom, the ultimate expression of the modern feeling of individual powerlessness and of a Modernity that has failed to deliver on its promises.|hdl=10045/134890|hdl-access=free}}</ref> and to the Argentinian [[Presidency of Javier Milei]].<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Dieter|last1=Boris|first2=Patrick|last2=Eser|title=The Mysterious Rise of the »Messiah« Milei: Argentina as an Experimental Laboratory for Libertarian Authoritarianism?|url=https://www.prokla.de/index.php/PROKLA/article/view/2126|journal=PROKLA. Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialwissenschaft|date=31 May 2024|issn=2700-0311|pages=325–350|volume=54|issue=215|doi=10.32387/prokla.v54i215.2126}}</ref>
Carolin Amlinger and Oliver Nachtwey, in ''Offended Freedom: The Rise of Libertarian Authoritarianism'', describe libertarian authoritarianism as arising from a backlash to government efforts to contain the [[COVID-19 pandemic]] and, more broadly, against the increasing complexity of the world, ultimately leading to hostility towards democracy.<ref>{{cite book|first1=Carolin|last1=Amlinger|first2=Oliver|last2=Nachtwey|date=December 2024|access-date=2025-02-22|title=Offended Freedom: The Rise of Libertarian Authoritarianism|publisher=Wiley|url=https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Offended+Freedom%253A+The+Rise+of+Libertarian+Authoritarianism-p-9781509560868}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Heinz|first=Janine|chapter=Libertärer Autoritarismus in Österreich–eine empirische Annäherung|title=Die Auswirkungen der Corona-Pandemie auf die österreichische Gesellschaft.|publisher=Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG|date=2024|pages=353–392 |doi=10.5771/9783748942696-353 |isbn=978-3-7489-4269-6 |quote=In 2022, the sociologists Carolin Amlinger and Oliver Nachtwey published a much-acclaimed book in which they argue that the Corona crisis has given rise to a new form of "libertarian authoritarianism". This new authoritarianism is characterized by the fact that individual freedom is not seen as relative but as an absolute right and, as a result, any governmental interference with the private sphere is seen as an attack on human rights and freedom of expression.|doi-access=free}}</ref> Writing in [[Jacobin (magazine)|''Jacobin'']] and ''[[New Statesman]]'', Amlinger and Nachtwey define libertarian authoritarians as those who believe in the abolition of the democratic state on the basis of its restrictions on individual freedoms, and "consider the democratic state itself, the authorities and their regulations, to be invasive and harmful"; they described the fundamental basis of libertarian authoritarianism to be based in "[[post-truth]] politics", and that in the [[late-modern]] era, believers validate their opinions "with [[proto-scientific]] evidence, rumours, [[conspiracy theories]] and [[fake news]]". They describe [[neoliberalism]] as an additional factor contributing towards the recent rise of the ideology.<ref name="Nachtwey-2023">{{Cite web |last1=Nachtwey |first1=Oliver |last2=Amlinger |first2=Carolin |date=2023-12-07 |title=The new authoritarian personality |url=https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/12/new-authoritarian-personality |access-date=2025-02-13 |website=[[New Statesman]] |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=jacobin>{{Cite web |last1=Amlinger |first1=Carolin |last2=Nachtwey |first2=Oliver |date=29 January 2025 |title=In Elon Musk, Libertarianism and Authoritarianism Combine |url=https://jacobin.com/2025/01/musk-authoritarianism-libertarianism-afd-trump |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250130040002/https://jacobin.com/2025/01/musk-authoritarianism-libertarianism-afd-trump/ |archive-date=30 January 2025 |access-date=2025-02-12 |website=[[Jacobin (magazine)|Jacobin]] |language=en-US}}</ref> Individuals they identify as modern adherents to the ideology include [[Peter Thiel]], [[Elon Musk]], and [[Javier Milei]], having merged their libertarianism with their "authoritarian tendencies".<ref name="Nachtwey-2023"/><ref name=jacobin />
=== Authoritarianism and totalitarianism === [[File:Mussolini mezzobusto.jpg|thumb|[[Benito Mussolini]], the founder of [[Italian fascism]], called his regime the "Totalitarian State": "Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State."<ref>{{cite journal |last=Delzell |first=Charles F. |title=Remembering Mussolini |journal=The Wilson Quarterly |volume=12 |number=2 |date=Spring 1988 |page=127 |publisher=Wilson Quarterly |location=Washington, D.C. |jstor=40257305 }} Retrieved April 8, 2022</ref>]] [[Totalitarianism]] is a label used by various [[political scientists]] to characterize the most tyrannical strain of authoritarian systems; in which the ruling elite, often subservient to a [[dictator]], exert near-total control of the social, political, economic, cultural and religious aspects of society in the territories under its governance.<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Concise Encyclopedia of Democracy |publisher=Routledge |year=2013 |isbn=978-1-57958-268-5 |location=New York, NY |pages=51, 391}}</ref>
Linz distinguished new forms of authoritarianism from personalistic dictatorships and totalitarian states, taking [[Francoist Spain]] as an example. Unlike personalistic dictatorships, new forms of authoritarianism have institutionalized representation of a variety of actors (in Spain's case, including the military, the [[Catholic Church in Spain|Catholic Church]], [[Falange Española y de las JONS|Falange]], [[Monarchism|monarchists]], [[technocrat]]s and others). Unlike totalitarian states, the regime relies on passive mass acceptance rather than popular support.<ref name="Landman-SHR-2003-71">Todd Landman, ''Studying Human Rights'' (Routledge, 2003), p. 71 (citing Linz 1964 and others).</ref> According to Juan Linz the distinction between an authoritarian regime and a [[Totalitarianism|totalitarian]] one is that an authoritarian regime seeks to suffocate politics and political mobilization while totalitarianism seeks to control and use them.<ref name="LinzLinz2000" /> Authoritarianism primarily differs from totalitarianism in that social and economic institutions exist that are not under governmental control. Building on the work of Yale political scientist Juan Linz, Paul C. Sondrol of the [[University of Colorado at Colorado Springs]] has examined the characteristics of authoritarian and totalitarian dictators and organized them in a chart:<ref name="Sondrol">{{Cite journal |last1 = Sondrol |first1 = P. C. |s2cid = 144333167 |title = Totalitarian and Authoritarian Dictators: A Comparison of Fidel Castro and Alfredo Stroessner |journal = Journal of Latin American Studies |volume = 23 |issue = 3 |page = 599 |year = 2009 |doi = 10.1017/S0022216X00015868}}</ref>
{|class="wikitable" |- ! !Totalitarianism !Authoritarianism |- |[[Charisma]] |High |Low |- |Role conception |Leader as function |Leader as individual |- |Ends of power |Public |Private |- |[[Political corruption|Corruption]] |Low |High |- |Official [[ideology]] |Yes |No |- |Limited [[Pluralism (political philosophy)|pluralism]] |No |Yes |- |Legitimacy |Yes |No |} Sondrol argues that while both authoritarianism and totalitarianism are forms of [[autocracy]], they differ in three key [[Dichotomy|dichotomies]]: {{blockquote|(1) Unlike their bland and generally unpopular authoritarian brethren, totalitarian dictators develop a [[charisma]]tic "[[Cult of personality|mystique]]" and a mass-based, pseudo-democratic [[interdependence]] with their followers via the conscious manipulation of a prophetic image.
(2) [[wikt:Concomitant|Concomitant]] role conceptions differentiate totalitarians from authoritarians. Authoritarians view themselves as individual beings largely content to control and often maintain the status quo. Totalitarian self-conceptions are largely [[Teleology|teleological]]. The [[tyrant]] is less a person than an indispensable function to guide and reshape the universe.
(3) Consequently, the utilisation of power for personal aggrandizement is more evident among authoritarians than totalitarians. Lacking the binding appeal of [[ideology]], authoritarians support their rule by a mixture of instilling fear and granting rewards to loyal collaborators, engendering a [[kleptocracy]].<ref name="Sondrol"/>|sign=|source=}}
Compared to totalitarianism, "the authoritarian state still maintains a certain distinction between state and society. It is only concerned with political power and as long as that is not contested it gives society a certain degree of liberty. Totalitarianism, on the other hand, invades [[private sphere|private life]] and asphyxiates it."<ref name="Cinpoes">Radu Cinpoes, ''Nationalism and Identity in Romania: A History of Extreme Politics from the Birth of the State to EU Accession'', p. 70.</ref> Another distinction is that "authoritarianism is not animated by utopian ideals in the way totalitarianism is. It does not attempt to change the world and human nature."<ref name="Cinpoes"/> [[Carl Joachim Friedrich]] writes that "a totalist ideology, a party reinforced by a [[secret police]], and monopoly control of ... industrial mass society" are the three features of totalitarian regimes that distinguish them from other autocracies.<ref name="Cinpoes"/>
[[Greg Yudin]], a professor of political philosophy at the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences, argues "political passivity and civic disengagement" are "key features" of authoritarianism, while totalitarianism relies on "mass mobilization, terror and homogeneity of beliefs".<ref>{{cite news |title=Putin's War in Ukraine Shatters an Illusion in Russia |newspaper=The New York Times |agency=New York Times |date=9 April 2022 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/09/world/europe/putin-ukraine-russia.amp.html |last1=Tavernise |first1=Sabrina }}</ref>
== Economic effects == In 2010, Dani Rodrik wrote that democracies outperform autocracies in terms of long-term economic growth, economic stability, adjustments to external economic shocks, human capital investment, and economic equality.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Rodrik|first=Dani|date=2010-08-09|title=The Myth of Authoritarian Growth {{!}} by Dani Rodrik|url=https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-myth-of-authoritarian-growth|access-date=2022-01-07|website=Project Syndicate|language=en|archive-date=18 February 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130218065349/https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-myth-of-authoritarian-growth|url-status=live}}</ref> A 2019 study by [[Daron Acemoglu]], [[Suresh Naidu]], Pascual Restrepo, and [[James A. Robinson (economist)|James A. Robinson]] found that democracy increases GDP per capita by about 20 percent over the long-term.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Acemoglu|first1=Daron|last2=Naidu|first2=Suresh|last3=Restrepo|first3=Pascual|last4=Robinson|first4=James A.|date=2019|title=Democracy Does Cause Growth|url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/700936|journal=Journal of Political Economy|volume=127|issue=1|pages=47–100|doi=10.1086/700936|hdl=1721.1/124287|s2cid=222452675|issn=0022-3808|hdl-access=free|archive-date=4 April 2023|access-date=7 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230404005435/https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/700936|url-status=live}}</ref> According to [[Amartya Sen]], no functioning liberal democracy has ever suffered a large-scale [[famine]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Sen|first1=A. K.|year=1999|title=Democracy as a Universal Value|journal=Journal of Democracy|volume=10|issue=3|pages=3–17|doi=10.1353/jod.1999.0055|s2cid=54556373}}</ref> Studies suggest that several health indicators (life expectancy and infant and maternal mortality) have a stronger and more significant association with democracy than they have with [[Gross domestic product|GDP]] per capita, size of the public sector or income inequality.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Franco |first1=Á. |last2=Álvarez-Dardet |first2=C. |last3=Ruiz |first3=M. T. |year=2004 |title=Effect of democracy on health: ecological study |journal=BMJ |volume=329 |issue=7480 |pages=1421–1423 |doi=10.1136/bmj.329.7480.1421 |pmc=535957 |pmid=15604165}}</ref> States that undergo democratic backsliding are more likely to face downgrades in their sovereign bond ratings.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Yoo |first=Seong Hun |date=2025 |title=Economic costs of democratic backsliding: how does democratic backsliding affect sovereign bond ratings? |url=https://academic.oup.com/ser/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ser/mwaf016/8090277?redirectedFrom=fulltext |journal=Socio-Economic Review |volume=23 |issue=4 |article-number=mwaf016 |doi=10.1093/ser/mwaf016 |issn=1475-1461|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
One of the few areas that some scholars have theorized that autocracies may have an advantage, is in industrialization.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Gerring |first1=John |last2=Gjerløw |first2=Haakon |last3=Knutsen |first3=Carl Henrik |date=2022 |title=Regimes and industrialization |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X2100406X |journal=[[World Development (journal)|World Development]] |language=en |volume=152 |article-number=105791 |doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105791 |issn=0305-750X |hdl-access=free |hdl=10852/89922}}</ref> In the 20th century, [[Seymour Martin Lipset]] argued that low-income authoritarian regimes have certain technocratic "efficiency-enhancing advantages" over low-income democracies that gives authoritarian regimes an advantage in [[economic development]].<ref name="Halperin">Morton H. Halperin, Joseph T. Siegle, & Michael M. Weinstein, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=JiNLH1I50PkC The Democracy Advantage: How Democracies Promote Prosperity and Peace]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151007173459/https://books.google.com/books?id=JiNLH1I50PkC|date=2015-10-07}}'' ([[Council on Foreign Relations]]/Psychology Press, 2005).</ref> By contrast, [[Morton H. Halperin]], Joseph T. Siegle and Michael M. Weinstein (2005) argue that democracies "realize superior development performance" over authoritarianism, pointing out that poor democracies are more likely to have steadier economic growth and less likely to experience economic and humanitarian catastrophes (such as refugee crises) than authoritarian regimes; that civil liberties in democracies act as a curb on corruption and misuse of resources; and that democracies are more adaptable than authoritarian regimes.<ref name="Halperin" />
== Military effects == According to Allan C. Stam and Dan Reiter, liberal democracies have an advantage in battlefield performance over non-democracies and illiberal democracies.<ref name="Reiter-2002">{{Cite book |last1=Reiter |first1=Dan |title=Democracies at War |last2=Stam |first2=Allan C. |date=2002 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-08949-2 |jstor=j.ctt7s7tq }}</ref> They argue that this democratic advantage is derived from the fact that democratic soldiers fight harder, democratic states tend to ally together in war, and democracies can employ more economic resources towards combat.<ref name="Reiter-2002" /> Due to elevated fears against military coups against authoritarian regimes, authoritarian regimes may also put loyalists in the military. This may reduce military effectiveness as loyalty is prioritized over experience when filling key positions within the military.<ref name="Talmadge-2015">{{Cite book |last=Talmadge |first=Caitlin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XRhJCgAAQBAJ |title=The Dictator's Army: Battlefield Effectiveness in Authoritarian Regimes |date=2015 |publisher=Cornell University Press |isbn=978-1-5017-0175-7 |language=en |access-date=27 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230803203553/https://books.google.com/books?id=XRhJCgAAQBAJ |archive-date=3 August 2023 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Narang-2017">{{Cite journal |last1=Narang |first1=Vipin |last2=Talmadge |first2=Caitlin |date=31 January 2017 |title=Civil-military Pathologies and Defeat in War |journal=Journal of Conflict Resolution |volume=62 |issue=7 |pages=1379–1405 |doi=10.1177/0022002716684627 |s2cid=151897298}}</ref><ref name="Biddle-1996">{{Cite journal |last1=Biddle |first1=Stephen |last2=Zirkle |first2=Robert |date=1996-06-01 |title=Technology, civil-military relations, and warfare in the developing world |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/01402399608437634 |url-status=live |journal=Journal of Strategic Studies |volume=19 |issue=2 |pages=171–212 |doi=10.1080/01402399608437634 |issn=0140-2390 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200430002634/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/01402399608437634 |archive-date=30 April 2020 |access-date=31 March 2021|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref name="Paine-2022">{{Cite journal |last=Paine |first=Jack |date=2022 |title=Reframing The Guardianship Dilemma: How the Military's Dual Disloyalty Options Imperil Dictators |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/reframing-the-guardianship-dilemma-how-the-militarys-dual-disloyalty-options-imperil-dictators/FAB035DCE1D5EA6CE383D3A7DFB48062 |url-status=live |journal=American Political Science Review |language=en |volume=116 |issue=4 |pages=1425–1442 |doi=10.1017/S0003055422000089 |issn=0003-0554 |s2cid=247278896 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220305000829/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/reframing-the-guardianship-dilemma-how-the-militarys-dual-disloyalty-options-imperil-dictators/FAB035DCE1D5EA6CE383D3A7DFB48062 |archive-date=5 March 2022 |access-date=4 March 2022|url-access=subscription }}</ref> However, critics argue that democracy itself makes little difference in war and that some other factors, such as overall power, determine whether a country would achieve victory or face defeat. In some cases, such as the [[Vietnam War]], democracy may even have contributed to defeat.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Downes |first=Alexander B. |date=2009 |title=How Smart and Tough Are Democracies? Reassessing Theories of Democratic Victory in War |journal=International Security |volume=33 |issue=4 |pages=9–51 |doi=10.1162/isec.2009.33.4.9 |issn=0162-2889 |jstor=40207151 |s2cid=5275270}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Reiter |first1=Dan |last2=Stam |first2=Allan C. |last3=Downes |first3=Alexander B. |date=2009 |title=Another Skirmish in the Battle over Democracies and War |journal=International Security |volume=34 |issue=2 |pages=194–204 |doi=10.1162/isec.2009.34.2.194 |issn=0162-2889 |jstor=40389217 |s2cid=18796232 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=Brown |first1=Michael E. |url=https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/do-democracies-win-their-wars |title=Do Democracies Win Their Wars? |last2=Coté |first2=Owen R. |last3=Lynn-Jones |first3=Sean M |last4=Miller |first4=Steven E. |date=2011 |publisher=The MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-51590-0 |series=International Security Readers |archive-date=1 July 2022 |access-date=18 January 2025 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220701145138/https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/do-democracies-win-their-wars |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Merom |first=Gil |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/how-democracies-lose-small-wars/74B08003103C8E81F94B7D2E4A1AD28D |title=How Democracies Lose Small Wars: State, Society, and the Failures of France in Algeria, Israel in Lebanon, and the United States in Vietnam. |date=2003 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-80403-5 |doi=10.1017/CBO9780511808227 |archive-date=11 April 2024 |access-date=18 January 2025 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240411173856/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/how-democracies-lose-small-wars/74B08003103C8E81F94B7D2E4A1AD28D |url-status=live }}</ref> Jasen Castillo argues that autocratic states may in certain circumstances have an advantage over democracies; for example, authoritarian regimes may have ideologies that require unconditional loyalty, which may contribute to military cohesion.<ref name="Castillo-2014">{{Cite book |last=Castillo |first=Jasen J. |title=Endurance and War: The National Sources of Military Cohesion |date=2014 |publisher=Stanford University Press |isbn=978-0-8047-8910-3 |doi=10.2307/j.ctvqr1d70 |jstor=j.ctvqr1d70}}</ref>
== Historical trends == === Pre-World War II === Authoritarian rule before World War II includes short-lived dictatorships and has been claimed to be understudied.<ref name="j455">{{cite book | last=Morgenbesser | first=Lee | title=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics | chapter=The Lost Works of Nondemocratic Rule | publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2024 | isbn=978-0-19-887199-6 | doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.62 | page=}}</ref>
=== Post-World War II anti-authoritarianism === {{main|Anti-authoritarianism}}
Both [[World War II]] (ending in 1945) and the [[Cold War]] (ending in 1991) resulted in the replacement of authoritarian regimes by either democratic regimes or regimes that were less authoritarian.
[[World War II]] saw the defeat of the [[Axis powers]] by the [[Allies of World War II|Allied powers]]. All the Axis powers ([[Nazi Germany]], [[Fascist Italy (1922–1943)|Fascist Italy]] and [[Empire of Japan|Imperial Japan]]) had totalitarian or authoritarian governments, and two of the three were replaced by governments based on democratic constitutions. The [[Allies of World War II|Allied powers]] were an alliance of Democratic states and (later) the Communist [[Soviet Union]]. At least in Western Europe the initial post-war era embraced pluralism and freedom of expression in areas that had been under control of authoritarian regimes. The memory of fascism and Nazism was denigrated. The new [[Federal Republic of Germany]] banned its expression. In reaction to the centralism of the Nazi state, the new constitution of West Germany ([[Federal Republic of Germany]]) exercised "[[separation of powers]]" and placed "[[Law enforcement in Germany|law enforcement]] firmly in the hands" of the sixteen ''[[States of Germany|Länder]]'' or states of the republic, not with the federal German government, at least not at first.<ref>[https://www.bmi.bund.de/EN/topics/security/federal-police/federal-police-node.html The Federal Police] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181005030924/https://www.bmi.bund.de/EN/topics/security/federal-police/federal-police-node.html |date=2018-10-05 }}. Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community of Germany</ref>
Culturally there was also a strong sense of anti-authoritarianism based on [[anti-fascism]] in Western Europe. This was attributed to the active resistance from [[German-occupied Europe|occupation]] and to fears arising from the development of [[superpower]]s.<ref name="swcjsb">{{cite book |title=Sign Wars: The Culture Jammers Strike Back! |last=Cox |first=David |year=2005 |publisher=LedaTape Organisation |isbn=978-0-9807701-5-5 |page=108 |url={{Google books |plainurl=yes |id=zKo8DrmamAwC |page= }} |access-date=22 October 2011}}</ref> Anti-authoritarianism also became associated with [[countercultural]] and [[Bohemianism|bohemian]] movements such as the [[Beat Generation]] in the 1950s,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.pbs.org/wnet/americannovel/timeline/beatgeneration.html|title=Retired Site PBS Programs|website=pbs.org|access-date=4 September 2016|archive-date=7 July 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070707044219/https://www.pbs.org/wnet/americannovel/timeline/beatgeneration.html|url-status=live}}</ref> the [[hippies]] in the 1960s<ref name="Stonepolitics">"The way of the hippie is antithetical to all repressive hierarchical power structures since they are adverse to the hippie goals of peace, love and freedom ... Hippies don't impose their beliefs on others. Instead, hippies seek to change the world through reason and by living what they believe."{{cite web |title=The Way of the Hippy |first=Skip |last=Stone |url=https://www.hipplanet.com/books/atoz/way.htm |website=www.hipplanet.com |access-date=16 May 2022 |archive-date=26 August 2003 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030826132408/https://www.hipplanet.com/books/atoz/way.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> and [[Punk subculture|punk]]s in the 1970s.<ref>{{Cite book| last = McLaughlin | first = Paul | title = Anarchism and Authority | publisher = Ashgate | location = Aldershot | year = 2007 | isbn = 978-0-7546-6196-2 | page = 10}}</ref>
In South America, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Chile and Uruguay moved away from dictatorships to democracy between 1982 and 1990.<ref>{{cite news |title=The challenge of the past |newspaper=The Economist |date=22 October 1998 |url=https://www.economist.com/the-americas/1998/10/22/the-challenge-of-the-past |access-date=17 October 2018 |archive-date=18 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181018043503/https://www.economist.com/the-americas/1998/10/22/the-challenge-of-the-past |url-status=live }}</ref>
With the fall of the [[Berlin Wall]] in 1989 and the [[Dissolution of the Soviet Union|Soviet Union]] in [[1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt|1991]], the other authoritarian/totalitarian "half" of the Allied Powers of World War II collapsed. This led not so much to revolt against authority in general, but to the belief that authoritarian states (and state control of economies) were outdated.<ref name="Tharoor-wapo-2017">{{cite news |last1=Tharoor |first1=Ishaan |title=The man who declared 'the end of history' fears for democracy's future |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/09/the-man-who-declared-the-end-of-history-fears-for-democracys-future/?noredirect=on |access-date=4 October 2018 |agency=Washington Post |date=9 February 2017 |archive-date=30 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181130030528/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/09/the-man-who-declared-the-end-of-history-fears-for-democracys-future/?noredirect=on |url-status=live }}</ref> The idea that "liberal democracy was the final form toward which all political striving was directed"<ref name="Ignatieff-nyrb"/> became very popular in Western countries and was celebrated in [[Francis Fukuyama]]'s book ''[[The End of History and the Last Man]]''.<ref name="Ignatieff-nyrb"/> According to Charles H. Fairbanks Jr., "all the new states that stumbled out of the ruins of the Soviet bloc, except Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, seemed indeed to be moving towards democracy in the early 1990s" as were the countries of East Central Europe and the Balkans.<ref name="causes-2014">{{cite web | last1=Fairbanks | first1=Charles H. Jr. |title=Causes of Authoritarianism in the Former Soviet Republics |url=https://ge.boell.org/en/2014/01/16/causes-authoritarianism-former-soviet-republics |website=Heinrich Boell Stiftung |access-date=5 October 2018 |date=16 January 2014 |archive-date=6 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181006000531/https://ge.boell.org/en/2014/01/16/causes-authoritarianism-former-soviet-republics |url-status=live }}</ref>
In December 2010, the [[Arab Spring]] arose in response to unrest over economic stagnation but also in opposition to oppressive authoritarian regimes, first in [[Tunisia]], and spreading to [[Libya]], [[Egypt]], [[Yemen]], [[Syria]], [[Bahrain]] and elsewhere. Regimes were toppled in [[Tunisia]], [[Libya]], [[Egypt]] and partially in [[Yemen]] while other countries saw riots, civil wars or insurgencies. Most Arab Spring revolutions failed to lead to enduring democratization. A decade after the Arab Spring, Tunisia stood as the sole, albeit fragile, democratic success story, while Egypt reverted to authoritarian military rule, and Libya, Syria, and Yemen descended into catastrophic civil wars.<ref>{{cite news|first=Matt|last=Bradley|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/10-years-after-arab-spring-autocratic-regimes-hold-upper-hand-n1251710|title=10 years after Arab Spring, autocratic regimes hold the upper hand|date=19 December 2020|publisher=NBC News|archive-date=28 May 2023|access-date=15 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230528122021/https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/10-years-after-arab-spring-autocratic-regimes-hold-upper-hand-n1251710|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|first=Kali|last=Robinson|date=2 December 2020|publisher=Council on Foreign Relations|title=The Arab Spring at Ten Years: What's the Legacy of the Uprisings?|url=https://www.cfr.org/article/arab-spring-ten-years-whats-legacy-uprisings|archive-date=1 June 2023|access-date=15 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230601220021/https://www.cfr.org/article/arab-spring-ten-years-whats-legacy-uprisings|url-status=live}}</ref>
=== 21st-century === Since 2005, observers noted what some have called a "[[democratic recession]]",<ref name="Ignatieff-nyrb">{{cite journal |last1=Ignatieff |first1=Michael |title=Are the Authoritarians Winning? |journal=New York Review of Books |date=10 July 2014 |volume=65 |issue=11 |access-date=4 October 2018 |url=https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2018/06/28/hitlers-rise-it-can-happen-here/ |archive-date=22 September 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180922122324/https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2018/06/28/hitlers-rise-it-can-happen-here/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Levitsky-myth">{{cite journal |last1=Levitsky |first1=Steven |last2=Way |first2=Lucan |title=The Myth of Democratic Recession |journal=Journal of Democracy |date=January 2015 |volume=26 |issue=1 |pages=45–58 |access-date=4 October 2018 |url=https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/Levitsky-26-1.pdf |doi=10.1353/jod.2015.0007 |s2cid=154831503 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180828220545/http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/Levitsky-26-1.pdf |archive-date=28 August 2018 }}</ref> although some such as Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way have disputed that there was a significant democratic decline before 2013.<ref name="Levitsky-myth"/> In 2018, the [[Freedom House]] declared that from 2006 to 2018 "113 countries" around the world showed "a net decline" in "political rights and civil liberties" while "only 62" experienced "a net improvement."<ref name="FH-2018">{{cite web |title=Freedom in the World 2018 Democracy in Crisis |url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2018 |website=Freedom House |access-date=4 October 2018 |archive-date=7 October 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191007111055/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Its 2020 report marked the fourteenth consecutive year of declining scores.<ref>{{cite web |title=New Report: Freedom in the World 2020 finds established democracies are in decline |url=https://freedomhouse.org/article/new-report-freedom-world-2020-finds-established-democracies-are-decline |website=Freedom House |access-date=20 September 2020 |language=en |archive-date=15 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200915184801/https://freedomhouse.org/article/new-report-freedom-world-2020-finds-established-democracies-are-decline |url-status=live }}</ref> By 2020, all countries marked as "not free" by [[Freedom House]] had also developed practices of [[transnational repression]], aiming to police and control dissent beyond state borders.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tsourapas|first=Gerasimos|date=2020|title=Global Autocracies: Strategies of Transnational Repression, Legitimation, and Co-Optation in World Politics|journal=International Studies Review|volume=23|issue=3|pages=616–644|language=en|doi=10.1093/isr/viaa061 |issn=1521-9488|doi-access=free}}</ref> {| class="wikitable" style="float:right" |+ International trends in<br /> democracy/authoritarianism |- ! ! countries becoming<br /> more democratic ! countries becoming<br /> more authoritarian |- ! late 1990s | 72 | 3 |- ! 2021 | 15 | 33 |- | colspan=3 style="text-align: center;" |<small>source: V-Dem<ref name="Leonhardt-NYT-17-9-22">{{cite news |last1=Leonhardt |first1=David |title=Democracy Challenged 'A Crisis Coming': The Twin Threats to American Democracy |newspaper=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html |access-date=20 September 2022 |agency=New York Times |date=17 September 2022 |archive-date=1 November 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231101094836/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="V-Dem-2022">{{cite web |title=Democracy Report 2022 Autocratization Changing Nature? |url=https://v-dem.net/media/publications/dr_2022.pdf |website=V-Dem |access-date=20 September 2022 |archive-date=2 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220302141653/https://v-dem.net/media/publications/dr_2022.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref></small> |}
Writing in 2018, American political journalist [[David Frum]] stated: "The hopeful world of the very late 20th century{{snd}}the world of [[NAFTA]] and an expanding [[NATO]]; of the World Wide Web 1.0 and liberal interventionism; of the global spread of democracy under leaders such as [[Václav Havel]] and [[Nelson Mandela]]{{snd}}now looks battered and delusive."<ref name="Frum-liberalism">{{cite journal |last1=Frum |first1=David |title=The Republican Party Needs to Embrace Liberalism |journal=Atlantic |date=November 2018 |access-date=4 October 2018 |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/the-case-for-liberal-republicanism/570790/ |archive-date=4 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181004141954/https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/the-case-for-liberal-republicanism/570790/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
[[Michael Ignatieff]] wrote that Fukuyama's idea of liberalism vanquishing authoritarianism "now looks like a quaint artifact of a vanished unipolar moment"<ref name="Ignatieff-nyrb"/> and Fukuyama himself expressed concern.<ref name="Tharoor-wapo-2017"/> By 2018, only one Arab Spring uprising (that in Tunisia) resulted in a transition to constitutional democratic governance<ref name="NYRB-Ruthven">{{cite journal|last1=Ruthven|first1=Malise|title=How to Understand ISIS|journal=New York Review of Books|date=23 June 2016|volume=63|issue=11|url=http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/06/23/how-to-understand-isis/|access-date=12 June 2016|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160807014415/http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/06/23/how-to-understand-isis/|archive-date=7 August 2016}}</ref> and a "resurgence of authoritarianism and [[Islamic extremism]]" in the region<ref>{{cite web |author=Phua |first=Yun Ru |date=31 March 2015 |title=After Every Winter Comes Spring: Tunisia's Democratic Flowering – Berkeley Political Review |url=http://bpr.berkeley.edu/2015/03/30/after-every-winter-comes-spring-tunisias-democratic-flowering/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729220649/https://bpr.berkeley.edu/2015/03/30/after-every-winter-comes-spring-tunisias-democratic-flowering/ |archive-date=29 July 2017 |access-date=11 February 2017 |publisher=Bpr.berkeley.edu}}</ref> was dubbed the [[Arab Winter]].<ref name=telegraph>{{cite web |url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/9753123/Middle-East-review-of-2012-the-Arab-Winter.html |title= Middle East review of 2012: the Arab Winter |work= The Telegraph |date= 31 December 2012 |access-date= 19 July 2014 |archive-date= 10 June 2019 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20190610162006/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/9753123/Middle-East-review-of-2012-the-Arab-Winter.html |url-status= live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | publisher = The Jerusalem Post | url = https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Analysis-Arab-Winter-is-coming-to-Baghdad-359348 | title = Analysis: Arab Winter is coming to Baghdad | work = The Telegraph | access-date = 8 October 2014 | archive-date = 14 July 2019 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190714211712/https://www.jpost.com//Middle-East/Analysis-Arab-Winter-is-coming-to-Baghdad-359348 | url-status = live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2014/April/Expert-Warns-of-Americas-Coming-Arab-Winter/ |title=Expert Warns of America's Coming 'Arab Winter' |date=8 September 2014 |publisher=CBN |access-date=8 October 2014 |archive-date=9 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181209063914/http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2014/april/expert-warns-of-americas-coming-arab-winter |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url= http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-arab-winter |title= The Arab Winter |magazine= The New Yorker |date= 28 December 2011 |access-date= 8 October 2014 |archive-date= 25 September 2018 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180925113516/https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-arab-winter |url-status= live }}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url= http://www.spu.edu/about-spu/news/articles/2014/may/arab-spring |title= Arab Spring or Arab Winter? |magazine= The New Yorker |access-date= 8 October 2014 |archive-date= 18 July 2019 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20190718054118/https://spu.edu/about-spu/news/articles/2014/may/arab-spring |url-status= live }}</ref>
Various explanations have been offered for the new spread of authoritarianism. They include the downside of globalization, and the subsequent rise of [[populism]] and [[neo-nationalism]],<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bhagavan |first1=Manu |title=We are witnessing the rise of global authoritarianism on a chilling scale |url=https://qz.com/643497/we-are-witnessing-the-rise-of-global-authoritarianism-on-a-chilling-scale/ |website=Qz.com |date=21 March 2016 |access-date=4 October 2018 |archive-date=4 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181004230109/https://qz.com/643497/we-are-witnessing-the-rise-of-global-authoritarianism-on-a-chilling-scale/ |url-status=live }}</ref> and the success of the [[Beijing Consensus]], i.e. the authoritarian model of the [[People's Republic of China]].<ref name="Cowen-2017-success">{{cite web |last1=Cowen |first1=Tyler |date=3 April 2017 |title=Opinion: China's Success Explains Authoritarianism's Allure |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/china-s-success-explains-authoritarianism-s-allure |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180818160326/https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/china-s-success-explains-authoritarianism-s-allure |archive-date=2018-08-18 |access-date=4 October 2018 |website=Bloomberg}}</ref> In countries such as the United States, factors blamed for the growth of authoritarianism include the [[2008 financial crisis]] and slower real wage growth<ref name="Cowen-2017-why">{{cite web |last1=Cowen |first1=Tyler |title=Why is authoritarianism on the rise? |url=https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/04/why-is-authoritarianism-on-the-rise.html |website=marginalrevolution.com |access-date=4 October 2018 |date=4 April 2017 |archive-date=5 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181005071800/https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/04/why-is-authoritarianism-on-the-rise.html |url-status=live }}</ref>{{better source needed|date=November 2025}} as well as social media's elimination of so-called "gatekeepers" of knowledge – the equivalent of [[disintermediation]] in economics – so that a large fraction of the population considers to be opinion what were once "viewed as verifiable facts" – including everything from the danger of global warming to the preventing the spread of disease through vaccination – and considers to be fact what are actually only unproven fringe opinions.<ref>{{cite web |last=Kaiser |first=Charles |date=8 April 2018 |title=Can it Happen Here? review: urgent studies in rise of authoritarian America (Review of Cass Sunstein book ''Can It Happen Here?: Authoritarianism in America'') |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/apr/07/can-it-happen-here-review-trump-republicans-authoritarian-america-fascism |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181004225913/https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/apr/07/can-it-happen-here-review-trump-republicans-authoritarian-america-fascism |archive-date=4 October 2018 |access-date=4 October 2018 |website=The Guardian}}</ref>
In [[Politics of the United States|United States politics]], [[White supremacy|white supremacist]] groups such as the [[Ku Klux Klan]], [[White power skinhead|neo-Nazi skinheads]], and adherents of the [[Christian Identity]], ideology have long operated as a loose network. In the [[Information Age|internet age]], far-right extremists throughout the U.S. and much of the West have consolidated further into a movement known as the [[Alt-right|Alt-Right]], which has inspired numerous [[Right-wing terrorism|terrorist attacks]] while at the same time increasing the mainstream appeal of white supremacism.<ref name="Azani-2020" /> According to Azani et al.:<ref name="Azani-2020" /><blockquote>The current resurgence of far-right ideology may be explained by a variety of factors, primarily, the strategic adjustment of white supremacists to soften overtly racist rhetoric in order to appeal to a wider audience. This new discourse attempts to normalize white supremacy, developing intellectual and theoretical foundations for racism based on the notion that the white race is at risk of eradication, threatened by the growing population of immigrants and people of colour. The pre-existing, offensive white supremacist, fascist and neo-Nazi ideas that drove the white power movement of the twentieth century were thus rebranded through a new innocuous defensive frame of white victimhood. As such, the new strategy of racist rhetoric has allowed the movement to co-opt mainstream political debates surrounding immigration and globalization, drawing large audiences through a deliberate obfuscation of the underlying ideology.</blockquote>Far-right extremism has played a key role in promoting the [[Great Replacement]] and [[White genocide conspiracy theory|White genocide conspiracy theories]], and an "[[Accelerationism#Far-right accelerationist terrorism|acceleration]]" of racial conflict through violent means such as [[assassination]]s, [[murder]]s, [[Right-wing terrorism|terrorist attacks]], and [[societal collapse]] in order to achieve the building of a [[white ethnostate]].<ref name="Azani-2020">{{Cite book |last1=Azani |first1=Eitan |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep30906.6 |title=The Far Right – Ideology, Modus Operandi and Development Trends |last2=Koblenz-Stenzler |first2=Liram |last3=Atiyas-Lvovsky |first3=Lorena |last4=Ganor |first4=Dan |last5=Ben-Am |first5=Arie |last6=Meshulam |first6=Delilah |publisher=International Institute for Counter-Terrorism |year=2020 |pages=13–36 |chapter=The Development and Characterization of Far-Right Ideologies |archive-date=12 June 2024 |access-date=12 June 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240612212022/https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep30906.6 |url-status=live }}</ref> While many contemporary extreme far-right groups eschew the hierarchical structure of other authoritarian political organizations, they often explicitly promote cultural authoritarianism alongside [[xenophobia]], racism, antisemitism, [[homophobia]] and misogyny, as well as authoritarian government interventions against perceived societal problems.<ref name="Azani-2020" />
=== Contemporary === There is no one consensus definition of authoritarianism, but several annual measurements are attempted. States characterized as authoritarian are typically not rated as democracies by [[The Economist Democracy Index]] or as 'free' by [[Freedom House|Freedom House's]] ''[[Freedom in the World]]'' index, and do not reach a high score on [[V-Dem Democracy Indices]]. According to an April 2025 survey, known as Bright Line Watch, of more than 500 U.S.-based political scientists, the vast majority think the United States is moving from liberal democracy to a form of authoritarianism.<ref>{{cite news |title=Hundreds of scholars say U.S. is swiftly heading toward authoritarianism |url=https://www.npr.org/2026/01/01/1267665416/us-scholars-trump-authoritarianism |agency=NPR |date=22 April 2025}}</ref>
== See also == {{div col|colwidth=22em}} * [[Absolute monarchy]] * [[Authoritarian capitalism]] * [[Authoritarian conservatism]] * [[Authoritarian nationalism]] * [[Authoritarian socialism]] * [[Criticism of democracy]] * [[Left-wing dictatorship]] * [[List of current state leaders by date of assumption of office]] * [[Managed democracy]] * [[Religion and authoritarianism]] * [[Right-wing dictatorship]] * [[Techno-authoritarianism]] * [[U.S. policy toward authoritarian governments]] {{div col end}}
== Notes == {{notelist}}
==References== '''Citations''' {{reflist}}
==Bibliography== * {{cite book |last=Amandae |first=Sonja |date=2003 |title=Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy: The Cold War Origins of Rational Choice Liberalism |publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]] |isbn=978-0-226-01654-2}} * {{cite book |last=Huntington |first=Samuel P. |date=1970 |title=Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society: The Dynamics of Established One-party Systems |publisher=[[Basic Books]] |isbn=978-0-465-00569-7}} * Linz, Juan J. (1964). "An Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Spain". In Allard, Eric; Littunen, Yrjo. ''Cleavages, Ideologies and Party Systems''. Helsinki: Academic Bookstore. * {{cite journal |last=Löwy |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Löwy |date=1986 |title=Mass organization, party, and state: Democracy in the transition to socialism |journal=Transition and Development: Problems of Third World Socialism |volume=94}}
==Further reading== * Frantz; Erica; Geddes, Barbara; Wrights, Joseph (2018). ''How Dictatorships Work''. Cambridge University Press. {{doi|10.1017/9781316336182}}. * Sanna Lundquist, Jan Teorell, Michael Wahman & Faradj Koliev. 2026. "[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13510347.2026.2631659 Updated data and new insight: a new version of WTH’s authoritarian regime type dataset]." ''Democratization.''
== External links == * {{Wikiquote-inline|Authoritarianism}}
{{authoritarian types of rule}} {{navboxes |list= {{fascism}} {{Political ideologies}} {{forms of government footer}} {{Political philosophy}} {{Conformity}} }} {{authority control}}
[[Category:Authoritarianism| ]] [[Category:Authority]] [[Category:Political culture]] [[Category:Political theories]] [[Category:Social theories]] [[Category:Political systems]] [[Category:Political repression]]