CONCEPT
Authoritarianism
Authoritarianism is a contested way of classifying regimes and practices that restrict political competition or undermine accountability. It is not a synonym for authority, autocracy, dictatorship, fascism, or totalitarianism, and one coercive act does not classify an entire political order.
Sources for this overview 3 claims
definition
Linz's ideal type distinguishes authoritarian regimes by limited, non-responsible pluralism, weak or absent guiding ideology, restricted mobilization, and formally unclear but generally predictable limits on leadership.
definition
Glasius argues that actions which sabotage accountability should be analyzed as authoritarian practices even when they occur outside a regime classified as authoritarian.
editorial interpretation
A regime-level autocracy classification and an analysis of authoritarian practices can overlap without being synonyms: one classifies political orders by stated thresholds, while the other identifies patterns that undermine accountability.
Definition
Definition
Which definition is being used?
Linz's influential regime type emphasizes limited pluralism, restricted mobilization, weak guiding ideology, and leadership exercised within unclear but generally predictable limits. Glasius instead asks whether a pattern of action sabotages accountability, allowing analysis of authoritarian practices inside more than one regime type.
Sources for “Which definition is being used?” 2 claims
definition
Linz's ideal type distinguishes authoritarian regimes by limited, non-responsible pluralism, weak or absent guiding ideology, restricted mobilization, and formally unclear but generally predictable limits on leadership.
definition
Glasius argues that actions which sabotage accountability should be analyzed as authoritarian practices even when they occur outside a regime classified as authoritarian.
How do autocracy and dictatorship differ?
Regimes of the World uses autocracy as a measured category and distinguishes closed from electoral autocracies while marking uncertain boundaries. Geddes, Wright, and Frantz argue that how a seizure group organizes can persist after it takes power and shape who influences later decisions. Márquez distinguishes the bounded Roman emergency office from a modern concept concerned with political authority and legitimation.
Sources for “How do autocracy and dictatorship differ?” 5 claims
definition
The Regimes of the World measure separates closed from electoral autocracies according to elections and democratic prerequisites, while recording uncertainty near category boundaries.
causal hypothesis
Geddes, Wright, and Frantz argue that differences in how groups that initiate dictatorships organize and make decisions persist after seizure and shape who influences later decisions.
definition
Márquez describes early Roman dictatorship as an office with enlarged powers for a specific emergency, constrained by customary expectations that the holder resign after completing the task.
definition
Márquez argues that the modern idea of dictatorship shifted attention from a ruler's character toward the authority and legitimation of political rule.
editorial interpretation
A regime-level autocracy classification and an analysis of authoritarian practices can overlap without being synonyms: one classifies political orders by stated thresholds, while the other identifies patterns that undermine accountability.
Why is totalitarianism not just stronger authoritarianism?
Linz reserved totalitarianism for an ideal type with a monistic power center, guiding ideology, and extensive mobilization. That distinction is analytically useful without implying that every historical regime fits cleanly into one box.
Sources for “Why is totalitarianism not just stronger authoritarianism?” 2 claims
definition
In Linz's analysis, limited pluralism and constrained mobilization distinguish authoritarian regimes from the monistic power center, guiding ideology, and extensive mobilization associated with totalitarian regimes.
definition
Linz's totalitarian ideal type combines a monistic power center, an exclusive guiding ideology, and extensive political mobilization.
What remains disputed?
Scholars use authoritarianism, autocracy, and dictatorship with overlapping but nonidentical meanings. The safest comparison names the definition, institution, period, and evidence instead of turning a ruler's style into a timeless national label.
Sources for “What remains disputed?” 3 claims
definition
Márquez argues that the modern idea of dictatorship shifted attention from a ruler's character toward the authority and legitimation of political rule.
definition
Glasius argues that actions which sabotage accountability should be analyzed as authoritarian practices even when they occur outside a regime classified as authoritarian.
editorial interpretation
A regime-level autocracy classification and an analysis of authoritarian practices can overlap without being synonyms: one classifies political orders by stated thresholds, while the other identifies patterns that undermine accountability.
REFERENCE
Usage and orientation
How published approaches use this idea 1
core
Linz's regime analysis
An ideal type based on pluralism, ideology, mobilization, and leadership limits.
definition
Linz's ideal type distinguishes authoritarian regimes by limited, non-responsible pluralism, weak or absent guiding ideology, restricted mobilization, and formally unclear but generally predictable limits on leadership.