Dictionnaire de la Science Politique

Authors: Hermet, Badie, Birnbaum & Braud
Summary: The entry, of about 750 words, points out the possible meanings of the term and its defining features as identified by several authors. This concept is considered too inclusive, since it could be applied to very different regimes, from French Bonapartism to Italian Fascism, from Franco's dictatorship to African military regimes.
Regarding the criteria to classify such regimes, J. Linz identified one in limited pluralism, where competition for power, take it place or not in a dictatorial context, is not free but influenced by the ruling class. H. Arendt identified another in violence: while selective repression of political adversaries pertains to authoritarianism, indiscriminate terror exerted over the whole population is typical of totalitarianism. Still another criterion is ideology: in contrast with totalitarian regimes based on the founding ideal of a new world, where state and society are closely intertwined, authoritarianism tends to preserve what already exists, to strengthen the state without ideological justification. According to Eisenstadt, the notion of neo-patrimonialism is helpful to identify those regimes (especially in eastern Africa) where rulers behave as if the state were their private property. Lastly, S. Huntington defines praetorian those regimes where a specialized group (e.g. the military) wields power in the absence of any other political class capable to govern the country.
Those summarized above are only some of the concepts related to authoritarianism; other examples mentioned by the author are populism as practiced by charismatic leaders (e.g. J.Peron) or Caesarism as proposed by Gramsci with reference to plebiscitary regimes.