Authoritarianism

In politics the abuses of both progressive and conservative political movements are due to Authoritarianism rather than Communism, Socialism, Fascism or any other any other political and economic systems that have existed. The ones that are good allow the most freedom to citizens in both social and economic terms, and the ones that are bad restrict those freedoms.

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.” -George Orwell, 1984

Dystopias provide counter-examples to be avoided. Don't be a bootlicker. Avoid Orwell's warning and choose the freedom.

See Authority and Balance of Power for relevant discussions of power dynamics.

In case you didn't know, authoritarianism is bad.

One Thing We Can Agree On

Typical right-wing arguments against Socialism use the most authoritarian counter-examples, like the USSR or Venezuela under Chavez, when there are plenty of examples of European countries that thrive under various forms of social democracy with much greater degrees of personal freedom than the US. That additional freedom (and the happiness citizens report as a result) is apparent when you consider the economic freedom that the vast majority of people gain via social safety nets, universal health care and employment regulations. These protect citizens from the ups and downs of capitalism and ensures a minimum standard of living regardless of circumstance. Freedom from destitution is desirable.

Typical left-wing arguments against Fascism tend to compare all things right-wing to Hitler, even though Libertarians have been ahead of the Democratic Party on drug legalization, gay marriage, opposing the police state, and a number of other progressive social issues despite leaning right on economic policy.

In the vast majority of modern online discourse, anyone who labels someone else a Communist, Socialist, or Fascist can be substituted with Authoritarian and the result will be more politically and historically accurate and less partisan. Self-described communists and fascists notwithstanding.

We should strive to minimize support for authoritarian leaders, and to set up balance of power systems in government and the economy to limit the damage they can do. This should be something that progressives, conservatives, and libertarians can all agree on.

Theories of Authoritarian Control

There is a common pattern in the ways that authoritarian leaders exert their control upon those who follow them, be they heads of state, CEOs, religious figures, or even family members. High-control groups are typically referred to as cults, but they can be formed around any in-group or subculture, not just New Religious Movements.

The BITE Model of Authoritarian Control provides a comprehensive checklist of authoritarian control techniques that you can use to determine if a particular group, political movement, or group leader, has authoritarian tendencies that you should be wary of.

Regardless of any differences we have in our ideology, religion, culture, or opinions on the best ways to seek happiness, we should all agree that authoritarian control techniques are taboo, and those who seek to use them should be ashamed of themselves.

Regality theory or the theory of regal and kungic societal structures relates perceived safety and fear to support for hierarchy and authoritarianism. When people don't feel safe, they tend to support leaders that project power and retributive justice against the perceived causes of crime and instability. Negativity bias in the media creates a feedback loop where profit motives incentivize outrage and fear based reporting, causing people to support authoritarian leaders that amplify these fear-based messages. Even in one of the most "kungic" societies in history (stable, safe, peaceful), we have unprecedented levels of fear and anxiety leading us to give up democracy and freedom to save us from fears that are mostly in our heads.