An Overview of Left-Wing Authoritarianism and Authoritarian Liberalism (Cultural + Social + Economic)

Democracy 4
1
  1. The Atlantic:
  1. The Irish Times:
  1. New Statesmen:
  1. Emory:

  1. Right-wing Authoritarianism, Left-wing Authoritarianism, and pandemic-mitigation authoritarianism (nih.gov)

  2. Left-Wing Authoritarianism: Myth or Reality? on JSTOR

  3. Authoritarian socialism - Wikipedia

Study with a differing view:

  1. The Myth of Left-Wing Authoritarianism on JSTOR

Authoritarian Liberalism:

  1. Authoritarian liberalism between market capitalism and democracy: critical and neoliberal perspectives | SpringerLink

  2. Microsoft Word - Wilkinson Copyedited 18-2018 final.docx (ssrn.com)

  3. An Authoritarian Liberal Europe? In Conversation with Michael Wilkinson | Review of Democracy (ceu.edu)

  4. Authoritarian capitalism - Wikipedia

  5. “Post-Communism Era”, “Post-Democracy Era”, in the face of “authoritarian liberalism” - Modern Diplomacy

A centrist perspective on these different kinds of authoritarianism:

  1. Opinion | What’s Happening on the Left Is No Excuse for What’s Happening on the Right - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

The left dominates American Academia (which might preclude imagining some questions):

  1. Political views of American academics - Wikipedia

Academic Bias:

  1. Academic bias - Wikipedia

What I mean by this post is that if social psychologists (barring a few exceptions) can ignore (or not conceive of) an important and well-established concept such as left-wing authoritarianism as witnessed in the Stalinist Soviet Union, Maoist China, Pol-Pot Cambodia and others, due to their own leftist bias, it’s conceivable that research in other fields as demonstrated in my “Euthanasia, Abortion and Tech” post with respect to “detranstition” can be suppressed, then it stands that such suppression or lack of inquiry (perhaps because the question is never imagined of) can occur in other topics. As to why conservatives never considered such a proposition, it might be because they are politically uninterested in finding out the links between euthanasia, abortion and tech, and are solely focused on abolishing them.

We shouldn’t let ideological, procedural or methodological authority prevent us from examining topics or thinking up of new ideas just because we may disagree with them, or they may not seem relevant at first glance, or not adhere strictly to established means of measurement (they might require new means of measurement).

And that’s why I think that my ideas in that post were not insane or useless.