Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
‘The Path to American Authoritarianism’

‘The Path to American Authoritarianism’

Last updated on: February 17, 2025 at 4:30 pm by Fred Clark

0 Comments

‘The Path to American Authoritarianism’ 2025-02-17T16:30:17-05:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This is grim reading, but it’s a clear-eyed look at what “competitive authoritarianism” entails. This is the form of quasi-democratic, quasi-freedom experienced under the growing form of dictator-ish regimes that have emerged in many countries after the end of the Cold War — and that the U.S. is racing toward right now. Here is a taste from Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Wray’s Foreign Affairs piece, “The Path to American Authoritarianism“:

Competitive authoritarianism—a system in which parties compete in elections but the incumbent’s abuse of power tilts the playing field against the opposition. Most autocracies that have emerged since the end of the Cold War fall into this category, including Alberto Fujimori’s Peru, Hugo Chávez’s Venezuela, and contemporary El Salvador, Hungary, India, Tunisia, and Turkey. Under competitive authoritarianism, the formal architecture of democracy, including multiparty elections, remains intact. Opposition forces are legal and aboveground, and they contest seriously for power. Elections are often fiercely contested battles in which incumbents have to sweat it out. And once in a while, incumbents lose, as they did in Malaysia in 2018 and in Poland in 2023. But the system is not democratic, because incumbents rig the game by deploying the machinery of government to attack opponents and co-opt critics. Competition is real but unfair.

Competitive authoritarianism will transform political life in the United States. As Trump’s early flurry of dubiously constitutional executive orders made clear, the cost of public opposition will rise considerably: Democratic Party donors may be targeted by the IRS; businesses that fund civil rights groups may face heightened tax and legal scrutiny or find their ventures stymied by regulators. Critical media outlets will likely confront costly defamation suits or other legal actions as well as retaliatory policies against their parent companies. Americans will still be able to oppose the government, but opposition will be harder and riskier, leading many elites and citizens to decide that the fight is not worth it. A failure to resist, however, could pave the way for authoritarian entrenchment—with grave and enduring consequences for global democracy.

Again, this is both very grim and very real. But it’s also not unprecedented right here in the U.S. of A. The “real but unfair” existence of stacked-deck democracy and the weaponization of every government office against opposition is exactly what non-white Americans lived with and lived through for most of the 20th century. The Trump/Musk effort to railroad the country into “competitive authoritarianism” is, essentially, an attempt to create a MAGA-version of Jim Crow.

There will be blood. Freedom Riders John Lewis and James Zwerg after one of the many beatings they were subjected to in 1961.

“Most autocracies that have emerged since the end of the Cold War fall into this category,” Levitsky and Wray argue. But this is also what “democracy” looked like in much of America before the beginning of the Cold War — before the Civil Rights Movement briefly forced America to begin treating the Reconstruction Amendments as actual, meaningful law and its theoretical protections began, haltingly — and temporarily — to be applied to all of its citizens more equally.

The explicitly segregationist and patriarchal “anti-DEI” fever shows that this new Jim Crow will include most of the features of the original — with similar implications for the original targets. But it will also be expanded to restrict and punish — to “bind, but not protect” — others based on their willingness to demonstrate fealty and obsequious loyalty.

The flagrant corruption of this new Jim Crow — the revival of the spoils system and overt kickbacks for exemptions from targeting, from harassment, from selective enforcement, from tariffs, etc. — isn’t really a new feature either. Economic corruption was also a foundation of the original system.

The parallel here isn’t exact in every detail, but it’s close enough to shape our forecast and expectations. And also close enough to shape our response and to allow us to learn how to resist, overcome, and overthrow this latest revision of an unjust, evil, sad system.

Understanding that history is grounds for hope. It shows that resistance is possible, and that it can succeed. But this is a daunting hope — a reminder that resistance and success are neither easy nor guaranteed.

The grade-school version of the Civil Rights Movement — now forbidden to be discussed in grade schools — makes it seem simple and inevitable. Rosa Parks sat on a bus, Martin Luther King Jr. gave some speeches, there were a few big protest marches, and then voila — equal protection, equality, and civil rights for all. But all of those steps were the product of years of planning and organizing — decades of work involving tens of thousands of people organizing locally. This recent BlueSky thread describes it well. The Civil Rights Movement:

… was not a sudden uprising of marches and actions, resulting in quick change. It was a carefully built machine, with test cases, trials, and planning. Extensive, intensive planning and training. Leaders weren’t magical negroes, born fully equipped to battle racism. They were cultivated, educated, and hardened to withstand fire hoses, dogs, and violence, and to use their voices with careful force.

It was disciplined work, plain and simple, not impulse and scattershot fury.

It was not quick. Whether you take voting rights, desegregation, or something else as your starting point, the Civil Rights Movement began the second slaves were freed. It took one hundred years to coalesce into the movement we studied, however briefly, in school.

Preventing, or beating back the new “American Authoritarianism” will not be a sprint. It will not be quick or easy. But it also will not be joyless, hopeless, or unrewarding.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

February 16, 2025

Sunday reading

Next Post

February 18, 2025 Ain't that America

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"https://uploads.disquscdn.c..."

reynard61

Cycling down the widening gyre

"OT: There is a release date! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upnkhFNuD_w28th January 2027!I’m mentally rearranging my budget to accommodate ..."

Matri

On the aesthetics of Saddam Hussein

"Zuck has apparently decided that he's never Meta fascist he didn't like. 😒"

reynard61

Cycling down the widening gyre

"https://uploads.disquscdn.c..."

Matri

On the aesthetics of Saddam Hussein

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does Hebrews define as "confidence in what we hope for"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Righteousness Faith Love Salvation