Authoritarianism is the real ‘New World Order’
Exploring what it means to ‘return’ to authoritarianism in a post cold war era
Love L. L. Lundy
Department of Political Science, Spelman College
PSC 325-02: Comparative Political Systems
Dr. Kasahun Woldemariam
December 5, 2022
Introduction
America is not innocent. The nation is just as coercive as any country ridiculed in
comparative politics. Like almost all nations, The United States preserves decade-old ideas about
what makes it so great, in the American case: democracy. The United States has gone to physical
and metaphorical war over ensuring that democracy was the reigning political system worldwide.
American ideologies promote the idea that the Cold War is the only one the United States indeed
‘won.’ However, that would mean that the opposing countries would recognize that democracy is
the apparent solution to all problems. This paper aims to realize that significant countries
involved in the Cold War meant what they said during the war – there is little to no interest in
adopting a liberal democracy or anything concerning liberalism.
Defining authoritarianism and what keeps it alive
Like most political systems, authoritarianism is broad and complex. This is one of the
things that makes creating a hybrid system that includes authoritarianism so simple – it has
limited requirements. This political system is described as “blind submission to authority.” One
person or small group of people are in complete control of a nation but have no constitutional
boundaries or legal accountability surrounding their domain (Britannica). Generally, one person
is in control and can truthfully do whatever they want. Maintaining authoritarian rule can be
complicated in the beginning as the nation works out how to withstand mental control over
citizens. However, disbanding authoritarian rule can be incredibly difficult once the proper
political culture and socialization are set in place.
Defining Liberal Democracy and what keeps it alive
In a democracy, a nation’s citizens have fundamental rights and are heavily involved in
the political process. In fact, there are regular elections. The concept of accountability is
essentially the core principle of democracy. When an elected official misbehaves according to
the law, several routes can be taken to ensure that that official is held accountable. Keeping
democracy alive involves ensuring that citizens feel that their rights are not being abridged and
maintaining the stability of the current government with precision.
Cold War Conflict
It may seem impossible to believe that the world leaders involved in the Cold War did not
realize the impact this dispute had on their nations and citizens. Based on the longevity of this
conflict, perhaps world leaders truly felt that blindly spending trillions of dollars and sending
thousands of soldiers out to die would eventually settle this ideological war surrounding
democracy vs. authoritarian rule. Understanding that world leaders rarely interface with
accountability, the cold war must be studied for what it is: a lazy attempt by world leaders to get
what they want under the guise that it is for the greater good of their citizens. Again, there is no
innocence – there are no good guys. Ronald Raegan, the king of warping American mindsets,
even had the gumption to proclaim to a group of students at Notre Dame University that the
years coming would see an abundance of freedom, describing communism as “a sad, bizarre
chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written” (McDougall). I digress to
mention that this is ironic considering the reign of captivity that Reagan pulled down on
American citizens during his presidency. Moreover, there is a broad misconception of the
political direction of the post-cold war world due to American nationalism, which is much more
influential than global citizens are led to believe.
It is essential to understand that after the cold war, the United States was considered the
uni power of the world. While Americans may have felt that they were always the global uni
power, there was a fragile period where this fact was. Today, America is not even close to being
alone in its world domination. This rampant nationalism has led people to believe that countries
were expected to diligently fall into democracy after the end of the Cold War. Instead, an article
in the Journal of Democracy explains that many nations established hybrid regimes or
completely retained authoritarian rule. (Levitsky and Way) This paper acknowledges the
overwhelming shadow of hope for democracy in writings about how nations proceeded post-cold
war. This want for democracy scrambles the actual facts regarding the governing styles of these
nations and fails to recognize that most of these regimes lack democratic values if there are any
at all – and these nations feel no shame regarding that or urgency to begin a transitional period to
democracy that the outside world often expects of them. Publicly, the perception was a
prolonged, steady global shift towards democracy. Indeed, for many, the Cold War validated and
solidified the authoritarian rule that the world uni power was convinced it had eradicated.
Afghanistan
The absurdity of blind American nationalism and love for democracy are highlighted in
understanding Afghanistan's current political state. Afghanistan exists under authoritarian rule,
which pre-dates the start of the Cold War in the mid-1940s. Authoritarianism has persisted as the
premiere way of thought despite the efforts of the Cold War. Afghanistan is the only country that
the Soviet Union invaded outside of the Eastern bloc (Office of the Historian, Foreign Service
Institute). That is an indicator of the USSR's faith in maintaining its authoritarian ways in
Afghanistan. A report on the Causes and Consequences of Destabilization in Afghanistan
suggests what is known about the pompous energy of American political scientists – Americans
believe that Afghanistan would be in better shape today had American troops remained in
Afghanistan supporting self-proclaimed freedom fighters (Hanifi). This belief may consider that
without American presence, those who committed the acts of 9/11 began to form and plot.
However, Hanifi promotes the fact that both the USSR and the United States have little to do
with the current state of Afghanistan – both nations just exacerbated issues that were in place
before the Cold War started. In short – authoritarianism is not some weak political ideology that
the United States can just in and conquer. Like China, the nation of Afghanistan has a longstanding relationship with conservatism that informs its current political position (News Desk at
PBS). Currently, the U.S. Department of State informs the American people that they do not
recognize the Taliban, an extremist entity, as the official Afghan government. America widely
denounces almost all the actions taken by Afghanistan and will continue to do so until
democracy progresses there. This nation represents the mental block that exists in understanding
how a country obtains and maintains its political structure. Afghanistan was not startled by the
Cold War's attempts and democratization.
Iran
Iran represents this essay’s hybrid political system. It is the only nation in the world
functioning under a constitutional theocracy. This means that the rule of law must coincide with
religious morality and the “will of God.” Also, this allows for the head of state and government
to be a clergy member (Chehabi and Keshavarzian). Understanding the very structure of this
specific type of authoritarianism verifies this essay’s point that democratic nations were biting
off more than they could chew regarding a mass wave of democratizing nations. A theocracy is
technically a democracy, as elections do take place. Iranian citizens’ understanding of democracy
is vastly different from the understanding of citizens in the United States or Germany. Ergo –
some may argue that Iran is a democratic state. However, how political leaders, who are often
religious leaders as well, are regarded by the public. It is not just how the government mandates
the highest respect and submission to these officials – it is the constant state of fear that citizens
exist within. It may not be internally received as fear, but there is undoubtedly an unspoken
understanding of how one is meant to feel about the government. This state of fear and
misinformation is what keeps this regime moving.
Forgotten Iran
While the cold war was happening on a global scale, Iran and Iraq began a war in 1980,
which coincided with the end of the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The product of that revolution was
the end of Iran’s monarchy days and the beginning of the Islamic Republic of Iran – the
theocratic system that the nation governs under today. The Iran-Iraq war concluded in 1988, not
long before the Cold War ceased. A lot occurred in the middle east during this time, and
ultimately the United States focused more on establishing a relationship with countries that were
willing to negotiate with their governments and that would provide lasting natural resources.
(McDougall) With the Islamic Republic of Iran thriving for a decade at this point – Iran was left
forgotten in the list of nations meant to have a more aggressive slope towards liberal democracy.
China
China has never experienced pure democracy; the continent historically has floated in
between the more conservative government systems. The Chinese government has the flexibility
to maintain an authoritarian regime because it has almost complete jurisdiction over its citizens.
A critical point drawn in an article in the Harvard Business Review argues that China continues
to dominate in economics and technological advancement despite assumptions that their
authoritarian way of governing would inhibit development worth acknowledging. 95% of
“ordinary” citizens reported that they were satisfied with the communist party in Beijing. Despite
the occasional annoyance that comes with a lack of autonomy, they feel empowered by the
opportunities this way of governance has provided for citizens (Mitter and Johnson). During the
reign of past Chairman Mao Zedong of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), leaders of the
communist party perpetuated the silencing of opposing intellectuals and capitalists via a practice
called “thought reform.” (Manion) In essence, the Chinese government has always had an
immense amount of control regarding political socialization.
Chinese Legalism
Political socialization is a significant factor in the longevity of a political system. Political
socialization explains how people come to understand their political system. Direct socialization
comes from government-mandated civic education, and indirect socialization refers to the
uncontrollable perceptions a person forms by participating in politics. In the case of Chinese
authoritarianism, recognizing the impact of the legalism philosophy clarifies why authoritarian
rule is such an accepted experience. Legalism, an ancient Chinese belief that maintained several
dynasties, is a belief that people are inherently evil and self-serving. This belief suggests that no
human being would sacrifice for another unless forced – justifying the enactment of numerous
predatory and controlling laws (Mark). Legalism affects direct and indirect socialization because
the Chinese government enforced the belief through laws that strictly controlled the culture. The
mindset perpetuated by legalism made for a public atmosphere that was willing to submit to the
rule of a morally commendable person - this is an example of how a legacy of ideals based on
citizens’ dispositions as humans can trap a nation in authoritarian rule.
Ultimately, China struggled to adopt any aspects of liberal democracy because the
country was never interested in straying away from authoritarianism. The political and
philosophical legacy of the nation suggests that democracy is not even a faint desire for
government officials or citizens – they have always been taught to believe that the system they
operate under is in the citizen’s best interest.
Germany
Germany underwent a different sort of revolution to obtain its current political system. The
nation had already experienced some of the worst authoritarianism had to offer. Before Hitler
was a blip on the horizon, Germans already had the weak middle class with blind support to
solidify an authoritarian state (Dalton). Hitler, a dictator whose life purpose was eradicating
anything non-Aryan, saw the end of authoritarianism as it was previously understood in
Germany. It took global efforts to stop the reign of the Third Reich: the western section was
invaded by Britain, France, and The United States. The Soviet Union occupied the east. Thus,
democratization began in West Germany, and the USSR assisted in establishing the Socialist
Unity Party, a puppet organization for the Soviets to maintain control of East Germany’s
political process. About a decade later, Basic Law and the Federal Republic of Germany were
established by intellectuals in West Germany, and Easy Germany retaliated with the formation of
the German Democratic Republic. (Dalton) The nation was divided between democracy and
socialism. The foot that France, Britain, and America were able to get into the door is the one
significant interruption in the authoritarian rule, which provided space for liberal democracy
even to be considered in the later unified nation of Germany.
Citizens’ resistance is crucial to Germany’s current democracy – protests made global noise
surrounding the Berlin Wall months before it fell. There was an undeniable passion for freedom
from both West and East Germany. The socialist life of East Germany was no longer desirable to
people who would not dare to say that socialism was the best way to live. At the same time,
citizens experiencing democracy in West Germany felt extreme disturbance by the lack of unity
in their countries. Although authoritarian sub-groups remain in Germany, democracy took the
course that Americans liked to believe it always should. The Berlin Wall was deconstructed, and
Germany knew that democracy was leading the nation to greater heights, so it solidified its spot
as a democratic nation in Europe. It is now the largest state in the European Union – both by
population and economic grandeur.
Conclusion
Authoritarianism is prevalent in a global society. The political system is a logical reaction
to the most negative philosophical understanding of human nature. The Cold War is often
viewed as a war on communism vs. freedom, as former President Reagan suggested. That is
nonsensical - if anything, the idea of freedom was weaponized for the political gain of
democratic leaders. While promoting democracy is the façade under which western global
leaders operated, they failed to realize the unbridled power of the mindset required for
authoritarianism to flourish. It is much bigger than the hopes and dreams of an American
politician.
Bibliography
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopedia, "authoritarianism". Encyclopedia Britannica, 18 Nov. 2022,
https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism. Accessed 6 December 2022.
Chehabi, H. E. and Arang Keshavarzian. "Politics in Iran." Powell, Jr., G. Bingham, Russell J.
Dalton and Kaare Strom. Comparative Politics Today: A World View. Pearson, 2014.
Dalton, Russell J. "Politics in Germany." Powell, Jr., G. Bingham, Russell J. Dalton and Kaare
Strom. Comparative Politics Today: A World View. Pearson, 2014.
Hanifi, M. Jamil. Causes and Consequences of the Destabilization of Afghanistan . April 18 2012. 05
December 2022.
Levitsky, Steven and Lucan A. Way. "The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism." Journal of
Democracy 13.2 (2022): 51-64.
Manion, Melanie. "Politics in China." Powell, Jr., G. Bingham, Russell J. Dalton and Kaare Strom.
Comparative Politics Today: A World View. Pearson, 2014.
Mark, Emily. Legalism. 31 January 2016. 06 December 2022.
McDougall, Walter A. "20th-century international relations". Encyclopedia Britannica, 28 Feb.
2022, https://www.britannica.com/topic/20th-century-international-relations-2085155.
Accessed 6 December 2022.
Mitter, Rana and Elsbeth Johnson. What the West Gets Wrong About China. May 2021. 05 December
2022.
News Desk at PBS. A Historical Timeline of Afghanistan . 04 May 2011. 05 December 2022.
Office of the Historian, Foreign Service Institute . The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan and the U.S.
Response, 1978–1980 . n.d. 05 December 2022.
U.S. Department of State. U.S. Relations with Afghanistan. 15 August 2022. 05 December 2022.