Authoritarianism as an ideal type

[Mark Graber]

May I suggest that there is nothing particularly authoritarian or
anti-authoritarian in efforts to centralize power.  Early liberals
tended to be committed to centralizing power in the nation state in
order to overcome what they perceived were the authoritarian practices
of local lords and the church.  And presumably few on the left (or
right) would think wanting a central government strong enough to
dismantle Jim Crow is particularly authoritarian.  Professor Balkin is
more accurate when he notes there are various authoritarian ways that
are frequently used to achieve and maintain national power, but these
means are often used to achieve or maintain local power (think of the
Klan of 1870, which was deepely concerned about maintaining local power,
but I suspect had little concern with race relations in Massachusetts).

In short, how authoritarian efforts to centralize government are depends
in part on how authoritarian you think local practices are.  And, again,
there is not neutral answer to this question.  But, in a delayed
response to Eugene, there is no neutral meaning of equality or liberty
either (which standing alone, in my judgment, never advance discussion).
 All we can do is debate whether Bush administration practices violate
rights (a contested term) or so violate rights as to demonstrate an
authoritarian tendency (an equally contested term).

Mark A. Graber
mgraber at gvpt.umd.edu