Authoritarian Haplotype Rarity: ~2% of population

Authoritarian Right

You support strong leadership to maintain order and tradition while allowing market competition. Authority preserves civilization; markets create prosperity.

Orientation: Strong leadership, law and order, traditional hierarchy

Dimension Scores

Liberty
28
Markets
62
Global
40
Culture
40

Understanding This Type

Authoritarian Right believes that strong executive authority is necessary to maintain order, preserve tradition, and enable prosperity. Democracy, in this view, tends toward chaos—mob rule, short-term thinking, and the erosion of standards. Effective governance requires concentrated power in capable hands, insulated from popular passions and special interests.

This strain draws on older traditions of political thought: throne-and-altar conservatism, the authoritarian strands within fascism (though most Authoritarian Right adherents reject fascism's totalitarian ambitions), Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore model, and contemporary "illiberal democracy" as practiced in Hungary or admired in observers of China's governance capacity.

The critique of liberal democracy is practical, not ideological: democracies struggle with long-term planning, pander to voters, accumulate unsustainable debts, and allow social decay in the name of individual rights. Authoritarian systems—Singapore, China, sometimes historical examples like Pinochet's Chile—demonstrate that prosperity and order can coexist with restricted political freedom.

Unlike Authoritarian Left, this strain accepts market economics and private property—indeed, sees economic freedom as more important than political freedom. The state should be strong enough to maintain order, enforce contracts, and protect property, but should not manage the economy in detail. Markets create wealth; authority preserves civilization.

At roughly 2% of the population, Authoritarian Right is a minority view in America but more common globally. It appeals to those frustrated with democratic dysfunction, worried about social decay, or simply convinced that strong leadership produces better outcomes than electoral competition. Critics see authoritarianism; supporters see realism about human nature and effective governance.

Dimension Analysis

Personal Liberty

28

Low personal liberty—Authoritarian Right prioritizes order over freedom. Individual rights exist at the state's discretion and can be curtailed when they threaten stability. Law and order, hierarchy, and authority take precedence over personal autonomy.

  • Strong law enforcement with broad powers
  • Restrictions on speech and assembly that threaten order
  • Traditional hierarchies (family, church, state) respected
  • Individual subordinate to community and nation

Market Economy

62

Pro-market within authoritarian framework. Support free enterprise, private property, and economic competition—but under state supervision. The state provides order and direction; markets provide prosperity. Singapore or China model.

  • Free markets under state guidance
  • Private property protected by strong state
  • Industrial policy and economic direction acceptable
  • Corruption ruthlessly punished

Global Orientation

40

Moderately nationalist—prioritize national interest and sovereignty. Skeptical of international institutions that constrain state action. May support international trade and cooperation when it serves national purposes.

  • National sovereignty over international rules
  • Strong borders and controlled immigration
  • Trade serves national interest, not ideology
  • Skeptical of human rights universalism

Cultural Values

40

Traditional on cultural issues—value social order, family structure, and traditional morality. See cultural liberalism as decay that authority should resist. Modernization doesn't require abandoning traditional values.

  • Traditional family and gender roles valued
  • Religious and moral traditions respected
  • Social liberalism seen as decadence
  • Cultural change should be managed, not celebrated

Core Beliefs

  • Democracy is mob rule—effective governance requires insulated, capable leadership
  • Order and stability are preconditions for prosperity and freedom, and trump abstract rights in crisis
  • Traditional hierarchies are natural and necessary—equality ideology causes dysfunction
  • Singapore/China models show authoritarianism can deliver prosperity and order
  • Western liberal democracy is decadent and declining; alternative models are rising
  • Strong executive authority, not checks and balances, enables decisive action

Internal Tensions

  • Supporting "strong leaders" who turn out to be incompetent or corrupt
  • Free markets vs. state direction when they conflict
  • Nationalism vs. admiration for foreign authoritarian models
  • Traditional values vs. modernization that erodes them
  • Authoritarian efficiency vs. authoritarian abuse

Foundational Thinkers

Carl Schmitt

German jurist on sovereignty and exception (1888-1985)

Thomas Hobbes

Political philosopher on authority and order (1588-1679)

Joseph de Maistre

Counter-revolutionary theorist (1753-1821)

Giovanni Gentile

Italian fascist philosopher (1875-1944)

Vilfredo Pareto

Italian economist on elite theory (1848-1923)

Contemporary Voices

Rodrigo Duterte

Former Philippine president admired for strongman tactics

Nayib Bukele

El Salvador president admired for crime crackdown

Jack Posobiec

Right-wing media personality and activist

Bronze Age Pervert

Pseudonymous vitalist influencer

Sebastian Gorka

Trump advisor promoting nationalist authoritarianism

Communities & Spaces

Law and order conservatives Various

Blue Lives Matter supporters

Strong-man admirers X/Twitter

Orbán, Duterte, Bukele fans

Singapore model fans Various

Authoritarian efficiency admiration

Reactionary forums Various

Anti-democratic right discourse

Post-liberal right spaces Various

Beyond conservative liberalism

Key Institutions

Claremont Institute

Think tank with authoritarian-adjacent figures

Danube Institute

Hungarian think tank promoting Orbán model

Mathias Corvinus Collegium

Hungarian nationalist educational institution

Intercollegiate Studies Institute

Traditional conservative education

Society for American Civic Renewal

Secretive traditionalist fraternal order

How It Compares

vs. Authoritarian Left (Authoritarian Mirror)

Aspect Authoritarian Right Authoritarian Left
Economics Market/capitalist Planned/socialist
Equality Accept hierarchy Fundamental goal
Tradition Preserve Transform
Property Protect private Socialize

vs. National Conservative (Ideological Neighbors)

Aspect Authoritarian Right National Conservative
Democracy Skeptical/reject Accept with nationalist content
Authority Concentrate power Use existing systems
Rights State discretion Constitutional limits
Method Strong leader Movement politics

vs. Moderate Conservative (Establishment Opponents)

Aspect Authoritarian Right Moderate Conservative
Democracy Dysfunctional Works with reform
Rights Subordinate to order Constitutional protection
Style Authoritarian Institutionalist
Norms Obstacles Valuable constraints

Common Critiques

Authoritarianism always leads to abuse—power corrupts
All systems can be abused. Democracies produce demagogues and dysfunction. The question is what institutional design produces good outcomes. Singapore shows that competent authoritarian rule can be clean and effective. The problem is bad authoritarianism, not authority itself.
You're just a fascist trying to sound respectable
Fascism was a specific ideology with totalitarian ambitions, racial theories, and mass mobilization. We're talking about effective governance—strong leadership, market economics, social order. Lee Kuan Yew wasn't a fascist. Conflating all non-democratic politics obscures important distinctions.
Without democratic accountability, how do you remove bad leaders?
Succession is a real challenge for authoritarian systems. Singapore managed it; others haven't. But democracies also struggle to remove popular demagogues or dysfunctional systems. No system perfectly solves the problem; the question is which works better overall.
Human rights exist regardless of what governments say
Rights are guaranteed by power, not philosophical claims. Abstract rights without enforcement are meaningless. Order and security—which strong states provide—are preconditions for any rights to be meaningful. We prioritize what actually protects people over what sounds good.
The "Singapore model" only works in a small city-state—it can't scale
China has applied similar principles at massive scale with remarkable economic success. The model is governance capacity and long-term thinking, not specific institutions. Large democracies like India underperform authoritarian systems like China on many development metrics.

Frequently Asked Questions

No. Fascism was a specific 20th-century ideology with totalitarian ambitions, racial theories, mass mobilization, and revolutionary nationalism. Authoritarian Right is broader: it includes conservative authoritarianism, technocratic governance, and traditional monarchy-style rule. Some fascists were Authoritarian Right; most Authoritarian Right aren't fascists.
Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew is the most cited example: market economy, strict social control, limited political freedom, effective governance. China has elements. Historical examples include Franco's Spain (later period), Pinochet's Chile, and various developmental authoritarianisms. Hungary and other "illiberal democracies" move in this direction.
Views vary. Some want formal institutional change (stronger executive, weaker legislature). Others want to work within existing structures to concentrate power. Still others simply admire authoritarian efficiency without specific plans to implement it. It's more an orientation than a program in the American context.
Selection and culture matter more than formal constraints. Singapore developed norms of clean governance and competent leadership. Institutional design can help (term limits, collective leadership). The honest answer is that it's difficult—but democracy doesn't reliably prevent tyranny either.
People want outcomes: safety, prosperity, order, meaning. Freedom is one value among many and can conflict with others. When freedom produces chaos, crime, and decay, people may prefer effective authority. Most humans throughout history lived under non-democratic systems and many preferred capable rulers to chaotic freedom.

Is This Your Political DNA?

Take the Political DNA Scan to discover your type among 32 distinct political strains.

Take the Quiz →