Kleptocracy, authoritarianism and democracy as ideal types of political power

Figures & data

Table 1. 4x3 table of kleptocracy, authoritarianism and democracy as ideal types of political power.

Dimension/ideal types	Kleptocracy	Authoritarianism	Democracy
First dimension, agency	Resource: Coercion Power-over is zero-sum	Resource: Authority Power-over appears positive-sum.	Resource: Authority Power-over is positive-sum.
Second dimension, structure	Power relations structurally oppressive. Binary: powerful and powerless. Powerful have near monopoly of power Scope of coercive power highly fungible. The less powerful akin to the status of slaves. Deep structural conflict, as all obedience is based upon coercion. Unstable system prone to revolution.	Leaders retain power by managing the belief in legitimacy of the less powerful. The elites stay, while the beliefs circulate as choreographed by the elites. Sustaining belief imposes some constraints upon the powerful. However, as they control those beliefs, they have fewer restraints than democratic elites. Strong private realm for the powerful, maintained by control of information.	Leaders are circulated, so those who command the greatest belief in legitimacy are in power. The powerful circulate. Political leaders in constant competition for this belief. Citizens have a right to justification of power-over. The powerful have limited scope of power, as limited by rights of the less powerful citizens. Powerful under constant scrutiny through open information.
Third dimension: social epistemology.	The objective of the ideology is not the buy-in of the powerless into the system. Rather, there are two ideologies. That of the powerful, which is self-justification and is highly derogatory of the powerless – e.g. crude racism. In response the powerless have low self-esteem and embrace fatalistic ideologies, to make their absence of power bearable. Powerless attracted to religions that emphasize their otherworldly redemption.	The elites strongly interventionist in order to control practical knowledge, choreographing the belief in legitimacy. Emphasis upon taken-for-granted natural-order of things, thus upon rote learning and ritual. Reification: social order is sacred and/or according to the Truth. Information limited to what is considered Truth, while the False is excluded. Binary logic pervasive. Re-education justified as exclusion of False/profane ideas. Nationalism strong. Differences of opinion socially constructed as conspiracy by enemies. Prone to group think.	Practical knowledge constantly subject to discursive scrutiny. Emphasis upon understanding, rather than rote learning or ritual. Reifications constantly deconstructed. There is nothing sacred. All truth is fallible and socially constructed hypothesis – truth with small t. There are no essences or Truths. Open societies with limitless access to information. Logic is plural; exclusions require justification. Nationalism replaced by patriotism: loyalty towards institutions/practices that are understood as empowering.
Fourth dimension: social ontology	The powerful seek to socially construct the powerless to have a low level of independent agency. Akin to slaves. Powerless in survival mode, as the powerful have the right of life and death. Violence used to instil a subservient mentality, whereby the less powerful are deeply ontologically insecure. As the whims of the powerful the only certainty, results in self-deprecation and sometimes in self-identification with their needs or Stockholm syndrome.	The powerful seek to socially construct social subjects through panoptical power. Discipline makes them docile bodies, effective as cogs in the machine. Disciplinary military type ritual highly esteemed. Low sense of individual self or rights, while a highly developed sense of public duty. Individualism socially constructed as profane (selfish etc). Discipline results in willingness to sacrifice for the collective (martyr). Downward gaze typical of bodily disposition when confronted with authority.	The social subject is self-disciplined leading to self-restrained forward planning, in order to maximize power-to. Discipline is not imposed, rather an unintended effect of constant competition for distinction or cultural capital that confers status and economic advantage. Strong sense of individual self and rights. Individualism constructed as self-esteem (a virtue). Self-discipline results in willingness to consent to defeat in elections and in meritocratic competition. Passes the eye-ball test, looks authority in the eye.