Webster’s defines authoritarian like this:
Interestingly wikipedia says,
There is no one consensus definition of authoritarianism, but several annual measurements are attempted, including Freedom House’s annual Freedom in the World report. Some countries such as Venezuela, among others, that are currently or historically recognized as authoritarian did not become authoritarian upon taking power or fluctuated between an authoritarian, flawed or illiberal-democratic regime. The time period reflects their time in power rather than the years they were authoritarian regimes. Some countries such as China and fascist regimes have also been characterized as totalitarian, with some periods being depicted as more authoritarian, or totalitarian, than others.
This article also lists current countries that are considered authoritarian. Some of these people won’t argue about like North Korea.
Historically authoritarian has been used as a pejorative, at least from our Western perspective, so if it clearly applies to countries like North Korea or China, doesn’t it dilute its power to use it to refer to people who support seat belt laws or temporary restrictions to restrict the spread of a disease?
It seems silly to refer to anything that isn’t anarchy as authoritarian.
