Abstract
This chapter engages with two interpretations of authoritarianism that present it in opposition to liberal democracies. One is found in contemporary institutionalist political science, and the other draws from the Poulantzian Marxist tradition of state theory in order to provide an interpretation of the current crisis. As a second step, the argument moves further back in Latin American history to establish colonial domination as the basis for the creation of geopolitically-differentiated categories of political subjects, and the shift towards modern sovereignty as one infused with authoritarianism in its core.
Reference50 articles.
1. Albright, Madeleine (2018), Fascism: A Warning, New York: Harper Collins.
2. Anderson, Benedict (2006), Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Kindle edition, London: Verso.
3. Antunes de Oliveira, Felipe (2019), “Development for Whom? Beyond the Developed/Underdeveloped Dichotomy”, Journal of International Relations and Development, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 924–46, available at https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-019-00173-9. Last accessed on 22 June 2022.
4. Antunes de Oliveira, Felipe (2020), “Democracy in the Prison of Political Science”, International Political Science Review, pp. 1–14, available at https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512120932435. Last accessed on 22 June 2022.
5. Bezerra, Gustavo A. de G., Pedro Salgado, and Roberto V. Yamato (2019), “Escravismo Atlântico No Século XIX: A Construção Do ‘Internacional’ No Mar”, Monções, vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 424–57.