I think we are conflating two different things: the state’s foreign policy stance and its domestic structure.
You are correct that ‘authoritarian’ is often a propaganda label used to justify sanctions or invasion. However, refusing to use the word to describe any state in the Global South implies that the only form of oppression that matters is Western imperialism. That effectively erases the lived experience of people in those nations who might be jailed or disappeared by their own government.
The term ‘authoritarian’ shouldn’t mean ‘enemy of the US.’ It should mean a system where the people have no mechanism to hold their leaders accountable. By that definition, a state can be anti-Zionist and still be authoritarian toward its own citizens. Do you believe there is any word we should use to describe a government that silences its own working class, or should we just stay silent about that to avoid sounding like the US State Department?
I think we are conflating two different things: the state’s foreign policy stance and its domestic structure.
You are correct that ‘authoritarian’ is often a propaganda label used to justify sanctions or invasion. However, refusing to use the word to describe any state in the Global South implies that the only form of oppression that matters is Western imperialism. That effectively erases the lived experience of people in those nations who might be jailed or disappeared by their own government.
The term ‘authoritarian’ shouldn’t mean ‘enemy of the US.’ It should mean a system where the people have no mechanism to hold their leaders accountable. By that definition, a state can be anti-Zionist and still be authoritarian toward its own citizens. Do you believe there is any word we should use to describe a government that silences its own working class, or should we just stay silent about that to avoid sounding like the US State Department?