I know nothing but think that the turn to autocracy - including here in the US - is caused by a shift from "authority" to "power." Power is encapsulated in the ages-old pronouncement that "The strong do what they can do, and the weak suffer what they must" and assigns moral weight by asserting that "Might makes right." In other words, those in power have the right to impose their will on others, others the majority of whom would not willingly accept those impositions. In this sense, even power is a form of weakness: an inability to persuade others that your causes/policies are 'right.' Thus, power requires repression of the people's will, suppression of dissent, and often violence against those who do not bow down to their rulers' will.
In contrast, authority is vested in officeholders by the will of the people expressed through free and fair elections: As Lincoln so beautifully said, "a government of the people, by the people, and for the people." Authority imposes responsibility - that these officeholders act with good will and in good faith to serve the interests of the people. Our oaths of office typically include a vow to "faithfully execute" the duties of those authorized to govern us. And that responsibility implies accountability: those who do not faithfully exercise their authority can lose that authority - at the ballot box or by removal from office by impeachment or other legitimate means.
Unfortunately, even in democratic systems, the people sometimes fail to exercise their 'power' - a power of numbers, not of repression or violence. They don't vote and/or don't attend to what their leaders are doing with their authority. They surrender their agency to - cast their votes for - a demagogue or a wannabe authoritarian. This willing or unthinking surrender of the people's power is far worse than the people's acquiescence to a violent, repressive power. Actively choosing to be governed by power rather than authority? As Joseph de Maistre noted and as I amend, "Every country [with fair elections] has the government it deserves."
I know nothing but think that the turn to autocracy - including here in the US - is caused by a shift from "authority" to "power." Power is encapsulated in the ages-old pronouncement that "The strong do what they can do, and the weak suffer what they must" and assigns moral weight by asserting that "Might makes right." In other words, those in power have the right to impose their will on others, others the majority of whom would not willingly accept those impositions. In this sense, even power is a form of weakness: an inability to persuade others that your causes/policies are 'right.' Thus, power requires repression of the people's will, suppression of dissent, and often violence against those who do not bow down to their rulers' will.
In contrast, authority is vested in officeholders by the will of the people expressed through free and fair elections: As Lincoln so beautifully said, "a government of the people, by the people, and for the people." Authority imposes responsibility - that these officeholders act with good will and in good faith to serve the interests of the people. Our oaths of office typically include a vow to "faithfully execute" the duties of those authorized to govern us. And that responsibility implies accountability: those who do not faithfully exercise their authority can lose that authority - at the ballot box or by removal from office by impeachment or other legitimate means.
Unfortunately, even in democratic systems, the people sometimes fail to exercise their 'power' - a power of numbers, not of repression or violence. They don't vote and/or don't attend to what their leaders are doing with their authority. They surrender their agency to - cast their votes for - a demagogue or a wannabe authoritarian. This willing or unthinking surrender of the people's power is far worse than the people's acquiescence to a violent, repressive power. Actively choosing to be governed by power rather than authority? As Joseph de Maistre noted and as I amend, "Every country [with fair elections] has the government it deserves."