Authoritarian Liberalism
How The Centre Will Respond To The Far Right
In the name of democracy, an increasing number of governments in liberal states are using authoritarian means to push back against the rising tide of far-right extremism. But as this battle intensifies, are we watching liberalism save itself—or hollow itself out?
In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s balancing act between neoliberal reforms and authoritarian governance provides a stark example of how liberalism's contradictions can lead to troubling outcomes. If this trend continues, what does it mean for the future of authority and the societies we hope to build?
Liberalism's Authoritarian Impulse
Authoritarian liberalism isn’t new. It has roots in moments when liberal states used heavy-handed measures to suppress perceived threats, often sacrificing democratic principles in the process. Today, as the far-right gains momentum, this tendency is on full display. Governments once defined by their commitment to individual freedoms are relying on police crackdowns, surveillance, and executive overreach—all justified as necessary to safeguard democracy.
Macron’s presidency illustrates this evolution. Framing himself as the last line of defense against the far-right, he has used his platform to implement austerity policies, suppress dissent, and centralize power. While these moves are couched in the language of responsibility and pragmatism, they raise urgent questions: How much authority can a liberal democracy consolidate before it ceases to be liberal—or democratic?
Macron’s France: A Case Study in Contradiction
Macron came to power promising transformation. His platform blended economic liberalism with progressive rhetoric, portraying himself as an antidote to both the far-right Marine Le Pen and France’s entrenched political establishment. Yet his governance has often mirrored the authoritarian tactics he claims to oppose. Consider three key areas where Macron’s policies reveal the contradictions of authoritarian liberalism:
Austerity and Economic Reform:
Macron has pursued aggressive neoliberal reforms, such as changes to France's pension system, which sparked widespread protests. His response? Deploy riot police, use tear gas, and enforce strict measures to quash demonstrations. By prioritizing economic “efficiency” over popular dissent, Macron has alienated the very working-class voters most vulnerable to far-right appeals.
National Security:
Under Macron, France has expanded anti-terrorism laws, granting the state sweeping surveillance powers and enabling authorities to shut down organizations deemed “extremist.” These laws, while framed as a shield against terror and the far-right, have disproportionately targeted Muslim communities and left-wing activists. This erosion of civil liberties often strengthens the far-right narrative of liberal hypocrisy.
Immigration and Borders:
Macron has tightened immigration policies, reinforcing Europe’s hardline stance on refugees. While positioning himself as a centrist alternative to Le Pen’s overt xenophobia, Macron’s policies echo her themes, blurring the line between opposing the far-right and adopting their agenda.
The Danger of Authoritarian Liberalism
Macron’s France exemplifies a broader trend across liberal democracies: the adoption of authoritarian methods not as a last resort, but as a calculated strategy to maintain control. This dynamic reveals two critical dangers:
Legitimizing the Far-Right Playbook:
By co-opting far-right rhetoric on immigration or dissent, liberal leaders give these ideas mainstream credibility, making it harder to dislodge them. Austerity policies that exacerbate inequality further drive disillusionment, pushing disaffected voters toward extremist solutions.Weakening Democratic Resistance:
When governments sideline democratic participation in favor of technocratic decision-making or executive decrees, they undermine the very principles they claim to defend. This alienates citizens, fostering apathy or resentment—fertile ground for authoritarian alternatives.
Where Does This Leave Us?
Authoritarian liberalism isn’t just a reaction to far-right populism; it’s a symptom of deeper systemic issues. Economic inequality, political disconnection, and the erosion of public trust fuel both the rise of the far-right and the authoritarian responses we see today. These cycles are self-reinforcing: authoritarian liberalism begets further disillusionment, which in turn strengthens extremist forces.
If this trajectory continues, the future of authority could look more like a cold technocratic order, where liberal ideals are invoked only to justify repression. The far-right, far from defeated, would thrive in the vacuum left by hollowed-out democracies.
A Different Path Forward
The challenge of our time is not to defend liberal democracy at all costs but to reimagine it. Real opposition to both authoritarian liberalism and far-right extremism requires confronting the structural inequities they both depend on. That means building power from the ground up—through workplaces, communities, and networks of solidarity—rather than concentrating it in the hands of elites who claim to know best.
The future of authority doesn’t have to be defined by suppression or control. It can be cooperative, decentralized, and rooted in the needs of the many, not the few. To get there, we must reject the false choice between authoritarian liberalism and the far-right—and demand something better.
Is authoritarian liberalism a temporary phase, or are we witnessing a fundamental shift in how power operates?