Asklemmy

Just as capitalist states are "authoritarian" against working class interests, socialist states are "authoritarian" against capitalist interests.

The state is a tool for one class to oppress another. The goal of (most) communists is to transition from capitalism — where the capitalist class is in power — to a stateless, classless communist society via socialism — where the working class is in power.

Public perception of which is more "authoritarian" therefore depends on which class is currently in power and is able to manufacture consent, and that is the capitalist class in the vast majority of the world right now since the USSR's overthrow.

• What is "Authoritarianism"?

Because we live in a capitalist society where capitalists control our media and education. Back in the fifties, you’d be jailed or even killed for being a communist (or gay) in the United States of America. Why do we view this as any less authoritarian than the USSR? Because it’s our past.

With the USSR overthrown, virtually all mainstream media now is capitalist propaganda. And the capitalist class obviously would not want the working class to prefer a system where workers are in power.

They aren't?

Americans live in an authoritarian plutocracy, but refuse to believe it

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B

Isn't that generally said by countries that oppose them?

The land of the less authoritarian had race discrimination until half a century ago, right? Seeing the BLM, it seems to have a prominent role even now. So are they any better?

Because mass media, manufactured consent, and regulatory capture are the “good” kind of coercion.

Because of who controls the presses in capitalist countries.

I see a lot of comments saying they aren't. I'd disagree, but I agree they don't have to be. The issue is most of the major powers in the world have opposed leftist governments anytime they show up. The ones that didn't have a strong central power and cultural hegymony collapsed under the pressure. Any nation that had a weaker central power was either destroyed, couped, or undermined by the west.

There is nothing intrinsically authoritarian about leftism (really, I'd say it's less authoritarian in it's ideals), but authoritarianism is easier to hold together when outside pressures are trying to destroy you.

From Losurdo - A critique of the category of totalitarianism:

Nowadays we constantly hear denunciations, directed toward Islam, of ‘religious totalitarianism’ or of the ‘new totalitarian enemy that is terrorism’. The language of the Cold War has reappeared with renewed vitality, as confirmed by the warning that American Senator Joseph Lieberman has issued to Saudi Arabia: beware the seduction of Islamic totalitarianism, and do not let a ‘theological iron curtain’ separate you from the Western world.

Even though the target has changed, the denunciation of totalitarianism continues to function with perfect efficiency as an ideology of war against the enemies of the Western world. And this ideology justifies the violation of the Geneva Convention, the inhuman treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, the embargo and collective punishment inflicted upon the Iraqis and other peoples, and the further torment perpetrated against the Palestinians. The struggle against totalitarianism serves to legitimate and transfigure the total war against the ‘barbarians’ who are alien to the Western world.

Socialist countries are not, the entire Scandinavian block are super socialist, and not authoritarian.

As for Communist countries, no one has actually implemented communism, only in name. Communism means the workers, not the state, control the means of production. The state controlling them allows for bad actors to seize control.

Marketing

Authoritarianism has nothing to do with economic systems and everything to do with government structure. The Soviet bloc/China and other communist countries were authoritarian because the populous allowed their governments too much power. China is ultra capitalist now and they're as authoritarian if not more so.

People remember communist countries as more authoritarian because they're the more taught examples. Pinochet was a turbo capitalist and he was one of the most authoritarian rulers in history.

Because our bourgeois state propaganda and corporate media tell us that they are, because it’s in their best interest that we believe it.

some people have to be forced into being a part of a social system.

IE, there are people who would rather let others die in the streets than have their taxes raised. some people are just terrible human beings who believe 'i got mine, fuck everyone else' which is antithetical to socialism, and requires a heavy hand via regulation.

From a Swedish standpoint, this is just nonsense. The Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Island and Denmark) are all in the top six most democratic countries in the world (according to The economist, England). These are were much socialist countries and most definitely democratic.

Then you have china, soviet and alike. Those are countries that call(ed) themself communist. I will argue that that's however mostly used as a label to legitimate the government and to obscure what they really are, in the same manner north Korea is formaly named the democratic people's republic of Korea (DPRK). Those countries does/did not operate as communist states the way that Marx and other political theorists imaginend them.