Should Political Science Think in Oxymorons?

Situated at the crossroads of political theory and regime theory, this article undertakes a critical genealogy of two expressions currently in vogue within political science: “authoritarian liberalism” and “illiberal democracy.” Drawing on the history of ideas, with particular attention to the interwar debates – especially the figure of Carl Schmitt – as well as more recent discussions on the nature of the European Union, the article offers a critique of the conceptual obfuscation produced by these two oxymorons. By blurring analytical categories, they hinder the proper classification of certain contemporary political regimes, as evidenced by the proliferating use of the vague notion of hybridity. To restore conceptual clarity, the article advocates for a renewed emphasis on the inseparable link between political democracy and the rule of law – the latter being a condition of possibility for the former. In this light, it proposes using the ideal-type of autocratization as a more accurate framework for analyzing the transformations currently faced by comparative politics.