Are We Beginning a Slide Towards Competitive Authoritarianism?

 One can easily argue (and many have already begun to argue) that the United States, under the influence of Donald Trump’s administration, is on the cusp of sliding into Competitive Authoritarianism.

Competitive Authoritarianism is a political system that is formally democratic but functionally authoritarian. The term was coined by Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way in their 2002 academic article "The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism," published in the Journal of Democracy. They later expanded on the concept in their 2010 book, Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. Levitsky and Way used the term to describe regimes that are neither fully democratic nor fully authoritarian, but rather a hybrid of the two. 

In these regimes, elections occur, opposition parties exist, and democratic institutions are in place, but the playing field is significantly tilted in favor of the ruling party or leader. While competitive authoritarian regimes do not fully suppress opposition as outright dictatorships do, they systematically undermine democratic norms through subtle (or not-so-subtle) means.

Key Characteristics of Competitive Authoritarianism:

1. Elections Exist but Are Not Fully Free or Fair: Elections take place, but they are often manipulated through voter suppression, gerrymandering, media control, or intimidation. The opposition may still have a chance to win, but the ruling party has a structural advantage.

2. Weakening of Democratic Institutions: Institutions like the judiciary, the legislature, and election oversight bodies may formally exist but are co-opted or pressured to serve the interests of the ruling party rather than functioning independently.

3. Media Control and Suppression of Dissent: The government may dominate major media outlets, harass independent journalists, or spread disinformation to maintain control over public perception.

4. Use of State Resources for Political Gain: Incumbents often use the power of the state—such as law enforcement, regulatory agencies, and public funds—to benefit themselves or to disadvantage opponents.

5. Harassment of Opposition: While opposition parties and activists are not outright banned, they may be subjected to legal harassment, politically motivated prosecutions, or intimidation.

6. Erosion of Checks and Balances: Mechanisms meant to hold leaders accountable—such as an independent judiciary, free press, or a robust civil society—are systematically weakened.

Why the Term Is Relevant to the U.S. Today:

Certain trends in U.S. politics—such as efforts to undermine electoral integrity, attacks on the media, politicization of the judiciary, and increasing executive power—show warning signs of a shift toward competitive authoritarianism. The concern is that while the U.S. retains democratic institutions, they may be eroding in ways that favor one party or leader, potentially making elections and governance less genuinely democratic over time.

I suspect the vast majority of us do not want this to happen in the United States. It is therefore very likely to be better to step up and articulate our concern sooner rather than later. How?

Gene Sharp, a political scientist known for his work on nonviolent resistance, categorizes nonviolent action into three broad types:

1. Protest and Persuasion: These are symbolic acts meant to raise awareness, express opposition, or demonstrate support for a cause. Examples include marches, vigils, petitions, public speeches, and symbolic gestures like wearing specific colors or displaying signs.

2. Noncooperation – This involves withdrawing support from an oppressive system or authority, often by refusing to comply with laws, policies, or social norms. Examples include boycotts, strikes, civil disobedience, and refusing to pay taxes.

3. Nonviolent Intervention – This is a more direct and often disruptive form of action aimed at actively interfering with oppressive systems or policies. Examples include sit-ins, blockades, creating parallel institutions, and occupations.

Start with two things: 1) Keep up with the news. Start small. You don’t have to digest it all at once, and 2) know and contact your elected representatives. Do this locally, at the county and state level, and, of course federally. You can find your elected representatives online through the following official sources:

1. USA.gov – https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials

• This site provides links to federal, state, and local representatives, including members of Congress, governors, and state legislators.

2. U.S. House of Representatives – https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

• Enter your ZIP code to find your Congressional representative.

3. U.S. Senate – https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm

• A directory of U.S. Senators by state.

4. State Legislature Websites – https://www.ncsl.org/about-state-legislatures/state-legislative-websites-directory

• Find your state legislators and their contact information.

5. Common Cause – https://www.commoncause.org/find-your-representative/

• This tool helps identify federal and state representatives by entering your address.

These resources provide direct links to your representatives' official websites, where you can find contact details, district maps, and policy stances.

The Minnesota Vikings' Superbowl Drought: Some Emotional Systems Leadership Musings

It has been way too long since I have posted anything on this blog site. I apparently started it in 2012. I honestly can't remember why. I probably had some delusionally grandiose aspirations of literary success due to my amazingly unique and insightful musings, insights, blatherings and other stuff. I revisited it in 2017 thinking I could resurrect it in anticipation of my three month sabbatical. Alas, that's a whole story unto itself. Maybe the third time is the charm.

Full disclosure: On this third attempt I have no shame. I am using ChatGPT to help. I get these rambling ideas that are difficult to put into coherent prose in an efficient and timely manner. I have been leaning on AI to help.

What follows in my inaugural endeavor. It is pretty far afield from my role as an ordained pastor. It might tangentially connect with my coaching practice. It is perhaps a quite accurate example of a musing. It might even be an amusing musing.

I asked ChatGPT the following: "When was the last time the MN Vikings were in the Super Bowl? Was it before their stadiums were inside? While this is likely correlative and not causative, it seems like there may be some type of systemic, emotional systems and leadership-related hypotheses that could explain this drought. Thoughts?"

I took the answer it gave me and polished it up for my first re-resurrected blog installment. I hope it might engage you. Here goes nuthin'!

The Minnesota Vikings' last Super Bowl appearance was on January 9, 1977 (Super Bowl XI). This was their fourth appearance in the Super Bowl and it was also their fourth loss, losing to the Oakland Raiders 32-14.

The push for a domed stadium had already begun in the early 1970s as a result of a mix of economic necessity, competitive ambition, and political maneuvering. It really took off after their 1977 Super Bowl loss. 

While going inside solved immediate problems, it may have altered the Vikings’ long-term identity in ways still debated today. So much so, that a lone pastor is bringing it up on a cold February night in 2025 out among the rolling hills of Pepin County Wisconsin.

While the connection between a domed venue and the Vikings' performance may be more correlative than causative, it opens up an interesting lens to explore leadership and organizational culture in the context of their long championship drought. I offer a reflective breakdown:

Teams with long gaps between championships can develop a culture of "almost, but not quite." This identity becomes entrenched, with players, staff, and even fans subconsciously carrying the weight of past failures. Emotional systems within organizations can perpetuate a cycle of heightened expectations followed by disappointment, creating a culture of cautious optimism rather than bold confidence. Leaders can find themselves struggling to instill a fresh mindset that divorces their present team from the legacy of missed opportunities, especially when a passionate fanbase amplifies the historical narratives.

Did the shift from outdoor to indoor stadiums subtly influence the team’s identity? Outdoor games in Minnesota’s harsh winters symbolized toughness, resilience, and grit — attributes that could psychologically bolster both players and fans. The move indoors, while practical, may have unintentionally shifted the team's emotional foundation, making it harder to sustain the same identity. A lack of adaptation to the new environmental conditions could reflect leadership challenges in maintaining a cohesive identity across eras.

Since the Vikings’ inception, the organization has seen significant turnover in leadership, from ownership to coaching staff. Without consistent leadership, it can be challenging to establish a unified vision or sustain long-term strategies. Emotional systems thrive on clarity, consistency, and trust — qualities that may falter with frequent changes. High turnover can lead to fragmented emotional systems and a lack of long-term strategic alignment, making it harder to build and sustain championship-level teams.

Organizations under pressure to win often fall into cycles of reactive decision-making — constantly looking for "the next piece" rather than fostering patient, long-term development. Could this be seen in the Vikings’ history of bold, high-stakes moves (e.g., signing Brett Favre, trading for Herschel Walker), which sometimes backfired? Leaders may prioritize short-term solutions at the expense of systemic growth, reinforcing patterns of inconsistency.

Minnesota fans are known for our passionate, sometimes hypercritical nature, and the media surrounding the team can easily and inadvertently emphasize past heartbreaks. This external emotional system can amplify internal pressures, creating an environment of heightened scrutiny that may undermine player and coach confidence. As a result, leaders might struggle to shield players and staff from external emotional systems, leading to stress and decision paralysis.

What might it look like for the team to practice some identity reclamation? Could the Vikings embrace their historical identity while redefining it for the modern era? For instance, what would it look like for the Vikings to revive the "gritty, outdoor warrior" narrative in a way that aligns with their current US Bank Stadium indoor setting? Could they invest in leadership pipelines within the organization to ensure consistency, resilience, and vision alignment, particularly at key moments like playoff runs? What would that look like? Does it make sense to bring in experts in organizational psychology and culture to help shift the emotional systems of the franchise from one rooted in past heartbreak to one oriented toward opportunity and resilience? What about collaborating with fans to rewrite the team’s narrative, focusing on pride, hope, and unity rather than historical failures?

It may be that the Vikings’ Super Bowl drought is a symptom of deeper systemic challenges related to leadership, culture, and emotional systems. But maybe not. While the shift to indoor stadiums is very likely correlative and not causative, it does sort of highlight how external and environmental factors can influence a team’s identity. Who knows? Maybe they have already addressed some of these systemic issues through intentional leadership and cultural strategies.

I don't claim to be an expert. I'm simply a Monday morning armchair quarterback with more than my fair share of leadership and emotional systems training over the years messing with ChatGPT to see what the wisdom of the ethereal realm might offer. I don't really even watch all that much football anymore.

As a kid, I was all about Fran Tarkington, Chuck Foreman and the Purple People Eaters. I watched those Super Bowls and was crushed every time they lost. That kid is kind of still there, buried underneath my aging frame and extended waistline. And that kid still believes the Vikings can indeed break free from their historical patterns and find sustained success. Maybe next season.