The Dangers of Authoritarian Power

The American Founders’ ingenious plan to prevent unchecked power, democracy’s great enemy, may now be unraveling.

John Dalberg-Acton, best known as Lord Acton, memorably skewered those in power, noting that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Likewise, Bertrand Russell warned that “the intoxication of power led to a certain kind of madness,” that was the “greatest danger of our time.”

Power is the ability to influence or compel others to do as you wish. We crave it. Its seductive appeal entrances us as we seek out domination over others, status, wealth, prestige, control. The hunt for power is ubiquitous. It provides the possessor with certain tangible social and political goods and satisfies some emotional needs, even certain physical needs. It is visible in the family, business, politics, sports. We want power and the benefits it confers.

Power in and of itself is neither good nor bad. Some leaders use power to accomplish positive shared societal goals, and power put to good use has liberated and advanced societies. However, power put to selfish use can enslave and destroy. Thus, the difference between the power “to” and the power “over.”

All societies need some measure of power to coordinate behavior, create order, promote cooperation, and achieve shared goals. But power can be poison to the person who seeks and uses it, or to the society that is oppressed by the unjust use or abuse of power. We should thus be especially sensitive to the hunger for power in those who seek to lead us.

Today, because of advances in neuroscience and related fields, we know a great deal about why we seek power and why some hunger for it and abuse it. We also know what power does to us. The exercise of power provides the user with an increase in dopamine, the chemical transmitter that produces pleasure. The use of power over others makes us feel good. Numerous scholars have studied the negative effects power can have, and here I have distilled some of the key findings. We can now scientifically describe what the use of power does to the user. It is not always pretty.

Herewith, the “dirty dozen” of power’s potential pitfalls.

Power is addictive. As with drug abuse, the use of power drives us to seek more power and more pleasure. And like addicts, we get hooked and can never get enough.

Power leads to a feeling of exceptionalism. Powerful people tend to feel special, different from the rest of us, morally superior, even self-righteous. This can lead to hypocrisy and feeling that one is above the law and above the rules of society.

Power increases overconfidence and promotes disinhibited behavior. Power is associated with riskier behavior, pushing the limits, and a rise in narcissism. It also increases the sense of control one has over outcomes. This pushes power holders to risk too much, believing that they are special and will win in any conflict.

Power decreases empathy. Empathy and compassion are two of the keys to becoming a whole person, a fully human person. But those who exercise power think less of others and more of themselves. They are more likely to ignore or underestimate the pain of others.

Power promotes unethical behavior. Those in power often feel entitled and that they deserve more and demand that they get it. The ethical rules do not apply to them. Ethical violations are not seen as violations but as part of the reward for their special status.

Power holders are less cooperative. Elevated power usually leads the holder to be less concerned with working with others and more concerned with getting their way. If I am so special, why should I work with those who are clearly less than myself? It becomes “my way or the highway.”

Power sexualizes behavior. Henry Kissinger said that “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.” In evolutionary terms, when looking at animal behavior, one can see the link between power and sexual favors. The alpha dog gets to pick his mate, is seen as a favorable companion and provider. It should be no surprise that sexual infidelity in humans often increases with increased perception of power.

Power increases a sense of victimhood. Many in power see themselves as put upon unfairly, as being picked on, and being unfairly accused of wrongdoing. As Nigerian investigative journalist T. O. Tobore notes, “The power derived from victimhood can be misused, and many people employ it for retribution.” If I am the victim, I have the right to strike back at my accusers. This opens the door to gross abuses of power.

Power absolves. Power allows us to reason: “My enemies unfairly attack me, so I am perfectly justified in responding in kind. It is their fault, not mine.”

Power increases the delusion of grandeur. Those seduced by power feel a need to announce their greatness and pay public tribute to themselves by erecting statues, monuments, and naming public buildings after themselves. Not content to wait until they are out of power to celebrate their greatness, they need to do so now.

Power leads to higher aggression. Powerful people tend to be more manipulative and hostile, especially when publicly challenged. It is an affront that they cannot tolerate. They must strike back, hit harder, destroy the adversary.

Power increases ambition. Intoxicated with the perks of power, leaders hunger for more and more power. There is never enough, the itch is never successfully scratched. This often leads to overreaching, to self-destructive behavior.

Of course, not all leaders fall victim to the seductions of power. Why is this? What is the secret sauce that inhibits a power user from becoming a power abuser? What inner compass keeps the leader’s ego and actions in check?

The framers of the American system believed that while character was a key component, they were also aware of the high price paid when a leader abuses power or becomes a tyrant. They therefore set up an architectural design of a system of government that, in James Madison’s words, set up “ambition to control ambition.” This was done by separating power and providing institutional checks and balances. No one branch, they hoped, would take over because if a president, for example, overreached, the Congress would be there to rein him in. But ours is no longer a separation of powers system; it has now morphed into a separation of parties system. This means that members of Congress do not protect the integrity of their institution, but support and build up the president of their party. Power is what drives them, and institutional safeguards may disappear.

Voters play an indispensable role in keeping power-hungry leaders in check. And while U.S. politics has descended into tribal warfare, it is not too late to ask, even demand, that  character be considered a key test of would-be leaders. Abraham Lincoln said that if you wanted to truly test a man, give him power. Power was the true test of character. But of course, by then it is too late. Electing leaders merely because they are of our tribe is understandable, but it is also dangerous. It endangers democracy. Thus, it would do us well to remember that in the end “character is all.”

Michael A. Genovese holds the Loyola Chair of Leadership Studies at Loyola Marymount University. He is the author of more than 50 books, including “The Modern Presidency.” In the summer 2025 edition of LMU Magazine, Genovese explored presidential use of executive orders as a way of conducting policy in his “Radical Change and Challenges to the Constitutional Order.”