But it’s *competitive* authoritarianism!

Some of Orban’s American apologists have developed the thin tautology that because Orban lost an election he could not have been any kind of authoritarian:

One important piece of context here is that Magyar appeared on state media in the wake of his victory this was his first appearance in 18 months:

Hungary’s prime minister-elect has vowed to suspend state media news coverage, describing it as a “propaganda machine,” when his government takes office around mid-May.

Péter Magyar, whose landslide election victory on Sunday brought an end to Viktor Orbán’s 16 years in power, detailed his plans for the suspension as he gave two tense interviews to public radio and television on Wednesday.

The appearances marked his first invitation to take part in state media in 18 months, Magyar said, in sharp contrast to Orbán’s regular appearances.

This is not just a variant of “democracy qua democracy,” Along with the extreme gerrymandering, the use of corrupt relationships to intimidate the opposition, etc. these are authoritarian measures. “Competitive authoritarianism” is a useful term describing the liminal space between fair multi-party elections and a pure one-party dictatorship. That there were fairly extreme conditions under which Orban could lose does not make Hungary just a minor variant of the kind of liberal democracy that exists in Germany or Denmark.

This kind of apologism, though, does provide a useful illustration of how Republican elites — including less Trump-aligned ones — have become comfortable with their own anti-democratic measures. Democrats could have broken the Wisconsin 2010 gerrymander by getting 70% of the statewide vote, so what’s the big deal? Vote suppression measures don’t make it impossible for Democrats to win, so why should we be worried about the Supreme Court effectively repealing the Voting Rights Act with a series of decisions that barely even pretend to have a legal basis? This is what John Roberts has believed since he was a DOJ functionary under Reagan, and it’s a way in which Trump is more symptom than cause.