There's this really pervasive notion from people on the left that those who vote conservative/republican must have an irrational reason for doing so. My guess is, they have internalized the notion that their worldview is so just and logically sound that the only rationale for someone to oppose it is because they are mislead by Fox News, Russian disinfo, conspiracy nuts, emotions, or just plain spite (owning the libs).

But the authoritarians I run into in the US are usually IT professionals earning 100k+ a year.

I think it always was a "my team" thing. It is just that the "conservative team" of the past had "anti-authoritarianism" as one of the team virtues, even if it was hypocritical at times. There is a still a vague notion of freedom, but there is not an intellectual anchor for what that means relative to other objectives, like some Buckley-esque defense of free-enterprise vs the USSR.

The principled intellectual wing of the US conservative movement has virtually disappeared. Even those who disagreed with their positions should lament this as a net loss for society as a whole.

>The principled intellectual wing of the US conservative movement has virtually disappeared.

I see similar on the left. You see a lot of people who had good things to say marginalized because they pushed back against the current populism or people who should know better embracing it so save their own hide (my senator being one of the latter).

Anti-intellectualism is part of populism, I would guess, and currently the Republican Party has been overrun with populists. There are certainly never trumpers talking about the older conservative values, but they are in the minority.

Things will change. They always do.

I too see rich people with fascist streak in them, if not a full on fascination with fascism. But those I group as rich idiots, vs angry idiots which which are actually dangerous, and will go and do NSDAP 2.0 once they can.

Second to it, is the reality on the ground is that the latter outnumber the former tens of times over.

Huh? It’s typically the educated elite calling for authoritarian policies. Just like most (not all) authoritarian systems. They are run by the elite educated in the prestigious universities of Europe and America.

It ain’t poor people running these countries.

Sure, but the recent turn to Populism, is that strange beast of elites pointing out the evils of some other class of elites to garner support. Bolsonaro, Babis, Borisov, Trump and others didn't come to power because they coopted the existing elite infrastructure, but because they tapped into discontent.

The story of populism has always been the same though.

One of the elites who is on the outs or doesnt have a path forward uses it as a tool to grab power for themselves, then uses that power to do what elites always do.

It's pretty much NEVER that one of the lower classes is the one that rise up and gain power via populism. Even Stalin would be "Elite" in that he went to Seminary.