There is a fundamental difference between authoritarian regimes of the right, and authoritarian regimes such as we are currently experiencing from the left.
But first, imagine a person who is a hypothetical perfect moral person in touch with God or some universal arbiter of good and evil. Imagine that there can be a left wing or a right wing version of such a thing. This person always does the right thing, even at the cost of breaking rules or laws.
A right wing version of this would be the original Dirty Harry, who when Scorpio had a young victim buried in a hole and running out of air, Harry ignored rules, the rights of the criminal, and even his own career, to beat the location of the girl out of the crim.
Because right wing regimes care about law and order, we can say that in this case Dirty Harry is acting as a perfect moral person substitute for a right wing regime.
And it is this that is a difference between left wing authoritarians and right wing authoritarians. We can imagine individual people driven by a moral imperative to act as a substitute for the things a right wing regime might want to achieve, But there is no such possibility with left wing regimes.
Take Stalin forcing industrialisation by taking all the grain off Ukrainian peasants to send to cities and overseas, making them sell every last grain to a centralised authority and thus causing mass starvation. Is there an analogous possible to imagine person who could commit an individual act to achieve likewise? No, there just isn’t an individual act that corresponds to mass starvation.
Abortion is another example that explains this difference. One could imagine an individual who discovers an abortion clinic like that Gosnell fellow’s and responds by taking the dude out with extreme prejudice if the law refuses to intervene. However, there is no counter case where a left winger could possibly think of a moral case, even from a left perspective, where it would work to break the law to kidnap some preggo woman off the street and abort her baby.
There are however cases where left regimes do such things on a regime wide level. For example, China’s one child policy. Now look at the regime level right extreme on abortion: Even when a right regime makes it illegal or extremely difficult to abort children, no one can actually physically force a woman to take a baby full term. It’s not possible. Now you might think that a Victorian era backyard abortionist is a left wing example of a perfect moral person (from the left viewpoint) breaking laws in an individual effort that achieves the same result as a left wing regime might by fiat. But this is not the case, because they were butchers who left many woman dead from infections and were motivated by profit, not morality.
Try it for yourself. Think of any thing that can be broken down into left and right, and try to think of ways in which a left wing person could act individually from a moral perspective in it’s name. It doesn’t exist.
It is because the right acts from an individual perspective and the left collectivise everything, that it is impossible for a leftist to act individually to further their causes from a moral perspective.
This is why leftist regimes tend harder to authoritarianism and stay there longer than right regimes. The left agenda does not lend itself to individual acts of moral courage.
In other words, the goal of the left in all things is to collectivise: collective guilt, collective ownership, group identity. You cannot achieve a collectivist goal through individualistic action. This is why, even in their authoritarian guises, the left and the right are fundamentally different and manifest themselves in completely different ways.