Authoritarianism is characterized by:

“Highly concentrated and centralized power structures,” in which political power is generated and maintained by a “repressive system that excludes potential challengers” and uses political parties and mass organizations to “mobilize people around the goals of the government”;[2]

The following principles: “1) rule of men, not rule of law; 2) rigged elections; 3) all important political decisions made by unelected officials behind closed doors; 4) a bureaucracy operated quite independently of rules, the supervision of elected officials, or concerns of the constituencies they purportedly serve; 5) the informal and unregulated exercise of political power”;[2]

Leadership that is “self-appointed and even if elected cannot be displaced by citizens’ free choice among competitors”

No guarantee of civil liberties or tolerance for meaningful opposition;[2]

Weakening of civil society: “No freedom to create a broad range of groups, organizations, and political parties to compete for power or question the decisions of rulers,” with instead an “attempt to impose controls on virtually all elements of society”;[2] and

Political stability maintained by “control over and support of the military to provide security to the system and control of society; 2) a pervasive bureaucracy staffed by the regime; 3) control of internal opposition and dissent; 4) creation of allegiance through various means of socialization.”

我认为中国的政治体制应该是authoritarianism，定义可参见wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Authoritarianism，按准非医常用的金山词霸解释，翻译成专制完全没有问题。political authoritarianism：政治上的专制主义

当然，民主与专制并不是那么黑白分明的，非此即彼的，美国也不是100%的民主，中国也不是100%的专制。严格说来，可以用模糊逻辑集合的概念来讨论。

这里主要在讨论中国是否需要民主，你却抓住我对专制的定义进行反驳，想以此来论证中国不需要民主，民主是西方的迷信，并把新语丝网站管理也扯进来，这才是真正的偷换概念。

首先，这里讨论的民主与专制，应该局限在一个国家的政治制度上。借用政治制度上的民主方式与专制管理来讨论其他机构也可以，但我不认为其他这些机构，比如公司，学校，网站啊什么的就应该实行民主管理方式。以后有空再写一篇谈谈这个问题。

看来你来新语丝的时间还不长，一直就有人认为新语丝专制。借用一下我党的术语，在我看来，新语丝实行的应该是民主集中制。看似有理的反面意见也刊登，但如何取舍，新语丝自己的立场如何是不需要民主投票表决的。退一步说，就算新语丝是实行的专制管理，也完全正常，没有什么大惊小怪的。