Sorry to interject, but that is an interesting question. I would say that "authoritarian" would be to hold power, due to any cause, and especially the power to promote the idea of your veracity. While "authoritative" would be to hold the power of veracity, and power due to that truthfulness.

It also follows that to "corrupt" would be to teach a youth to respect ideas based on, both, whether they are either alike or different. Since alike and different in a historical or social sense, are in no way related to truthfulness, but only the accident of birth according to which the ideas are present or not in your geographical and temporal locality.

Having said that however, in in F. N's. defence. Since many ideas are not simply binary, true or false, but in many cases there are multiple possible answers and interpretations. It follows therefore, that in a purely maths sense, the odds would seem to be better than even in favour of "different" ideas.

It was FN who was a square peg.