["Journal of Personality, Volume 94, Issue 2, Page 226-236, April 2026. ", "\nABSTRACT\n\nObjective\nMost prominent theories of authoritarianism maintain that it is deeply tied to threat, and yet few large‐scale cross‐cultural tests have evaluated this link. Furthermore, there are ongoing debates about (a) the degree that realistic (versus symbolic) threats predict authoritarianism and (b) the degree that the threat–authoritarianism link occurs across the political spectrum.\n\n\nMethod\nTo fill in these gaps, the present study evaluated the threat–authoritarianism link in 84,677 persons from 59 nations while measuring multiple different types of realistic threat, employing a relatively ideologically unbiased authoritarianism measurement (autocracy support), and measuring ideological controls/moderators.\n\n\nResults\nMultilevel models revealed that realistic threat predicted autocracy support in both WEIRD and non‐WEIRD countries around the world, although the effect was significantly stronger in WEIRD nations. Furthermore, threat predicted autocracy support for both left‐ and right‐wing persons, although the effect was significantly stronger for right‐wing persons.\n\n\nConclusions\nThese results provide the largest multinational test to date on the threat–authoritarianism link and offer numerous advances over prior research on the topic. Not only do they contribute large‐scale evidence for a key assumption of most authoritarianism theories in an era where many theories and findings are being reevaluated, but they also provide theoretical advances in our understanding of the specific nature of the threat–authoritarianism link.\n\n"]