Ideologies of authoritarian and neo-authoritarian regimes are analyzed in the article.The analysis is carried out in three clusters: “rudimentary” authoritarian regimes, post-colonialdictatorships, neo-authoritarian regimes. Within the first cluster regimes are subdivided into twosubgroups: authoritarian monarchies and “communist regimes”. The regimes united in the third clusterare also subdivided into two subgroups: post-Soviet regimes and neo-authoritarian regimes in Africa,Asia and Latin America. It is noted that in the age of decline of ideologies on a global scale authoritarianand neo-authoritarian regimes as before need political ideologies for legitimacy of their power. However,in contemporary epoch which sets authoritarian and neo-authoritarian regimes before new and muchmore complicated challenges they are forced to use more flexibility in ideological issues in order to adaptthemselves to the rapidly changing world. Ideologies of such regimes lose former integrity and become“multi-layer”, eclectic. Such “non-ideological” element as corruption becomes a part of ideologiesof neo-authoritarian regimes. But herewith priority of the state as the highest value remains “bearingstructure” of political ideologies of all authoritarian and neo-authoritarian regimes. The human being,protection of its rights and liberties are recognized by neo-authoritarian regimes as values that occupy secondary and subordinate place in ideological hierarchy and political practice of these regimes.