Learn English – “Would have” and “would have no”

These words are related but might not refer to the same exact thing. For example if you check the Wikipedia entry for Authoritarianism you will find this entry:

Authoritarianism is a form of social organization characterized by submission to authority. It is opposed to individualism and democracy. In politics, an authoritarian government is one in which political power is concentrated in a leader or leaders, typically unelected by the people, who possess exclusive, unaccountable, and arbitrary power. Authoritarianism differs from totalitarianism in that social and economic institutions exist that are not under the government's control.

so immediately you see the distinction between authoritarianism vs. totalitarianism. If you now go to the Wikipedia entry for Totalitarianism you will find this entry:

Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state, usually under the power of a single political person, faction, or class, recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.Totalitarianism is usually characterized by the coincidence of authoritarianism (where ordinary citizens have less significant share in state decision-making) and ideology (a pervasive scheme of values promulgated by institutional means to direct most if not all aspects of public and of public and private life).

We see here that Totalitarianism is characterized by Authoritarianism AND ideology.

If we now check Despotism vs. Dictatorship we find that for Despotism is

a form of government in which a single entity, called the despot, rules with absolute power. That entity may be an individual, as in an autocracy, or it may be a group, as in an oligarchy. The word despotism means to "rule in the fashion of a despot" and should not be confused with "despot", an individual.

the key word here is "single entity" which can actually be an individual OR a group. Under dictatorship we find this entry:

A dictatorship is defined as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual, the dictator.

also we find the distinction between dictatorships and totalitarian rule (with reference to authoritarianism:

For some scholars, a dictatorship is a form of government that has the power to govern without consent of those being governed (similar to authoritarianism), while totalitarianism describes a state that regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior of the people. In other words, dictatorship concerns the source of the governing power (where the power comes from) and totalitarianism concerns the scope of the governing power (what is the government). In this sense, dictatorship (government without people's consent) is a contrast to democracy (government whose power comes from people) and totalitarianism (government controls every aspect of people's life) opposes pluralism (government allows multiple lifestyles and opinions). Though the definitions of the terms differ, they are related in reality as most of the dictatorship states tend to show totalitarian characteristics. When governments' power does not come from the people, their power is not limited and tend to expand their scope of power to control every aspect of people's life.

For autocracy we find this entry:

An autocracy is a form of government in which one person possesses unlimited power.1 An autocrat is a person (such as a monarch) ruling with unlimited authority.

a distinction is made between autocratic rule vs. miliatry dictatorships with some reference also to totalitarian rule:

Autocracy and totalitarianism are related concepts. Autocracy is defined by one individual having unlimited legislative and executive power, while totalitarianism extends to regulating every aspect of public and private life. Totalitarianism does not imply a single ruler, but extends to include absolute rule by any faction or class of elites who recognize no limit to their authority. Autocracy differs from military dictatorship, as these often take the form of "collective presidencies" such as the South American juntas. However, an autocracy may be totalitarian or be a military dictatorship.

I hope this helps! :)

Among other uses, the auxiliary verb, would, is used to express an assumption, presumption or expectation in the past. The "would (and in some cases should) + present perfect" is formed with the present tense of have, and the past participle of the verb

would/should + have + past participle

• Someone called after you left but didn't leave a message. That would have been Cathy, probably.

• I would have thought that it was rather difficult

• The letter should/would have arrived by now. (I expect it has arrived.)

With action or dynamic verbs the progressive form can be used instead to emphasise the activity and to suggest the activity started in the past and was in progress for a period of time.

We saw a police helicopter overhead yesterday morning. | Really? They would have been looking for those bank robbers.

Despite the appearance of would, this is not the past subjunctive because there is no "if-clause" (protasi) present in the sentence and none is implied. The subjunctive is used to indicate conditions that aren't true, that might have happened in the past, but didn't. In the example above, however, the speaker is speculating as to what the police were doing with the helicopter at that time of the morning. Knowing that a bank had been robbed that same day, he assumes that the police were looking for the bank robbers.

Compare that sentence with this one:

They police would have been looking for those bank robbers yesterday morning (but they didn't), if they had bought a helicopter (but they hadn't bought one).

In the if-clause the police didn't buy a helicopter therefore, they couldn't search for the robbers yesterday morning. The subjunctive mood tells us the hypothetical result of a contrary fact in the past.

Returning to the OP's passage

At home I locked myself in. Jason, my lawyer and Lyn sent texts simultaneously at the point the announcement was made. Lyn would have been sending texts consecutively for 15 minutes. Apparently 35 newspapers in the world carried the news on the front page, including the New York Times.

Here the narrator, Sir Alex Ferguson, is assuming what Jason and Lyn were doing while he was announcing his dramatic and unexpected retirement as football manager of Manchester United to his players in the dressing room. During those 15 minutes, Alex Ferguson presumes that Lyn was sending texts to newspaper editors all around the world.

Background Information

Sir Alex Ferguson, a former Scottish football player and one of the most successful British and European football managers of all time. He managed Manchester United from 1986 to 2013, winning a grand total of 13 Premier League and two UEFA Champion league titles.

Sources: Sir Alex Ferguson My Autobiography
Advanced Grammar in Use Martin Hewings (units 7, 8, 99)
Advanced Language Practice Michael Vince (Unit 12 Modal auxiliaries 2: past, page 66)
A Practical English Grammar A.J. Thomson A.V. Martinet (160 will and should for assumptions; 231 C should/would have expected + infinitive construction)