Rise of the Autocrats Liberal Democracy Is Under Attack

Autocratic leaders and wannabes, from Putin to Trump, are making political inroads around the world. In recent years, Western liberal democracy has failed to live up to some of its core promises, helping to fuel the current wave of illiberalism. By DER SPIEGEL Staff


Russian President Vladimir Putin isn't actually all that interested in football. He's more of a martial arts guy, and he loves ice hockey. But when the World Cup football championship gets started on Thursday in Moscow, Putin will strive to be the perfect host. The tournament logo is a football with stars trailing behind it, evoking Sputnik, and a billion people will be tuning in as Putin presents Russia as a strong and modern country.

During the dress rehearsal, last summer's Confed Cup, Putin held an opening address in which he spoke of "uncompromising, fair and honest play ... until the very last moments of the match." Now, it's time for the main event, the World Cup, giving Putin an opportunity to showcase his country to the world.

The World Cup, though, will be merely the apex of the great autocrat festival of 2018. On June 24, Turkish voters will head to the polls for the first time since approving President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's constitutional reforms last year. The result of the vote will in all likelihood cement his claim to virtually absolute power until 2023 or even beyond. Should he miss out on an absolute majority in the first round of voting -- which is certainly possible given rising inflation in the country -- then he'll get it in the second round. The result will likely be a Turkey -- a country with around 170 journalists behind bars and where more than 70,000 people have been arrested since the coup attempt two years ago, sometimes with no grounds for suspicion - that is even more authoritarian than it is today.

And then there is Donald Trump who, after turning the G-7 summit in Canada into a farce, headed to Singapore for a Tuesday meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. And many pundits have argued this week that the greatest beneficiary of that summit was actually Chinese President Xi Jinping, the man who poses a greater challenge to Western democracy than all the rest.

At home, Trump is continuing his assault on the widely accepted norms regarding how a president should behave. He has the "absolute right" to pardon himself in the Russian affair, he recently claimed -- and then he went off the rails in Canada, picking fights with his allies and revoking his support for the summit's closing statement by sending out a tweet from Air Force One as he left. Trump, to be sure, is an elected president, but he is one who dreams of wielding absolute power and sees himself as being both above the law and above internationally accepted norms of behavior.

The Backward Slide

The upshot is that global politics are currently dominated by a handful of men -- and only men -- who have nothing but contempt for liberal democracy and who aspire to absolute control of politics, of the economy, of the judiciary and of the media. They are the predominant figures of the present -- and the decisions they make will go a long way toward shaping the future ahead. The globalized, high-tech, constantly informed and enlightened world of the 21st century finds itself in the middle of a slide back into the age of authoritarianism.

And this is not merely the lament of Western cultural pessimists, it is a statement rooted in statistics. A recent study by the German foundation Bertelsmann Stiftung found that 3.3 billion people live under autocratic regimes, while the UK-based Economist Intelligence Unit found that just 4.5 percent of the global population, around 350 million people, live in a "full democracy." In its most recent annual report, issued in January of this year, the nongovernmental organization Freedom House wrote that in 2017, "democracy faced its most serious crisis in decades." It went on to note that "the right to choose leaders in free and fair elections, freedom of the press and the rule of law are under assault and in retreat globally."

How can this global trend be explained? Are autocrats really so strong, or are democrats too weak? Is liberal democracy only able to function well in relatively homogeneous societies where prosperity is growing? Why do so many people doubt democracy's ability to solve the problems of the 21st century, challenges such as climate change, the tech revolution, shifting demographics and the distribution of wealth?

The optimistic Western premises -- that greater prosperity leads to more freedom, increased communication leads to greater pluralism, and more free trade leads to increased economic integration -- have unraveled. Following the end of the Cold War, the American political scientists Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan said in 1996 that Western democracy was "the only game in town." Now, though, it would seem to have lost its attraction. The expectation that democracy's triumphant march would be impossible to stop has proven illusory. China is currently showing the world that economic success and societal prosperity are also possible in an authoritarian system.

International Newsletter: Sign up for our newsletter -- and get the very best of SPIEGEL in English sent to your email inbox twice weekly.

The fact that established dictatorships in the world, such as those in Belarus, Zimbabwe or Vietnam, aren't showing any signs of change is only part of the problem. Rather, everywhere in the world, authoritarian phases are following on the heels of brief -- or more extended -- experiments with democracy, a development seen in places like Egypt, Thailand, Venezuela and Nicaragua, for example. At the same time, liberal democracy is eroding in many countries in the West.

Perhaps the greatest danger, though, is the increasing attraction of autocratic thinking in Europe. Some elements of such systems are sneaking into Western democracies, such as the growing contempt for established political parties, the media and minorities.

In Italy, a new government was just sworn in under the leadership of Matteo Salvini, an avowed Putin fan. In Hungary, Viktor Orbán just won a landslide victory in parliamentary elections held, according to OSCE election observers, in an atmosphere of "intimidating and xenophobic rhetoric." Polish voters are set to go to the polls next year, and there too, the right-wing nationalist PiS stands a good chance of emerging victorious.

Across the Atlantic, the U.S. under the leadership of Donald Trump has thus far resisted sliding into autocracy, but only because the institutional hurdles in the form of the judicial and legislative branches of government have managed to hold their ground. Nevertheless, liberal democracy is under attack in precisely the country where it first emerged.

Anxiety is likewise growing in other Western democracies. "Until recently, liberal democracy reigned triumphant. For all its shortcomings, most citizens seemed deeply committed to their form of government. The economy was growing. Radical parties were insignificant," writes the Harvard-based German-American political scientist Yascha Mounk in his book "The People vs. Democracy." But then the situation began changing rapid: Brexit, Trump's election and the success of other right-wing populist movements in Europe. The question, Mounk writes, is "whether this populist moment will turn into a populist age -- and cast the very survival of liberal democracy in doubt."

The Western political system, Mounk writes, is "decomposing into its component parts, giving rise to illiberal democracy on the one side and undemocratic liberalism on the other." The one, he argues, is dominated by manipulated majority opinion while the other is controlled by institutions such as central banks, constitutional courts and supranational bureaucracies like the European Commission that can operate independent of direct, democratic debate.

"Take back control" was the slogan used by the Brexiteers during their successful campaign. Indeed, the feeling of living in an era in which they have lost control is likely a common denominator among all European populists. Taking back that control is something they all promise.

It is combined with the desire to shake off the corset that allegedly makes life in the West anything but free. All the laws, rules, decrees and contracts that dictate to people, companies and entire countries how to behave. What they are allowed to say and what not. What they can buy and what is off limits. How things may or may not be produced. This desire to apply a new set of self-made, simpler rules to the world is feeding the popularity of the autocratically minded.

These days, it is rare that democracies collapse under attack from armed, uniformed adversaries. Such images belong to the past; the coup d'état has become a rarity. On the contrary, many autocrats have come to power by way of the ballot box, govern in the name of the people and regularly hold referenda to solidify their power.

But once in power -- in Turkey, Venezuela or Russia -- they bring the institutions of democracy under their control. They tend not to be committed ideologues. Rather, they are strategists of power who used ideologies without necessarily believing in them themselves. Furthermore, they don't generally wield violence indiscriminately, another difference to the murderous regimes of the past. Sometimes, a journalist loses their life, or an oligarch ends up in jail. But otherwise, the new autocrats are much subtler than their totalitarian predecessors. Generally, a timely threat issued to insubordinate citizens suffices. And they are particularly adept at the dark art of propaganda. They know that many people have become insecure and are afraid of the future and foreigners. They have learned how to augment those fears, so they can then pose as guarantors of stability.

China's System Works Well

The Beijing airport lies like an enormous red manta ray in the city's northeast, one of the world's largest buildings. Following four years of construction, it was opened in 2008 and is now the second busiest airport in the world. But the airport's three terminals are already hopelessly overcrowded, so a new, even larger airport is currently under construction to the south of the city. It is to be opened in 2019, also after just four years of construction.

Only very few people doubt that the new airport will open on time. The past 40 years have demonstrated that most government forecasts end up being quite accurate, both the positive ones and the more negative prognoses, both the general ones, and the more specific.

When President Xi Jinping came into office in 2013, China's economy was already the second largest in the world. Today, five years later, it has grown by another 50 percent. Hourly wages have tripled in the last 10 years and household disposable income has doubled. Even the poorest Chinese are faring better than they were just a few years ago and they expect to see their incomes continue rising.

That expectation is one of the Communist Party's primary instruments of power. Political scientists speak of "legitimacy through performance," a classic leadership principle of authoritarian developing nations. China's rulers have pushed this principle to the limit, with government experts thinking in terms of decades and in global dimensions. Because they are undisturbed by individual interests and the election cycles seen in democracies, their plans tend to be realized. Thus far, the mixture of planned and free-market economy has worked well.

But the economy is but one of several instruments. The Communist Party's power, China expert Minxin Pei has written, is today based on four pillars: robust growth, sophisticated repression, state-sponsored nationalism and co-opting social elites.

China is also setting new benchmarks when it comes to the second pillar. The melding of Leninism with technology has given birth to an unprecedented surveillance system. The internet, seen in Western democracies as a tool of free speech, is increasingly used in China as a means of social control, as a mood barometer and instrument of manipulation.

At the same time, the regime disseminates a grand narrative of the fatherland on state media and the internet, referred to as the "Chinese Dream" or the "Renaissance of the Chinese Nation," depending on the context. The message is clear: China, a leading political and economic power until the outbreak of the Opium Wars in the mid-19th century, is returning to "center stage," as President Xi put it at the 19th party congress in October, following more than 100 years of degradation and colonialism. It is an effective narrative on two counts: Domestically, it serves to solidify a nationalist consensus while at the same time radiating Beijing's growing self-confidence to the world at large.

Thus far, the country's leadership has been satisfied with the ideological and economic projection of its power. In contrast to its geopolitical rivals USA and Russia, China has avoided military adventures such as those in Ukraine or the Middle East. But the country's aggressive behavior in the South China Sea and its arms buildup clearly demonstrate that it might do so in the future.

One year ago, Beijing hosted a noteworthy summit focused on the most ambitious development project of the century: The New Silk Road. Recep Tayyip Erdogan came from Turkey as did Rodrigo Duterte from the Philippines, Viktor Orbán from Hungary and Vladimir Putin from Russia. They parked their government airplanes on the tarmac of the airport in the Chinese capital and headed for the Great Wall, where Xi presented his vision of a new world. It was a meeting of the like-minded. Western politicians were also present, but they seemed strangely sidelined.

The New Silk Road is the core of China's 21st century development policy. At first glance, it looks like a vast infrastructure project that will connect China with Africa and Europe. In truth, though, it is a plan for a new world order dominated by China.

China, he said, will set an example and connect the West and East in "peace, harmony and a better future." China, the country's president said, is "ready to share practices of development with other countries, but we have no intention to interfere in other countries' internal affairs." The word "dynasty" came up five times in the speech and "invest" appeared nine times. The terms "democracy," "rule of law" and "freedom of opinion" were missing entirely.

The Chinese dictatorship of development poses the greatest economic, political and intellectual challenge to the liberal world order. Because of its size and population, China creates economic dependencies that smaller countries on its periphery simply cannot escape. But even politicians and business leaders in Western industrialized nations fall victim to the dynamism and efficiency of the Chinese model.

"The China One Belt, One Road," Siemens CEO Joe Kaeser said at Davos in January, using the formal name of the project, "is going to be the new WTO, like it or not."

Discuss this issue with other readers!
11 total posts
Show all comments
Page 1
alynsymsmusic 06/13/2018
1. Trump, Putin and Co.
Historically, Russia was never anything but an authoritarian state in one form or another but I am particularly disappointed in the United States. This downward trend in democracy began in November of 63 when JFK was assassinated. Kennedy was the last president to stand up to the military when they thought they could win a nuclear war against the Russians. There were three future American presidents in Dallas the day he was killed, Nixon, H.W. Bush, Gerald Ford and W. Bush to come. The last Democrat in the original sense of the word is Bernie Sanders and the Democratic Party sabotaged his campaign at every turn, opting for Hillary Clinton, who wasn't qualified to be a Dog Catcher. I wonder whether political ideas mean anything anymore except for the average citizen, because the " powers that be " are multi-national corporations who owe their allegiance to one sign only, $$$$. I have been saying to fellow American citizens since 2001 that Germany is more of a Democracy than we are. so stop bringing up WWII and Hitler. Trump is just a knee jerk ( emphasize JERK ) reaction to Obama's presidency, and after W. Bush I thought we were free of psychopaths in the White House. Now we have Trump. I found one unique characteristic of all his supporters. If you bring up a fact to them they don't like they start to panic and go into this automatic idiot mode of saying it's not true. Case in point. Trump got 5 deferments during the Vietnam War. 4 while in college and one after which was a medical deferment. HE SAID that his number was high on the lottery ( they had a draft lottery, I was 31 on it which meant I would be gone in a week ) and remembered seeing it on TV while in college. The FACT of the matter is that the draft lottery didn't start until a year and a half after he was out of college. If you bring that up to them they run out of the room or their eyes cross and they start to repeat nursery rhymes. In other words, you're dealing with intentionally stupid people. Who else would vote for someone who was against their best interests, cause they " just like him. " A sad state of affairs indeed.
Jamester 06/13/2018
2. Brexit
Please point to evidence that "there is no small number who would like to restore the lost British Empire". In fact don't waste your time, there isn't any.
anvilsvs 06/13/2018
3. Liberal Democracy Is Under Attack
It's interesting that you equate Trump with Putin. You appear to have forgotten that your favorite Presidential son, Obama, is the one who allowed Putin to take over Ukraine. Do you really think that Trump would have allowed that? If so, I suspect that you're misreading him. And if Putin decides to shut off natural gas to Germany, do you think that Trump would allow that? You might note that we've already been preparing to replace Russia as a supplier should Putin try to play that game. So, who do you consider to be the friend of Germany? Putin, who's ready to let you starve in the dark. Or Trump, who's been working to ramp up U.S. energy production so that we have the capability to keep you fed and warm?
specialsymbol 06/15/2018
4. Blaming the voters for
The question is really: what do voters expect? Are all voters really as short sighted as politics expect or want them to be? Do they really forget the day they cast their vote the promises made? I doubt it. When we look at China, it sure is not a better society than we have. It is not an economy we want. And it definitely is not the ecology we want. But the government of China gets things done! And this is something we miss in Germany, or many western countries. Just think of the Berlin Airport. It is a disgrace for Germany, for the political establishment, even for the involved companies. It is so shameful that it is beyond words - and no politician cares about it. It is as if this issue doesn't exist. Stop talking about it, maybe it simply goes away. And maybe this is something voters are weary of. Putin is definitely authoritarian. When I see the Russian society - that's not something I want to have. On the other hand, Putin is much more trustworthy than our politicians. He is not the one who broke promises about not expanding NATO territory. Everyone is afraid of his military power, but guess what? That's because he gets things done! Something western countries fail to accomplish. Even when we invade other countries to liberate them from their resources, we fail. Russia - so far everything worked. Russia has the most dangerous and powerful military weapon at hand right now - something not well known in western countries (and also probably something no one wants the people to know). Might not be a positive example, but again it shows how powerless the western countries are and how, in comparison, Putin shows strategic competence, a wider horizon and the ability to think long-term. And they are powerless not because their citizens are lazy, dumb or stupid - they are powerless because their politicians are incompetent and exclusively act for their lobbyist's and sponsor's benefits and not for their countries or citizens (there are studies to prove this!). We can't improve, we can only shove more money down the fat cat's throats. That's our solution to everything. Trump may not behave the way we expect, but, and this again is something that is not discussed, that no one wants to see, he does things and gets (a few) things done. Things no one before him even dared to touch. Due to political correctness maybe, due to tactical considerations. Trump is not giving a monkey's about that. And frankly, that by itself is refreshing to see. Because we know, whatever Trump does, he is a mean bastard and wants to profit personally as much as possible - but at least he's doing it openly. I am sick of the deception, the lies, the hidden corruption (that of course isn't named that way, it's called being a consultant due to expertise in the political environment) in our political system. And I would accept many detriments for this to go away. Let's find out what is worse in the end.
joe_schmolen 06/18/2018
5. liberal democracy under assault by autocrats?
Liberal democracy in Europe is not under assault by populists and the right-wing. Liberal democracy was assaulted by installing the EU over-government against the will of the people. And by imposing the Euro against the will of the people. And by opening the borders to millions of Middle East Muslims against the will of the people. And installing an over-government whose offices are never subjected to the vote of the people. The sovereignty and even the very identity of the nations and cultures of Europe are being diminished against the will of the people of Europe. Ignoring the will of the people is NOT democracy.
Show all comments
Page 1

All Rights Reserved
Reproduction only allowed with permission

Die Homepage wurde aktualisiert. Jetzt aufrufen.
Hinweis nicht mehr anzeigen.