To fight zombie democracies, we should unpack the psychology of populist autocrats and echo chambers
How do populist autocrats think and feel? What wakes them up in the middle of the night?
Electoral political systems that are present in form, but without substance, “zombie democracies”,(1) are major threats to global democracy. Zombie democracy is a very stark form of repression where periodic elections are still held but the regime does not even pretend that elections are free or fair. A zombie democracy is “the living dead of electoral political systems, recognizable in form but devoid of any substance.”.(1)
Zombie democracies are common. They occur in both the global North and global South. Populist autocrats often contribute to the making of zombie democracies. To fight zombie democracies, we should first unpack the psychology of populist autocrats. For example: how do populist autocrats think and feel? What wakes them up in the middle of the night? What insistently drives them to hold on to political power?
Populist Autocrat: A Fly Stuck on Infinite Honey
A populist autocrat is unlike a top-down feudal ruler whose power is passed on in the family. The populists have a voter base, are elected, but do not always leave the public office by elections. Populist autocrats manipulate the factory settings of democracy, abolish the separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers, and attempt to rewrite constitutions. They do so to extract public resources and the nature for personal gain, and impose a monoculture on society. Losing elections and leaving public office mean facing charges for their tyranny while they were in power. Faced with a choice between jail time or clinging onto political power at all costs, a populist autocrat chooses the latter to avoid the former.
A populist autocrat is akin to a fly that is drawn to and stuck on infinite honey (read: power), unable to retire or leave political office even if they would like to.
Analyses of populist autocrats have focused on their hubris and obsession with power. Surely, they have hubris and love infinite power. But autocrats’ deeply held fears of facing charges if they lose grip on power likely hold much greater weight in defining all they do, than hubris and a lust for power. This psychology hidden behind the strongman public personas of populist autocrats tells us that they might, at the same time, think the unthinkable to compromise free and fair elections to stay in power and for as long as possible.
What shall the opposition and prodemocracy workers do in countries where populist autocratic governance has been in force, such as Turkey, Hungary, Brazil and others?
First, focusing mostly on polls and election arithmetic, “what % of the vote will go to which party?” is not enough, and in fact, has limited meaning if elections are not free and fair. There should be much greater weight given to efforts to ensure, or at least increase the extent to which elections will be free and fair.
Second, prodemocracy workers might want to prepare for and think beyond the usual suspect threats to free and fair elections. In the past, populist autocrats have undermined free and fair elections by intentionally holding them at the same time as socially engineered conflicts in domestic and international affairs. While it is important to continue to bear these threats to elections in mind, the psychology of populist autocrats is such that they are always on the look-out for new ways for self-preservation and political power.
A cautionary tale is already available from the experience with Covid-19. The pandemic has been an excuse in some countries for concentration of power through extreme digital transformation and obliteration of critical public spaces and dissent. Digital transformation and technology, while they might offer prospects for public participation in election campaigns and casting of the votes, can, on the other hand, result in further concentration of political power in the hands of autocrats. For free and fair elections, publics and democracy watchers need digital informatics capacity-building to keep digital transformation in check, including the digital vote counting processes. Monitoring of the bags of votes cast will not suffice in the case of elections that are digitally transformed.
Thirdly, zombie democracies come with echo chambers. For free and fair elections and to fight a zombie democracy, we also need to unpack the echo chambers.
Echo Chambers in Zombie Democracies
Echo chambers are disinformation chambers. They are social structures that systematically exclude truth from its members. The occupants of an echo chamber don’t trust knowledge from outside the echo chamber; other relevant voices and truth are “actively excluded and discredited”.(2) Living in an echo chamber is akin to a cult membership. It is very difficult to “unlock” an echo chamber once it is formed, and once its members are locked into accepting disinformation. Some countries are echo chambers.
A state policy and master narrative of homogenization and racist hatred of minorities passed on from the leaders of the Committee of Union and Progress continue today in contemporary Turkey, creating a veritable echo chamber overflowing with disinformation. While various political parties have come and gone to political power over the last hundred years, the dominant master narrative of homogenization stood firm, denying the Armenian Genocide and other numerous historic injustices to many minorities. In the book “Trauma and Resilience: Armenians in Turkey”, the author Raffi Bedrosyan notes that
“Genocide denied is genocide continued”.(3) The denial of the Armenian Genocide should end once and for all.
Turkey is changing but the genocidal master narrative of homogenization is not. This manifests itself in oppression toward minorities in particular, and in every sphere of life, be it health care, or while shopping or on public transit. Democratic posturing from political leaders cannot be believable, unless the echo chambers overflowing with disinformation are unpacked in Turkey and the genocidal master narrative of homogenization is faced off full frontally. Only then it is possible to make concrete strides toward radical, robust and veritable democracy and enjoy emancipated lives.
References
1. Kenneth Roth, “The Age of Zombie Democracies”, Foreign Affairs, July 28, 2021.
2. C. Thi Nguyen, “Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles”, Episteme 2020;17:141–161.
3. Raffi Bedrosyan, “Trauma and Resilience. Armenians in Turkey. Hidden, not hidden and no longer hidden”, London: Gomidas Institute Books, 2019 (page 33).
About the Author
Vural Özdemir is a Toronto-based systems scientist, medical doctor and independent researcher-writer on democratization of planetary health, science, technology and innovation. Twitter: @criticalpolicy1
Zombie democracies are common. They occur in both the global North and global South. Populist autocrats often contribute to the making of zombie democracies. To fight zombie democracies, we should first unpack the psychology of populist autocrats. For example: how do populist autocrats think and feel? What wakes them up in the middle of the night? What insistently drives them to hold on to political power?
Populist Autocrat: A Fly Stuck on Infinite Honey
A populist autocrat is unlike a top-down feudal ruler whose power is passed on in the family. The populists have a voter base, are elected, but do not always leave the public office by elections. Populist autocrats manipulate the factory settings of democracy, abolish the separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers, and attempt to rewrite constitutions. They do so to extract public resources and the nature for personal gain, and impose a monoculture on society. Losing elections and leaving public office mean facing charges for their tyranny while they were in power. Faced with a choice between jail time or clinging onto political power at all costs, a populist autocrat chooses the latter to avoid the former.
A populist autocrat is akin to a fly that is drawn to and stuck on infinite honey (read: power), unable to retire or leave political office even if they would like to.
Analyses of populist autocrats have focused on their hubris and obsession with power. Surely, they have hubris and love infinite power. But autocrats’ deeply held fears of facing charges if they lose grip on power likely hold much greater weight in defining all they do, than hubris and a lust for power. This psychology hidden behind the strongman public personas of populist autocrats tells us that they might, at the same time, think the unthinkable to compromise free and fair elections to stay in power and for as long as possible.
What shall the opposition and prodemocracy workers do in countries where populist autocratic governance has been in force, such as Turkey, Hungary, Brazil and others?
First, focusing mostly on polls and election arithmetic, “what % of the vote will go to which party?” is not enough, and in fact, has limited meaning if elections are not free and fair. There should be much greater weight given to efforts to ensure, or at least increase the extent to which elections will be free and fair.
Second, prodemocracy workers might want to prepare for and think beyond the usual suspect threats to free and fair elections. In the past, populist autocrats have undermined free and fair elections by intentionally holding them at the same time as socially engineered conflicts in domestic and international affairs. While it is important to continue to bear these threats to elections in mind, the psychology of populist autocrats is such that they are always on the look-out for new ways for self-preservation and political power.
A cautionary tale is already available from the experience with Covid-19. The pandemic has been an excuse in some countries for concentration of power through extreme digital transformation and obliteration of critical public spaces and dissent. Digital transformation and technology, while they might offer prospects for public participation in election campaigns and casting of the votes, can, on the other hand, result in further concentration of political power in the hands of autocrats. For free and fair elections, publics and democracy watchers need digital informatics capacity-building to keep digital transformation in check, including the digital vote counting processes. Monitoring of the bags of votes cast will not suffice in the case of elections that are digitally transformed.
Thirdly, zombie democracies come with echo chambers. For free and fair elections and to fight a zombie democracy, we also need to unpack the echo chambers.
Echo Chambers in Zombie Democracies
Echo chambers are disinformation chambers. They are social structures that systematically exclude truth from its members. The occupants of an echo chamber don’t trust knowledge from outside the echo chamber; other relevant voices and truth are “actively excluded and discredited”.(2) Living in an echo chamber is akin to a cult membership. It is very difficult to “unlock” an echo chamber once it is formed, and once its members are locked into accepting disinformation. Some countries are echo chambers.
A state policy and master narrative of homogenization and racist hatred of minorities passed on from the leaders of the Committee of Union and Progress continue today in contemporary Turkey, creating a veritable echo chamber overflowing with disinformation. While various political parties have come and gone to political power over the last hundred years, the dominant master narrative of homogenization stood firm, denying the Armenian Genocide and other numerous historic injustices to many minorities. In the book “Trauma and Resilience: Armenians in Turkey”, the author Raffi Bedrosyan notes that
“Genocide denied is genocide continued”.(3) The denial of the Armenian Genocide should end once and for all.
Turkey is changing but the genocidal master narrative of homogenization is not. This manifests itself in oppression toward minorities in particular, and in every sphere of life, be it health care, or while shopping or on public transit. Democratic posturing from political leaders cannot be believable, unless the echo chambers overflowing with disinformation are unpacked in Turkey and the genocidal master narrative of homogenization is faced off full frontally. Only then it is possible to make concrete strides toward radical, robust and veritable democracy and enjoy emancipated lives.
References
1. Kenneth Roth, “The Age of Zombie Democracies”, Foreign Affairs, July 28, 2021.
2. C. Thi Nguyen, “Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles”, Episteme 2020;17:141–161.
3. Raffi Bedrosyan, “Trauma and Resilience. Armenians in Turkey. Hidden, not hidden and no longer hidden”, London: Gomidas Institute Books, 2019 (page 33).
About the Author
Vural Özdemir is a Toronto-based systems scientist, medical doctor and independent researcher-writer on democratization of planetary health, science, technology and innovation. Twitter: @criticalpolicy1
