Autocracy, Democracy, Plutocracy
After the fall of Soviet-style “socialist” states in 1991, there was euphoria in the West among scholars, journalists, and politicians that the World was experiencing an inexorable transition to democracy. Within a decade and a half, however, roughly in the mid- and late-2000s, that triumphalist effervescence was dampened by an observable shift toward more authoritarian regimes. In Russia, Poland, Hungary, Turkey, India, and elsewhere, the promise of reformers to establish more participatory, egalitarian, and inclusive democratic states gave way to populist and nationalist leaders who manipulated constitutions and painted opponents as traitors and terrorists. All across the globe, from Modi's India through Erdoğan's Turkey to Trump's United States, illiberal leaders, using populist and nationalist rhetoric, shifted power toward strong executives. With the triumph of Trump in the United States, many American Cassandras, prophets of a dark future, predicted a turn toward tyranny and the collapse of democracy altogether. As a consequence of the retreat of democracy, scholarly and journalistic interest in the phenomenal rise of authoritarianism exploded. As the transitologists (those who made their careers outlining how dictatorships transformed into democracies) appeared to be less relevant to current trends, political scientists began seriously exploring the nature, evolution, and durability of what they termed autocracy.
Explanations for the rise of the new authoritarianism abound. The greater control of the economy by finance and globalizing of capitalism, the weakening of labor unions, the erosion of social welfare protections and the increase of privatization of public services have increased the risks to lower and middleclass people and led them to seek solutions in populist parties that identify their grievances with foreigners, immigrants, and liberal elites. The neoliberal faith that free markets can solve all economic problems has in fact led to a growing gap between the very rich and everyone else. Deregulation in favor of business has added to the global climate crisis and forced vulnerable people to choose between their jobs and their health. The limits and fragilities of liberal democracy have led to political stagnation and an erosion of belief in democratic politics to solve serious problems. Populists stoke fears that the benefits that citizens enjoyed earlier are being eroded by elites and shared with those – people of a different ethnicity or skin color or country of origin -- who do not deserve them. Anxiety about status and future, along with resentment toward alien others, has led many voters to turn to charismatic demagogic populist and nationalist leaders.
The erosion of democracy and the rise of autocracies is real, and ordinary people all over the world – from Belarus to Hong Kong, Vladivostok, Myanmar, Saint Louis, and Delhi – have marched in the streets to oppose anti-democratic repression. People want competent government responsive to the popular will; they desire some degree of participation in decision-making through elected representatives; and they are prepared to fight for rights and protections from their government. But the powerful forces of the state in many countries have ruthlessly crushed the mobilized opposition.
Yet there is another trend besides the autocratic threat to democracy that also needs to be recognized. And that trend, often closely related to autocracy but present in democracies as well, is plutocracy -- the rule of the very rich, which also erodes the possibilities of true democratic choices and the possibilities of real social and political equality. In the United States economic polarization has reached the point that the top 0.01 percent of the population owns roughly the same share of national wealth as the bottom 85 percent combined. Money in America is considered free speech, and unlimited amounts of cash flow from millionaires and billionaires into political campaigns, favored candidates, and lobbies to influence legislation. Low taxes (or often no taxes) for wealthy people with sophisticated accountants means that they can not only influence elections but through their charitable foundations or private philanthropy shape policy in areas like health care, education, or social welfare without democratic oversight. Americans in general do not resent the rich.
They all hope to become millionaires or better. Their anti-elitism is directed at intellectuals, journalists, and politicians. They believe in the good billionaire, though they wish he (or she) would pay their fair share of the tax burden. However, many voters did not seem bothered by presidential candidate Donald Trump’s remarks, when accused of not paying any federal income tax, he quickly retorted: “That makes me smart.”
Recently, the trend toward autocracy and authoritarianism has slowed down or even been stopped. Trump lost his bid for reelection last year, whether he knows it or not. Victor Orban in Hungary and Janez Janša in Slovenia have lost popularity and are facing a resurgent public looking for change. The party in power in Turkey is held responsible for the devasting economic decline and the erosion of the lira. Thousands of peasants march in India against Modi. But the power of the plutocrats has only increased, and the vulnerability of the poor and middle classes – the precariat -- remains.
Is there a way out? The struggle is clearly more difficult in authoritarian countries, and it must take the path of increasing democratic possibilities. Elections where they are still possible can weaken or eliminate autocrats, but they do not affect the influence of the plutocrats, who benefit both from the corruption and nepotism endemic to autocracies and the free-for-all politics of liberal democracies. In democratic countries voters can choose representatives who are prepared to tax wealth and the wealthy, promote environmental protection, and increase social welfare and protection of the most-needy.
We live in difficult but interesting times. Most people, particularly the young, are seeking alternatives to an intolerable present. They are less likely to succumb to the siren calls of populists who trade in hatred of the other, and appeal to imagined anti-Semitic, anti-Armenian, or anti-immigrant threats. Even without clear answers as to how to achieve what might seem to be utopian goals of greater freedom, it is essential not to despair, to remain optimistic and hopeful, and to use the tools at hand to move step-by-small-step toward empowerment of ordinary people. All power to the people is still a powerful slogan, but it also means that we need a new people. We need people with vision and courage.
(June 22, 2021)
