The Rise of Illiberal Democracies

What is an “Illiberal Democracy” - and should you care?

You can Wikipedia the history of the words Illiberal Democracy and still not be clear what it is and how it both affects and threatens us.

The term Illiberal Democracy is now primarily used to define a country that has came into power via elections, but then manipulated the mechanics of the system to ensure continued rule. The “system” here is defined to include the judiciary, the media, legal precedents and extra-national organizations (the EU, NAFTA and the UN are favorite straw men).

On the economic front, illiberal democracies often manipulate the ownership of media companies to support the policies of the government. This ensures that the official line of the Leader is published and reinforce. These countries then keep a reign of remaining press, either closing them if they do not follow the official line or forcing the ownership to accept co-ownership by a support oligarch. In many countries where this occurred, the media are limited in number, reach and access and it is relatively easy to bring these in line. Legal action or electronic methods are often used to block or censor social media that might spur opposition.

I am going to focus on Hungary, Poland and Turkey as examples of Illiberal democracies (ILD).

There are some common themes among these 3 ILD. The first self-proclaimed example of this was Hungary and it came to a climax with the election of Viktor Orbán.

Geographical Influences

Geographically, all these countries are in the path of refugees fleeing the Syrian Civil War. And they were all pushed to accepted immigrants by a “remote power”, in their case the European Union. More than 1 million refugees from the Syrian Civil War came to Europe, where the EU worked to support some of them. The refuges that moved on illegally, often came through the Balkan countries through Hungary before moving on. Orbán used the threat of refuge hoards overrunning the border to consolidate populist anger, which he then used to expand his base. The media spoke glowingly of the Orbán and the government’s work to protect the country. Orbán when Hungary built a fence to keep refuges in Serbia. It was a short-term inconvenience to migrants who found ways around it.

ILDs also depend on using “traditional values” to separate their countries from the “decadent” western countries. LGBT people are specifically vilified as the other and the leadership focuses their anger at those that don’t support “the family and religion”.

By the brute demonization of these “outsiders”, the ILD leaders often win greater power in free elections. ILD philosophy leverages uncomfortableness into to a near total fear of outsiders. The fear generated by “outside forces” drives more voters to the controlling party. And they then define opposition not as fearful but as enemies of the good people of the country.

if that opposition controls a media asset, then they can take control for the good of the country. In Poland and Hungary the blame is placed on the European Union leaders and their acceptance of LBGT.

Economic Power

In practice the ILD mimic authoritarian governments - and the worst parts of Western democracies - in that the leaders reward their allies both in and out of government with wealth and power. The families of leaders and loyal politicians benefit from the power dynamic and support the government. It is a closed reward loop that generates more support of the leader in power. With the shuttering of opposition parts and control of the media, ILD maintain their power.

In order to assure control of the country one of the most critical things ILD do is to neuter the Judiciary. For example, Poland forced the retirement of judges over a change in term limitations and retirement age. These changes were used to purge the more powerful courts, including the Supreme Court.

Populism and Illiberal Democracies

Populism is often the force that moves people to vote one way or another. President Trump, France’s Marine Le Pen, Brazil’s Bolsonaro, Italy’s Meloni and United Kingdom’s Nigel Farage all ran on platforms that were specifically anti-immigrant and pro-traditional values mimicking populist causes. And while LaPen’s National Rally party has not won a national election, Trump, Bolsanaro, Meloni, and Farage all lead populist movements that achieved some of their goals.

Farage lead the successful election to  Brexit. The end of the Trump and Bolsanaro’s Presidency resulted in populist physical attacks on the government institutions. These attacks are the tactics of Illiberal means to hang on to power. In both countries the populists parties are still in government, just not presently in power.  

How to Respond to Illiberal Democracies

My point of view is that Illiberal Democracies are bad. They implement domestically supported changes like raising tariffs and exiting the free market system which often spell long term problems. Great Britain after Brexit is a good example of an idea that sounded good, but implementation lead to a different economic outcome. The ILD leaders validate and enrich part of the population at the expense of the non-supporters.

In the case of Hungary and Poland the European Union is responding by trying to implement changes. They are using an economic carrots and sticks, threatening to hold back development aid until the internal politics are more inclusive. This position emboldens ILD leaders even more. If they can derail plans, they are a hero for standing up to the EU. If they capitulate to the EU, then the politicians can use that to “prove” the system is stacked against local people.

If an ally, like Türkiye, is deemed critical to the United States, then our military and political system will ignore their internal politics. After all, we ignore much worse with some allies who are near dictatorships. In these cases were a country is militarily supportive of the United States, there is very little leverage to force allies to change.

There is also the possibility of change arising internally. Singapore, South Korea, Malaysia and other countries in South America have used free elections to move towards more liberal systems.

On the other hand, there are many people in the United States that are actively working to increase Illiberalism in America. You find Vitor Orbán featured at CPAC conferences in the United States. You can see many conservative outlets, radio and TV, extolling the virtues of his regime. These nascent movements in the Americas and Europe need to be challenged or Illiberalism will rise again - with populists exploiting any outrage. The more that a population pays attention and votes, the greater chance that Illiberal tendencies can be countered. The more that indifference and disassociation from politics rules voters, the more likely an Illiberal leader will be elected and try to impose their vision.