Identifying Authoritarian Tactics in Democratic Systems

A sobering message from a history teacher: I’ve spent years teaching both American and international government. We study the full spectrum of systems: from well-established democracies like the UK, to hybrid regimes like Mexico and Nigeria, to authoritarian states like russia, Iran, and China. Each case study offers a lesson — but lately, the most unsettling one comes from within our own borders. One key lesson I teach my students: there’s never a single, defining moment when a democracy falls. No leader ever declares, “I am now a dictator.” The erosion is subtle. Gradual. Legal on the surface. And often supported — or at least tolerated — by the public. Look at russia. When Putin took power in 2000, it had the trappings of democracy: elections, a constitution, federalism, and a separation of powers. Today, those structures remain on paper, but functionally, they mean nothing. Putin holds absolute power — and is, perhaps not coincidentally, admired by Donald Trump. So, how do we recognize when a democracy is backsliding? There are clear warning signs — every first-year political science student learns them. Here are a few I share with my students: 1. When the Legislative Branch yields to the Executive. Congress was designed to check presidential power. If Congress becomes subservient — whether through inaction or complicity — the balance envisioned by the Constitution collapses. Putin faced early pushback from the Duma. He eventually sidelined, intimidated, and replaced dissenters with loyalists. Sound familiar? 2. When corporatism becomes normalized. In an authoritarian slide, industries and oligarchs cozy up to power in exchange for favors. In russia, compliant billionaires got rich. Critics were jailed or exiled. We’ve seen similar patterns here: tax breaks, deregulation, and media consolidation benefiting those aligned with Trump. 3. When adherence to the Constitution becomes optional. Rule of law is foundational to democracy. Yet we’ve seen moments when Constitution was ignored under Trump’s leadership. In healthy democracies, that shouldn't even be a question. 4. When enemies — internal and external — are manufactured. Authoritarians thrive by uniting people against scapegoats. Vulnerable communities become targets. Historic allies become threats. The purpose? To consolidate power under the guise of protecting the nation. 5. When personal loyalty to the leader outweighs loyalty to the nation. Public servants swear oaths to the Constitution, not individuals. But when loyalty shifts toward one man — especially among military, law enforcement, and intelligence — democracy is in grave danger. Here’s the hardest truth: if America continues down this path, it won’t be because we were blind. It won’t happen in darkness. It will happen in plain sight — and with our permission. Democracy is not self-sustaining. It survives only when we choose it — over and over again.

Hungary under Viktor Orbán serves as a stark example of how a democracy can inch towards centralization and authoritarianism within an electoral framework. As we face the possibility of “Trump 2.0,” there are critical lessons we must learn to guard against similar shifts here in the U.S. Here are six urgent lessons to consider. 1. Media Control & Press Freedom. Orbán’s government has consolidated media ownership, aligning much of it with state narratives. A free, diverse press is essential to democracy; it keeps power in check and informs the public. When media voices diminish, so does oversight. This isn’t a hypothetical for us; it’s a red flag. 2. Judicial Independence. Hungary’s reshaped judiciary now aligns with the ruling government’s perspective. Here, Trump has already stacked the federal courts with loyalists who support his agenda. The importance of an independent judiciary as a balance against executive power cannot be overstated. 3. Electoral Manipulation. Through redistricting and voting rule changes, Orbán’s administration has reshaped Hungary’s electoral system to reinforce his power. Structural changes like these are tools to entrench authority—tools we need to recognize and resist if we want true electoral competition. 4. Civil Society Suppression. In Hungary, NGOs critical of the government face restrictions and intimidation. In any democracy, civil society organizations and activist groups need protection to operate without fear. Stifling dissent erodes the freedoms we must defend at all costs. 5. Nationalism & Social Policy. Orbán’s “illiberal democracy” rides on a wave of nationalism and conservative social policies, appealing to some but marginalizing others. The risk here is clear: without policies that embrace diversity, marginalized communities are sidelined, threatening the social fabric of democracy. 6. Economic Control. With Hungary’s centralization of economic power and influence over EU funds, Orbán’s government has shown how centralizing economic control can strengthen authoritarianism. Accountability in public spending and economic governance matters—without it, corruption and power consolidation become the norm. The lesson from Hungary is clear: Trump 2.0 isn’t just a political shift; it’s a potential threat to the democratic principles we rely on—transparency, checks and balances, and institutional integrity. Democracy doesn’t die all at once; it’s death by a thousand cuts.

'1. Do not obey in advance. Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do. 2. Defend institutions. It is institutions that help us to preserve decency. They need our help as well. Do not speak of "our institutions" unless you make them yours by acting on their behalf. Institutions do not protect themselves. They fall one after the other unless each is defended from the beginning. So choose an institution you care about -- a court, a newspaper, a law, a labor union -- and take its side. 3. Beware the one-party state. The parties that remade states and suppressed rivals were not omnipotent from the start. They exploited a historic moment to make political life impossible for their opponents. So support the multiple-party system and defend the rules of democratic elections. Vote in local and state elections while you can. Consider running for office. 4. Take responsibility for the face of the world. The symbols of today enable the reality of tomorrow. Notice the swastikas and the other signs of hate. Do not look away, and do not get used to them. Remove them yourself and set an example for others to do so. 5. Remember professional ethics. When political leaders set a negative example, professional commitments to just practice become more important. It is hard to subvert a rule-of-law state without lawyers, or to hold show trials without judges. Authoritarians need obedient civil servants, and concentration camp directors seek businessmen interested in cheap labor.' Timothy Snyder https://lnkd.in/g2Dxy574

At Harvard, I run a small study group called Padthai & Politics, where students passionate about governance and democracy come together to explore political challenges. Today, we had the privilege of hosting Freddy Guevara, a Venezuelan politician and former deputy speaker of the National Assembly. He has faced political persecution similar to mine—stripped of his rights for over a decade. Simply put, he is Venezuela’s Padipat Santipada. Our discussion centered on “Cheat Sheets on How Autocrats Cheat”, which I translated into Thai as “The Autocrat’s Playbook: How Dictators Rig Elections.” We examined how authoritarian regimes manipulate the system—declining voter turnout, voter suppression, and engineered voter fatigue—drawing lessons from Brazil, India, Turkey, ASEAN nations, and Latin America. We also discussed Competitive Autocracy, a system where elections exist but are neither free nor fair. Incumbents use state-controlled media, legal loopholes, and voter intimidation to maintain power. Opposition forces may still contest elections, but the playing field is deliberately tilted to ensure the regime’s survival. This model is common in hybrid democracies and authoritarian states that seek international legitimacy while keeping a firm grip on power.

In April 2007, I was in Tallinn city centre when something shifted. There were no breaking news alerts, live updates, instant explanations. That kind of information environment simply didn't exist yet. There was only a growing tension you could feel, but not yet see. Something told me to leave immediately. I didn't have information, just instinct. Minutes later, the looting and riots began. That night became one of the defining moments in Estonia’s modern history. What unfolded was not just unrest. It was an early demonstration of what we now understand as integrated hybrid warfare: coordinated narrative manipulation, psychological pressure, cyberattacks targeting state institutions, media, banking, the fabric of normal societal functioning. Today, we live in the opposite reality. Information moves instantly across the world. That speed has created a new vulnerability: influence, manipulation, engineered narratives can now scale faster than institutions, media, or societies can verify and respond. This is precisely the environment Active Measures are designed to exploit. In Part 5 of this series, I examine a deeply uncomfortable but necessary reality. Democracy’s greatest strengths openness, trust, pluralism, freedom are also its most accessible operational surface for adversaries who are not constrained by those same principles. This does not make democracy weak but open which creates structural conditions that can be exploited. This article explains: • Why Russian strategic culture has historically viewed democracies as operational terrain • How openness creates access points that authoritarian systems can exploit • Why pluralism creates friction that can be amplified into fragmentation • How freedom of expression enables influence to spread in plain sight • Why democratic decision-making is structurally slower than adversarial operations • How Estonia 2007 and Ukraine since 2014 illustrate this model in practice • Why AI, social media, digital connectivity have dramatically accelerated these effects None of these methods are new. What has changed is the velocity, reach, scalability enabled by the digital era. What once required years of careful cultivation can now unfold in minutes. Often these methods are still treated as unexpected in Western discourse, rather than recognised as part of a long-standing strategic approach deeply embedded in Russian statecraft and culture. Understanding this is not alarmism but clarity. Clarity is a prerequisite for resilience. The objective of Active Measures is not dramatic collapse but gradual erosion of trust, cohesion, confidence, decision-making capacity, to create friction inside societies so that they weaken from within, often without fully realising why. The first step in defending democratic systems is recognising how they are being targeted, the very openness that makes them strong can also make them vulnerable if left unprotected. #ActiveMeasures #HybridWarfare #InformationWarfare

Competitive authoritarianism is not a sudden coup. In this state, which the USA is currently experiencing, it’s a slow, intentional tilt of the rules by leaders who keep elections but stack the deck. Research on competitive authoritarianism shows it’s built like a three‑legged stool: (1) political elites are co‑opted with jobs, money, or legal protection; (2) the security forces are pulled toward the leader’s side; and (3) civil society (unions, churches, media, grassroots groups) is either mobilized for the leader or pressured into silence. When all three legs line up (think Venezuela), the system hardens; when one leg breaks (as in Bolivia, where civil society and parts of the security forces wouldn’t go along), the project collapses; when elites are fragmented and citizens stay active (Brazil under Bolsonaro), it stalls. Applied to the U.S. and the Trump/MAGA project today: the danger isn’t tanks in the streets but quiet, practical moves; packing loyalists into government, weakening neutral referees, using police or guard units for politics, and riling up supporters to drown out critics; while still holding elections. The antidote is equally practical: federalism, independent courts, a professional military and civil service, business and political leaders who refuse to play along, and ordinary people who organize, sue, vote, and make rule‑breaking costly. In plain English: competitive authoritarianism takes root only if enough insiders decide the rules no longer apply, and it fails when institutions and citizens insist they do.

Have you read this book? How to Rig an Election by Nic Cheeseman and Brian Klaas examines the methods and strategies that authoritarian regimes and political actors use to manipulate elections to maintain power while maintaining a façade of democracy. Its thesis is that election rigging has evolved from overt methods, such as blatant voter suppression or ballot-stuffing, to more subtle and sophisticated tactics. These include disinformation campaigns, gerrymandering, voter intimidation, and co-opting electoral commissions, allowing governments to undermine democratic processes while appearing legitimate. Below are the key methods of election rigging discussed in How to Rig an Election: 1. Manipulating Electoral Rolls - Removing or disenfranchising certain groups of voters, such as minorities or opposition supporters, to skew the outcome in favor of the ruling party. 2. Control of Media - Dominating media coverage to promote the ruling party or candidate while suppressing or discrediting opposition voices through censorship or misinformation. 3. Vote Buying - Offering money, gifts, or other incentives to voters in exchange for their support, particularly targeting impoverished or marginalized communities. 4. Gerrymandering - Redrawing electoral boundaries to favor the ruling party by concentrating opposition voters in a few districts or diluting their influence across many. 5. Misusing State Resources - Leveraging public funds, infrastructure, or personnel for campaigning, giving the ruling party an unfair advantage over competitors. 6. Intimidation and Violence - Threatening or physically harming opposition supporters, candidates, or voters to discourage participation or coerce compliance. 7. Manipulating Electoral Commissions - Stacking electoral bodies with loyalists who can influence the rules, decisions, or reporting of results to favor the incumbent. 8. - Ballot Stuffing: Adding fraudulent votes to the ballot boxes, often in areas with weak monitoring or opposition presence. 9. Controlling Voter Access - Restricting voting hours, reducing polling stations, or creating logistical challenges to prevent certain demographics from voting. 10. - Deliberate Counting Errors - Tampering with vote counting or altering results during transmission to inflate support for the ruling party. 11. Use of Technology and Surveillance - Employing advanced technology to monitor and intimidate voters, or using electronic voting systems prone to hacking and manipulation. 12. Disinformation Campaigns - Spreading fake news, conspiracy theories, or false accusations to undermine opposition credibility and confuse voters. 13. Restricting Opposition Campaigns - Banning rallies, arresting opposition leaders, or denying access to resources and venues to weaken their ability to campaign effectively. Each of these methods is part of a broader strategy to undermine democratic norms while maintaining a superficial appearance of legitimacy.

Proud to share our new Atlantic Council report — “Authoritarian Reach and Democratic Response: A Tactical Framework to Counter and Prevent Transnational Repression,” co-authored with Sze-Fung Lee, Kenton Thibaut, Iria Puyosa, Lisandra N., Layla Mashkoor, Andy Carvin. Authoritarian regimes are extending their repression far beyond their borders, targeting journalists, activists, and diaspora communities in democracies through surveillance, threats, disinformation, and coercion. This report presents a global framework to help governments, civil society, and private actors identify, disrupt, and prevent these attacks on freedom and sovereignty. The framework offers practical tools for democratic coordination, mapping threats, strengthening legal and policy responses, and building resilience through collaboration and early-warning mechanisms. I’ve experienced first-hand how transnational repression operates in silence and shadows, from digital intimidation to physical targeting, and how democracies often respond reactively. This framework is meant to change that and defend those vulnerable to TNR, and help us get ahead of authoritarian reach. As global threats evolve, defending journalists, activists, and diaspora voices is not optional, it’s essential to defending our democratic sovereignty. 📘 Read the report here: https://lnkd.in/gTQF8jfD

🏴☠️ Authoritarianism Is Evolving—So Must Our Resistance ✊ Last week at Harvard Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, we had a conversation on Navigating Democratic Backsliding with Harvard students, drawing insights from 3 cases: Venezuela, Serbia, and India. Here are the main insights: 🦠 Authoritarianism today mutates like a virus. The question is - why do we keep electing so many authoritarians? Here is how they mutated: - 📺 Media monopolies built on shady private capture - 🧑💻 Digital armies of trolls paid to silence dissent - 😈 Smear campaigns targeting voices for democracy - 💼 Membership-for-opportunity schemes, where party allegiance is currency - 🤝 Government-fueled oligarchs, rewarded for loyalty, not merit - 🚨 Strategic detentions—just long enough to intimidate, but short enough to avoid attention - 🪓 Systematic fear and minor violence, in-prisoning activists for several days, minor physical attacks, to stay under the radar of international community - 🗳️ Delivering policies only for their base, everyone else is the enemy This is the new playbook for co-opting and ruling for just by 20–25% of the population which turns into 50% or so in the elections, and marginalizing the rest. WHAT CAN WE DO? ❌ What doesn’t work: reactive protests, lawsuits without grassroots, or placing faith only in better policy or international pressure. ✅ What DOES work: - ✊ Disciplined nonviolence - 🧱 Build something - create organization & structure to institutionalize the resistance & learn from mistakes collectively - 👥 Collective leadership over single heroes - 🫱🏽🫲🏼 Empathy - focusing on those who give orders, not on those who execute - 🥾 Break the fear & isolation with walking across country to meet out-of-city people too - 🌍 Diaspora support—financial, diplomatic, and moral Democracy is not a given. It must be strategically defended, creatively built, and empathetically restored. #DemocracyMatters #Authoritarianism #HumanRights #StrategicResistance #AshCenter #HarvardPanel #GlobalDemocracy #CivilSociety #LeadershipMatters #PowerToThePeople #LinkedInInsights #Activism #InstitutionBuilding #ChangeMakers #DemocraticLeadership Cc Freddy Guevara Cortez