The New Authoritarian Playbook describes how contemporary leaders consolidate power by using subtle, often legal, methods instead of traditional, violent coups. This shift moves away from outright force and towards a strategy of gradual erosion of democratic norms and institutions, creating a system that is authoritarian in practice but maintains a veneer of democratic legitimacy.

1. Shift to Subtle Control-

Modern authoritarians have learned that overt military coups or the immediate abolition of multi-party elections are more likely to provoke international condemnation and domestic resistance. Instead, they use a more sophisticated approach, often referred to as "soft authoritarianism" or "autocratization by stealth." This method involves a gradual, piecemeal dismantling of democracy, making each individual action seem minor or even justifiable. The goal is to avoid triggering alarms until it's too late. The control is not about eliminating democratic institutions but hollowing them out from the inside. They operate within the existing legal and constitutional framework, making their actions appear legitimate to both their supporters and international observers.

2. The Mechanics of "Democratic Backsliding"-

Democratic backsliding is the process by which a country shifts away from democracy. It rarely happens with a single, dramatic event. Instead, it occurs through a series of incremental steps that weaken the core institutions of a democratic state.

• Weakening of Institutions: The judiciary and legislature are key targets. The judiciary is often compromised by packing courts with loyalists, which erodes its independence and makes it a tool of the executive. The legislature is marginalized by a dominant party using its majority to pass laws that concentrate power, sideline the opposition, and prevent effective oversight of the government.

• Manipulation of Elections: While elections are still held, they are no longer "free and fair" in practice. This is achieved by gerrymandering electoral districts, using state resources to fund the incumbent party's campaign, intimidating voters, or controlling the electoral commission itself. The playing field is heavily tilted in favor of the incumbent.

• Suppression of Political Opposition: This is done through a variety of means that fall short of outright imprisonment. Opponents may face politically motivated investigations, libel lawsuits, or be targeted by state-controlled media. Civil society organizations and independent journalists are also harassed, with the goal of silencing all dissenting voices.

3. The Role of Legal and Constitutional Changes-

The new playbook heavily relies on legal and constitutional changes to legitimize the power grab. These changes are often framed as necessary reforms to improve efficiency, combat corruption, or protect national security.

• Constitutional Amendments: Rulers use their legislative majority to amend the constitution, often to remove term limits, granting the executive more time in power. They may also alter the constitution to grant the president emergency powers or weaken the powers of the other branches of government.

• Passing Restrictive Laws: New laws are passed that restrict freedom of assembly, speech, and the press. These laws are often broadly written, allowing the government to use them against any group or individual it deems a threat.

• Referendums: Sometimes, the executive will hold a referendum to legitimize its changes. This allows the leader to claim they have a direct mandate from the people, bypassing the traditional democratic processes and making it harder for the opposition to object.

By utilizing these legalistic maneuvers, leaders can centralize power and dismantle democratic safeguards while maintaining the pretense of a rule-of-law-based system.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Authoritarianism" has evolved to operate within a seemingly democratic framework. Instead of using military coups, leaders now often use legal and institutional means to consolidate power, creating a system that is authoritarian in all but name.

Africa: The Use of Populism and Anti-Corruption Rhetoric-

In Africa, leaders often come to power with popular support, promising to fight corruption and promote national unity. However, they can then use this mandate to dismantle checks on their power. They exploit ethnic divisions or popular anti-corruption sentiment to extend term limits, silence dissent, and sideline political opponents.

• Rwanda: President Paul Kagame has overseen significant economic growth and stability. However, he has also used the country's tragic history of genocide to justify a highly controlled political environment, with the ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) dominating all aspects of political life. Term limits were extended through a 2015 referendum, allowing Kagame to potentially stay in power until 2034.

• Nigeria: While the country has a multi-party system and has seen peaceful transitions of power, there are consistent concerns about electoral integrity and the use of state resources by the ruling party. The government has used state security agencies to suppress protests and has been accused of harassing journalists and activists who criticize the government.

• Cameroon: Paul Biya has been president since 1982. Despite the existence of a multi-party system, his ruling party has maintained power through a combination of repression, electoral manipulation, and an inability to address deep-seated regional grievances, particularly among the English-speaking minority.

• Côte d'Ivoire: The country has made strides toward democracy but remains fragile. In 2020, President Alassane Ouattara's decision to seek a third term, which critics argued violated the constitution, sparked widespread protests and was seen as a major step toward authoritarianism.

Europe: The Rise of Populist Nationalism-

In Europe, populist-nationalist parties often win power by appealing to a "pure people" against a "corrupt elite." Once in office, they often attack the rule of law and restrict media freedom, which they view as obstacles to the "will of the people."

• Hungary: Under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, the Fidesz party has used its parliamentary supermajority to overhaul the constitution, weaken the judiciary, and consolidate control over state-run and private media. Orbán's government has also passed laws restricting NGOs and used anti-immigrant rhetoric to rally support.

• Poland: The Law and Justice (PiS) party, while now out of power, spent years attempting to undermine the independence of the judiciary by giving the government control over judicial appointments. It also increased control over state media, turning it into a pro-government mouthpiece.

• Italy: The rise of populist parties like the League and the Five Star Movement has challenged traditional political norms. While not a full-blown authoritarian shift, their rhetoric has often been anti-establishment and critical of the European Union, which they accuse of undermining national sovereignty.

North/South America: Charismatic Populism and Executive Power-

In the Americas, leaders on both the left and right have used charismatic populism to connect directly with the people, bypassing traditional institutions and consolidating power in the executive branch.

• Venezuela: Hugo Chávez came to power democratically and used his popularity and state oil resources to implement social programs. He then used constitutional changes to extend his term limits and weaken the judiciary and legislature, eventually paving the way for Nicolás Maduro to consolidate a de facto one-party state.

• United States: The presidency of Donald Trump saw frequent challenges to democratic norms. He often attacked the free press as "enemies of the people," questioned the integrity of elections, and criticized federal agencies and the justice system, arguing they were part of a "deep state" working against him.

• El Salvador: President Nayib Bukele has used his popularity and legislative majority to remove the country's highest court justices and the attorney general, replacing them with loyalists. He has been widely criticized for concentrating power in the executive and weakening democratic checks and balances.

Asia: Economic Success as a Justification for Control-

In Asia, a common playbook is to argue that strong, centralized leadership is necessary to ensure economic success and stability. This "social contract" allows governments to suppress political freedoms in exchange for prosperity.

• China: The Chinese Communist Party's rule is largely justified by its ability to lift millions of people out of poverty and turn the country into an economic superpower. This narrative is used to dismiss Western-style democracy as a source of instability and to justify a highly repressive system of surveillance and censorship.

• Singapore: The People's Action Party (PAP) has governed Singapore since its independence. It maintains its dominance through strict controls on media and public gatherings and has successfully argued that this tight control is necessary to maintain social harmony and economic prosperity.

• Vietnam: The Communist Party of Vietnam has opened up the country's economy but has refused to allow political pluralism. Like China, it points to its economic progress as evidence that a one-party system is more effective for national development than multi-party democracy.