The New Authoritarians: Money, Country, God

The landscape of global authoritarianism has shifted dramatically in the first quarter of the 21st century. The terrifying figures of the past, such as Hitler and Stalin, have given way to a new breed of leader who blends into the global elite. These new authoritarians prioritize image and public relations over the overt brutality of previous eras.

Despite this polished exterior, the fundamental drive for control remains. These leaders manipulate public opinion and distort information to maintain power. When these softer methods fail, they revert to the violence of the past, as evidenced by recent conflicts in Ukraine and Syria.

The traditional image of the dictator has undergone a radical transformation. Gone are the days of the terrifying, militaristic figures like Hitler, Stalin, or Pinochet. The modern autocrat presents a polished, professional appearance, often wearing formal suits and ties, or even casual athletic wear.

These leaders are now fixtures on the international stage. They fly to Davos every January to participate in the World Economic Forum. There, they mingle with the global plutocracy, exchanging embraces with business elites and positioning themselves as legitimate statesmen rather than strongmen.

The new authoritarians have replaced the brute force of the past with sophisticated tools of influence. Rather than relying exclusively on torturers and assassins, they hire pollsters and political scientists to refine their public image and strategy.

They have also embraced mass media to create an illusion of transparency. They participate in radio and television programs, ostensibly submitting themselves to questions from the public. However, this is often a facade for deeper manipulation.

Their primary goal is the distortion of information to entorpecer (dull) the rebellion of the populace. The methods include:

• Constant manipulation of public opinion
• Control over the flow of information
• Distorting facts to confuse the citizenry

Despite the modernization of their tactics, the fundamental nature of these regimes has not changed. When the manipulation of public opinion and the distortion of information prove insufficient to maintain absolute control, these leaders revert to historical patterns of violence.

The source points to specific examples where this violence has been unleashed upon civilian populations. The Putin regime's invasion of Ukraine serves as a stark reminder of this reality. Similarly, the actions of Bashar al-Assad in Syria demonstrate that the threat of physical force remains the ultimate tool of the autocrat.

A central question arises from this evolution: how is it possible that, after witnessing the brutal effects of 20th-century fanaticism, the world watches impassively as autocracies resurge? The new authoritarians have successfully masked their intentions behind a veneer of modernity and engagement.

By participating in global forums like the UN and the CIA-adjacent intelligence networks, or simply by looking like 'normal' politicians, they disarm the international community. The shift from the terrifying to the mundane makes the rise of these regimes harder to identify and oppose until violence erupts.