Home > Autocracy Now

Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - 12:15am

Autocracy Now
What’s Inside
Gideon Rose

GIDEON ROSE is Editor of Foreign Affairs.

Historical eras tend to have characteristic leadership types: the fledgling democrats of the
1920s, the dictators of the 1930s and 1940s, the nationalist anticolonialists of the 1950s and
1960s, the gerontocrats of the 1970s, the fledgling democrats (again) of the 1980s and 1990s.
Now we’re back to dictators.

The leading figures on the world stage today practice a brutal, smashmouth politics, a
personalized authoritarianism. Old-school strongmen, they do whatever is needed to grasp and
hold  on to power. Here we profile five to see what makes them tick. All fought their way from
obscurity to the throne and then took a hard authoritarian turn. But how, and why?

Susan Glasser says that Russia’s Vladimir Putin sees himself as a latter-day Peter the Great [1].
He fetishizes strength, dreams of restoring imperial grandeur, and rules by the old tsarist
doctrine of “Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality.”

According to Richard McGregor [2], China’s Xi Jinping is driven by paternal hero worship and
devotion to the Chinese Communist Party. Having concluded that the party’s rule was under
growing threat, he has devoted his time in office to restoring its dominance.

Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan is harder to pin down, writes Kaya Genc [3]. A fiery Islamist turned
reformer turned populist authoritarian, he has become the country’s longest-serving and most
significant leader since Ataturk.

Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines is comfortable shooting people and wants you to know it,
notes Sheila Coronel [4]. He made his name as a tough mayor bringing order to a crime-ridden
city, and as president, he offers that experience as a national model—“Singapore with thugs
instead of technocrats.”

And Hungary’s Viktor Orban, Paul Lendvai explains [5], started off as a liberal activist before
cynically switching to populist nationalism when the political winds shifted—and as prime
minister, he has proceeded to dismantle democratic institutions and undermine the rule of law.

There is no scholarly consensus on what role individuals play in history, relative to broader
structural forces in their environment. You can tell any political story you want through the lens
of the people involved, making it appear that their choices mattered greatly. And you can tell the
same story with abstract trends doing the work and human particularity washed out of the
picture. So how much do details about these men’s lives and characters matter? How would
history be unfolding without them, and how much of what happens next will be determined by
their personal whims? Good questions.

Copyright © 2019 by the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc.

All rights reserved. To request permission to distribute or reprint this article, please visit
ForeignAffairs.com/Permissions.

Source URL: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2019-08-13/autocracy-now

Links
[1] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/putin-great
[2] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/party-man
[3] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/turkey/erdogans-way
[4] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/philippines/vigilante-president
[5] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/hungary/transformer