On Autocracy: Trump, Putin, the renewed strongman fetish, & the moral limits of autocratic rule

Without taking this thread more off-topic I agree with your main points here. Especially how the Arab Spring was painted in Western media as a "new generation" reshaping the region; they would be the drivers of a new "western-friendly" Middle East. I mean Egypt is a giant country; the middle class of Cairo can't represent the interests of the entire population. There is a chasm between Istanbullus and the cities of eastern Turkey just like there is a clash of interests between different parts of America.
That said it's a bit unfair to not aknowledge this aspect as it was in many ways driven by youth who was tired of corruption and lack of opportunities where social media, with it's quick spread of information, played an essential part. Then again I agree with you about its drawbacks, established movements like MB certainly capitalised on the lack of cohesion of the protest movements(the voter turnout was very sad also). I shall keep on being optimistic.
True, the youth and their social media networks did play significant a part. Even if they didn't turn out to save the Middle East as optimistic Western liberals thought they would they did have their impact. The perception of the Egyptian revolution as a liberal youth movement was mainly why Obama left Mubarak out to dry(he famously said about Egypt in 2011 that "I want the kids on the street to win and I want the Google guy to become president").

If the Egyptian Revolution was perceived as a Brotherhood dominated movement there's no way Obama would've abandoned Mubarak so easily. In fact many of his senior advisors at the time advised him not to anyway so the PR of the Arab Spring had an impact in the way the Western powers perceived it and that was driven largely by the youth and social media.
 
I think it would end up like modern day China. The west has too much money invested around the world to become fully nationalistic or communist. And little will to policy every little aspect of human existence. I also don't see the culture of the strongmen being that prevalent. But a dictatorship led by a faceless party or a group of corporations focused on economical growth and the suppression of dissent is a possibility.
That's even scarier. With a strongman at the helm there's at least a figure to rally against and someone who can make dramatic mistakes that lead to their downfall. With a faceless oligarchy, there is no such figure to build resentment against and the changes come slower, more gradually and in a way that eludes perception by most.
 
I should have specified: I am working under the presumption that the West is now fertile for autocrats to entrench themselves.

My question: if one were to take hold and shortcut the liberal democratic organs (like Trump seems to desire to do), what would the "the line" at which the liberal democratic institutions, presumably with popular support, reaffirmed themselves? Or, is such a line was especially elastic, what exactly would the regime look like?
.

I think our media plays an important role in this. Whenever one of those “organs” is taken control of it is done subtly so that popular support is not necessarily needed. You don’t need popular support to highjack the organ, you need rebelling against your highjacking to remain unpopular. There is just enough doubt sowed in whether or not the organ was highjacked that rising up against seems radical instead of obvious. As long as you give one side the ability to build a decent argument on why there was no high jacking then those in the middle are unsure enough that they don’t join the opposing side in rebelling.

I think a media that toned down the sensationalism on little things would be more trusted when they called attention to actual problems. I think some of the strongman power plays can be alleviate if our media didn’t call wolf so often or push an agenda. The more people that trust one source the more likely there will be a push back to the “highjackings” when that source calls it out.
 
I can certainly see it, with the populist candidate in Mexico closing to 50% of votes in the polls, it seems that his political power will be more considerable.

Although he doesnt has a strongman or ideological speech and there is no guarantee that his party members will follow him no matter what, a lot of them simply seem to be opportunists.
 
I originally didn't have Trump in the title. But none of you right-wingers post in threads that have to do with philosophy, political theory, dense issues, or really anything that doesn't involve Trump/Hillary/Muslims/BlackLivesMatter.

So, after 12 hours, I changed the title and put in "Trump" and, wallah, I attracted two of you within an hour.

Also, Trump is much, much more openly desirous of autocratic ability than Putin ever was. And his supporters are idolizing the two simultaneously.



Let’s amend that to some of his supporters.


I prefer my press to remain on the balcony.
 
Back
Top