Gülşen Doğan describes how charismatic leadership, propaganda, and a commitment to stable governance are behind the rise of autocratic populists
Contributors to this Future of Populism blog series have written about the definition of populism, the emergence of authoritarian populism, the influence of the military in populist governments, and the demand for populist leadership. But another important question arises from these analyses: what explains the lasting appeal of authoritarian populism across diverse contexts and eras?
This question is especially pertinent given that 71% of the world’s population – 5.7 billion people – live under authoritarian regimes. Ten years ago, the figure was just 48%.
Authoritarian populism, which has surfaced in political systems across the world, uses three similar strategies to cultivate public loyalty.
Max Weber’s concept of charismatic authority links authoritarian leaders' appeal to their ability to forge personal bonds with their followers. Embodying stability, national sovereignty, and traditionalism, such leaders tell their followers compelling stories.
Charismatic leaders present themselves as outsiders who embody the will of the people. They stand up to corrupt elites and ineffective institutions, and they cut through red tape to achieve tangible outcomes.
Such anti-establishment rhetoric appeals to people disillusioned with politics. It empowers marginalised, neglected citizens, and makes them feel heard. Charismatic leaders, who style themselves as guardians against perceived dangers, thus foster a deep personal bond with their followers.
This bond allows leaders to sustain a powerful hold on authority. It inspires citizens to identify what they have in common with the leader, and earns their loyalty and trust.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is a staunch guardian of Hungary’s Christian heritage. This appeals in particular to the country's rural, conservative demographic, who see the forces of globalisation and the European Union as threats to their national sovereignty.
In Türkiye, the religious, nationalist identity of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has strengthened his bond with conservative religious communities, especially in rural areas. By so doing, Erdoğan has reinforced his position as protector of Türkiye’s Islamic identity.
Charismatic quality is unique to the leader; it cannot be passed on to successors
In Brazil, former president Jair Bolsonaro's connection with conservative, middle-class voters enhanced his image as an outsider who could take on the 'corrupt' political establishment. Bolsonaro also took a tough stance on crime, which he framed as safeguarding traditional family values.
However, charismatic authority depends on a leader's unique ability to connect with the people through storytelling, and by embodying national and cultural values. This personal quality cannot be passed on to subsequent leaders, and this makes charismatic authority an unstable style of leadership.
Governments use propaganda to makes themselves appear durable, to suppress dissent, and to influence public sentiment. Propaganda can perpetuate authority, but its consequences are complex, and dependent on situational factors.
Russia's President Vladimir Putin and former US President Donald Trump have made adept use of propaganda to enhance their public personas. In more volatile and precarious autocratic countries, such as Venezuela, leaders use propaganda to suppress anti-regime mobilisation.
Some see propaganda merely as a means of indoctrinating citizens with pro-regime narratives. But propaganda also offers insights into a regime's resilience and ability to exercise social control. For example, a Chinese citizen might engage with state-sponsored propaganda. That doesn't necessarily give them a more favourable view of the government. Propaganda can coerce and control, as well as persuade.
Propaganda can coerce and control, as well as persuade
During international crises, governments rely on propaganda to influence public perception. Authoritarian regimes often spend fortunes manipulating media narratives that shape public perception and maintain regime legitimacy. By regulating the flow of information, such regimes can advance their populist agendas and suppress dissenting voices.
In China, state rhetoric and propaganda can significantly improve citizens' views on government handling of territorial disputes. Narratives that emphasise historical injustices, and focus on future success, have proved especially effective.
This strategic propaganda sustains public support and deters potential opposition, but the political landscape and the predispositions of the people mean it may not have the desired effect.
Playing on citizens' profound fear of disorder and external threats, authoritarian leaders promise stability, and emphasise national sovereignty. This is why, when authoritarian regimes improve the economy or accentuate national pride, they manage to retain popular support. Authoritarian leaders frequently portray themselves as robust figures capable of restoring stability, providing clear solutions, and protecting the nation from perceived threats. This is particularly appealing in a globalised, culturally plural world in which many feel their identity and traditional way of life are under threat.
A commitment to stable governance has particular appeal for those who feel their national identity is under threat from globalisation
In The Philippines, President Rodrigo Duterte imposed zero-tolerance law enforcement through his contentious 'war on drugs'. His approach has attracted support from Filipinos fed up with rising crime and perceived poor governance.
In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has dedicated himself to Hindu nationalism alongside economic advancement. He has thus consolidated support among India’s Hindu majority while marginalising religious and ethnic minorities. Modi's authoritarian populism appeals because he communicates clear, simple messages that suggest he is an effective manager.
Authoritarian populism is enjoying strong global appeal, yet it's unclear if those who lead in this style will be able to maintain their power. Whether they do will depend upon the resilience of democratic systems and people's capacity to tackle fundamental economic and cultural disputes.
If authoritarian populists' appeal diminishes, will their successors be able to re-establish democracy under current structural conditions? The danger is that authoritarian U-turns could trigger a robust resurgence of authoritarianism.
