The global world order’s political plight forms the basis of autocratisation, an apt label used to encapsulate the democratic conundrums of contemporary politics. Following the events of the Second World War and the emergence of international institutions such as the United Nations, democracy triumphed over alternative government systems. However, as recently witnessed, autocratic tendencies have rendered decades of democratic progress ineffective. Consequently, questions about human rights, liberty, and freedom occupy academic discourses as the future of international relations remains unclear.
In the past few decades, democratic governance formed law and order across a huge chunk of the global population. In the present time, the level of freedom that constitutes democracy has degenerated into a complex interplay of soft totalitarianism that stems from the amalgamation of democracy and authoritarianism. In essence, a significant portion of the population, surpassing two-thirds, resides under an autocratic rule. Contrary to popular belief, particularly one that stems from American academia, such autocratic tendencies do not solely dominate the ‘Global South’ but are also prevalent in the Global North. Western media has articulated a certain discourse that compromises both the sanctity and legitimacy of governance in the Global South, questioning the moral integrity of Asian and African states.
As it stands, the regression of democracy is not contingent on geographical borders. Rather, it is a marker of unfilled promises, which exacerbate security dilemmas. Countries with large populations, such as Turkey, Pakistan, and India, are indicative of this change. They become primary testaments to the display of performative democratisation as the people are denied basic civil rights. The three branches that govern the social contract between the state and its people–the executive, legislative, and judiciary–often collide and attempt to dominate the central government. The overpowering presence of the executive often conflicts with the judiciary, which, in turn, implements suo-moto actions against the policies of the elected government. This concentration of power and authority demonstrates the distorted implementation of democracy that has strayed miles away from its original purpose. Democratic countries that have been commonly deemed as stable in the West are witnessing mass polarisation with populist movements attempting to destabilise the current governments. Imperatively, this demonstrates the escalation of autocratisation across the world, where democracy once reigned supreme.
The notion of west-perceived human rights applying to the rest of the world was sheerly idealistic and performative, to begin with, autocratisation has diminished its importance symbolically as well
In definition, autocratisation is the process of dissolving democratic elements from within the government structure and overshadowing it with centralised control. The initial erosion of democracy manifests in curtailing freedom of expression, often through media. Leaders will consolidate power by manufacturing public discourse and filtering out any negative feedback. This careful maneuvering of democratic avenues is evident in several countries under autocratic regimes. They often justify it in the name of preserving national security since the international world order is anarchic in nature, hence, heightened control over government apparatus is necessary to repel foreign attacks. It is also important to note that autocratisation does not equate to fascism. It may transition into such through acts of violence against civilians, however, the two fundamentally differ in terms of intent and purpose. To maintain law and order, certain leaders deem democracy as insufficient, however, they maintain its ideological backdrop to conserve Western patronage.
Perhaps the most difficult challenge that autocratisation poses is the lack of transparency in electoral campaigns. Election results are often meddled with, presenting an illusion of democracy as polling results have been fixed from the beginning. Notably, in most autocratic states, the leaders dispel people’s fear through populist appeal – curating discourse against the perceived elites of the country. Yet, the paradox persists; populist leaders seek to consolidate absolute power by criticising other leaders for doing the same. However, such rhetoric recreates the social reality of people as they ultimately begin internalising the ideas being presented. This transition in power results in the dismantling of democratic structures.
Moreover, autocratisation has transcended borders internationally and regionally alike. The Global South, for instance, is not immune from the forces of autocratisation. It is important to note that weakened democratic institutions in countries like India have a domino effect; spreading into Pakistan and across the continent. Similarly, Africa has seen its fair share of political polarisation in the form of military coups. The Middle East is more destabilised than ever before, as autocratic governments continue to impose their unparalleled power, sparking revolts and conflicts.
One of the most integral tenets of democracy is the advocacy of human rights, which have been detailed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, it seems as though human rights are not entirely universal, provided the emergence of autocratic governments across the globe. Although the notion of west-perceived human rights applying to the rest of the world was sheerly idealistic and performative, to begin with, autocratisation has diminished its importance symbolically as well. Rights of minorities have been compromised and economic prosperity only benefits the rich and powerful. Moreover, the breakdown of democracies poses significant global risks, particularly those concerned with climate change and immigration. As Donald Trump signed the executive order to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement on the day of his inauguration, it appears the forces of autocratisation have entirely swept the Global North in its grip. Additionally, governments like Donald Trump will indulge in protectionist policies as opposed to multilateral agreements. The reality of the situation is – the once unrivaled international world order is not as powerful as it once used to be.
Nonetheless, despite the emergence of autocratic trends, democracy has not diminished as yet. Democratic advocates and movements continue to challenge the power shift. Social media, in particular, is an integral avenue upon which people express their opinions despite censorship. The vast dispersion of media means controlling online discourses requires advanced resources and technological prowess. Of course, social media acts both as a blessing and a curse; if it can be used to curate discourses for the masses, it is also capable of achieving the opposite. Regardless, such are the challenges that one must overcome to ensure freedom of expression retains its existence for years to come. Ultimately, the conservation of democracy is not just an essential requirement, it is crucial to ensure political integrity is upheld on a domestic, regional, and international level.