How we went from “dictators of fear” to “dictators of deceit” who monopolize power by distorting the truth.

Drawing on numerous examples from both right and left, they describe how “deceptive dictators” cover up their abuses, win popular support through pretentious propaganda, falsify democracy, manipulate justice, blackmail their political opponents, and undermine citizens’ confidence in democratic institutions by spreading misinformation, cynicism and split, while avoiding international isolation, developing ties with Western elites in their favor.

Cultivating the image of competent leaders who guarantee the well-being of the people, they accuse dissidents of reducing patriotism and try to hide their authoritarianism with formal democratic procedures, rendering constitutional checks and balances useless. They allow the participation of opposition parties in elections, but create obstacles for their political activity. Instead of strict censorship, they encourage self-censorship and allow a few critical media outlets to circulate to show that they respect freedom of expression, while tightly controlling the state media and appointing henchmen to take ownership of anything. independent media can challenge their dominance.

The “dictators of deceit” have perfected the lie and are skillfully and deceitfully manipulating information. Using modern technology, they track and intimidate their opponents in politics and the media, threatening them with tax offenses, criminal prosecution and leakage of personal data. And in order to provide good evidence from the outside, they buy the services of willing Western companies, bankers, lawyers and lobbying companies. According to the authors’ calculations, “dictators of fear” accounted for 60% of the total in 1970 and less than 10% in the 2000s; the share of “dictators of deception” increased from 13% to 53% over the same period. The remaining cases are characterized as hybrid.

Various criteria are used to classify authoritarian leaders as “dictators of fear or deceit”. North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad are among the “dictators of fear.” China has undergone various mutations, but in recent times, everyone agrees that Xi Jinping has chosen a state of surveillance and fear, like Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia and Erdogan in Turkey after the 2016 coup attempt. If the author of the book had been completed after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Putin would certainly be a candidate for the same column.

The authors recommend that the West continue its “hostile engagement” against them with constant vigilance, vigorous resistance to attempts to undermine democratic institutions, methodical documentation of abuses, and defense of the global liberal system. The West is called upon to stop helping dictators launder their black money and reputation and continue to push for modernization, economic and social development, which are the best hope for a transition to democracy. It is also necessary that she put her house in order to restore the trust of society and thereby undermine the propaganda that the West is corrupt and in decline. The allure of democracy around the world is a powerful weapon against authoritarian regimes. They conclude that the easiest way to defeat an idea is to come up with a better idea, and authoritarianism certainly doesn’t offer a better vision.

* Mr. Achilleas Paparsenos worked at the Greek Embassy in Washington DC as Head of Public Relations and Press Relations.