How Do Dictators Centralize Power, and to What Lengths Do They Go in Order to Hold onto It?
By Grant Garland
The phenomenon of dictatorships has been ubiquitous throughout history, coming in many different forms, across various regions, and rising in the wake of distinct circumstances. The 21st century has been the stage for a resurgence in authoritarian tendencies, including concentrations of power, the suppression of opposition, and the attrition of liberties, but why? What allows dictatorships to gain power, thrive, and survive? What makes them successful and are there any patterns? This article searches for answers to such questions by comparing 21st century Latin American dictatorships, with a specific focus on Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and El Salvador.
Cuba
Cuba’s extensive history of dictatorships is mainly tied to the Castro regime, the political leadership of the Castro family that began with Fidel Castro in 1956 as a result of the Cuban Revolution who was succeeded by his brother Raúl Castro. Raúl Castro, the most prominent dictator of the Castro regime in the 21st century, became president in 1976 after growing up with a front seat to the lesson of how to be a successful dictator taught by his brother Fidel. Raúl had big shoes to fill, so to maintain the Communist Party’s monopoly on political power, Raúl employed an extensive tool kit with suppressing dissent as his trusty hammer. He saw those who opposed him as enemies and made sure to display the consequences of any opposition, mainly in the form of incarceration. In a report conducted by Human Rights Watch, there were more than 40 cases where Cuba imprisoned individuals because they believed they were planning to stage protests or organize labor unions under Raúl. Enforcing harsh consequences on opposition no matter what evidence existed spread fear–and fear maintains power. To sustain his power and thrive, Raúl also ensured that socialist principles were at the core of his policies and actions.
Nicaragua
Nicaragua’s history of dictators has similarly been shaped by current president Daniel Ortega. Like Raúl, Ortega has made significant efforts to suppress political opposition. In 2021, for example, a rival candidate named Cristiana Chamorro faced legal challenges by the prosecutors’ office and was accused of abusive management, ultimately leading to her disqualification. Manipulating information has also served as a key tool in Ortega’s ability to consolidate power and achieve success as a dictator. Ortega’s government has taken control of state-owned media outlets and turned them into a tool for propaganda, spreading messages that support his narrative and limiting the coverage of opposing perspectives. The government has also suppressed independent media outlets: in 2018 and 2021, for example, the prominent news outlet known as Confidencial was raided and its director Carlos Fernando Chamorro faced legal threats. Ortega has further consolidated power by limiting individual freedom of speech by passing laws that restrict online freedoms. In 2020 Nicaragua passed the Special Cyber Crimes Law which gave authorities the ability to monitor online content and established legal ramifications (including prison terms of two to four years) for “those who promote or distribute false or misleading information that causes alarm, terror, or unease in the public” (Associated Press). Controlling the narrative is a helpful and widely employed tool for dictators as it allows for the shaping of public perception to portray themselves as favorable and stifle dissent. In essence, it safeguards the regime from any scrutiny or criticism.
Venezuela
Venezuela is home to one of Latin America’s most notorious dictators:none other than Nicolas Maduro. In many ways, Maduro has laid the blueprint for entrenched dictatorships in the 21st century. As the handpicked successor of Hugo Chávez, Maduro assumed power in 2013 and has done all he can to keep hold of it. One key instrument to Maduro’s success has been the manipulation of electoral processes. In the 2018 election,Maduro implemented a range of measures to limit the participation of potential candidates and key opposition figures. He used state resources to fund his campaign and maintained control over electoral institutions such as the National Electoral Council sparking contestation domestically and internationally by a range of actors including the U.S. When a dictator cannot gain approval in an electoral system, one must do all that they can to paint a picture of legitimate authority. For Maduro, whose approval rating was just 24% (Statista) in 2018, controlling the electoral process was the way to do so. The symbol of opposition that Maduro targeted was Leopoldo López,a Venezuelan politician who directly challenged Maduro when he ran for president in 2013 and lost. In 2014, López helped lead the widespread protests known as “La Salida” that called for the resignation of Maduro and a restoration of democratic values. Violence broke out between the government and protesters, ultimately resulting in Lopez’s arrest on charges of inciting violence. Maduro framed López as a clear enemy and “monster,” to unite people against a common enemy and demonstrate the consequences of disobedience and opposition, creating that oh-so important ingredient: fear. Maduro has also strategically placed military officials in government positions, used the military to suppress opposition movements, and sought support from countries like China and Russia. In the eyes of the public, military power is often viewed as the sword and shield for a dictator; it can be used to protect against opposition and lay strong blows to enforce rulership.
El Salvador
El Salvador provides interesting cases for the evaluation of what makes a successful dictator because their leader isn’t widely accepted as a dictator in the way that Maduro was, for example, but has taken steps that can be perceived as authoritarian. El Salvador’s current president Nayib Bukele calls himself the “world’s coolest dictator” (Youkee) and he has faced criticism by the public for playing cards from the deck of a dictator. The most notable card played by Bukele from this deck was the occupation of the Legislative Assembly in 2020. Bukele entered the assembly accompanied by armed soldiers and police officers in an effort to convince lawmakers to approve a plan that would secure a $109 million loan that he thought would allow for better equipped military personnel and law enforcement. Such an action is an example of Bekele’s use of executive power to influence democratic decision making processes with the military serving as a source of persuasion through intimidation. Under the lens of authoritarian consolidation of power, Bukele has also failed to comply with a number of rulings of the Constitutional Court. Similar to Ortega and others, Bekele has also taken a stab at manipulating information, mainly through the use of social media whereby he uses Twitter to undermine traditional media outlets to communicate directly with the public and spread his narrative. Bekele has also been accused of limiting the press’s freedom. For example in 2019, Bekele expelled journalists from El Faro and other organizations and accused them of being fake journalists. So why don’t most people call Bukele a dictator like they do Maduro? One reason is because Bukele was democratically elected president in 2019 and had widespread support. In addition, despite Bukele’s siege of the Legislative Assembly, El Salvador has maintained its democratic instructions, including regular elections. Although it has received criticism, Bukele’s government also still receives recognition on the international stage. From his leadership however, we can learn how fundamental the role of undermining democratic institutions is when it comes to being a prototypical dictator, even if there is no objective definition.
The examination of 21st-century Latin American dictatorships, focusing on Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and El Salvador, reveals common patterns and strategies employed by authoritarian leaders to gain and maintain power. Whether through the calculated repression of dissent in Cuba, the control of information in Nicaragua, the manipulation of electoral processes in Venezuela, or the authoritarian tendencies of El Salvador’s Bukele, common threads of fear, propaganda, and strategic undermining of democratic principles emerge.
Disclaimer:
In no way does this article mean to rationalize methods of dictators, but rather aims to examine the tools that allow dictators to maintain power and hence identify what makes them function.
Grant Garland is a sophomore at Tufts University studying International Relations.
Image: https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/how-maduro-survived/
Image courtesy: Sefa Karacan/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images
This piece is a reproduction from its original issue in Hemispheres vol. 47, no. 1.
tuftshemispheres.org 