Twilight of Democracy

Anne Applebaum's The Twilight of Democracy is a stark warning of the ever-expanding authoritarian tendencies that lurk even in modern democracies. Applebaum, a renowned journalist and author, reveals how seemingly stable democratic societies can slide toward authoritarianism if they lack the protective mechanisms of critical thinking, strong institutions, and committed leaders. Focusing on the psychological, cultural, and political factors that make authoritarianism attractive in uncertain times, she offers both historical and modern examples to better illustrate the link between fear, the desire for stability, and the growing support for authoritarian leaders. Applebaum combines her personal experiences and interviews with political leaders and citizens from around the world to show how divided elites, nostalgia, misinformation, and conformity become tools that enable the decline of democracy. It explains how authoritarian regimes are undermining trust in democratic institutions step by step and how the simple solutions they promise lure people in times of chaos and confusion. The Twilight of Democracy is not only an analytical look at the current crisis, but also a call to defend democratic values and critical thinking.

In times of uncertainty, people often turn to solutions that promise quick relief and a sense of stability. This phenomenon is particularly evident in social and political crises, when traditional democratic institutions seem unable to respond quickly to challenges such as economic problems or rising crime. Authoritarian regimes offer precisely this illusion of firm leadership and order, which can be tempting to the masses who feel lost or threatened. Consider the 1930s in Europe - economic depression, high unemployment and despair created the ideal breeding ground for the rise of authoritarian regimes. People were looking for a strong leader to lead them out of chaos and misery. The rise of Hitler in Germany or Mussolini in Italy shows how quickly this scenario can play out in uncertain times when apparent stability outweighs the values of freedom. Authoritarianism, however, promises not only order but often unity and common purpose, which is attractive in times of chaos. In the modern world, this trend is reappearing - technological advances, climate change, and economic disparities are creating a sense that democratic systems are not ready to tackle complex problems. This is where the space opens up for strong leaders who come forward with simple answers to complex issues. However, behind the apparent simplicity and stability lies the risk of a loss of freedom and a curtailment of individual rights. Democratic processes are replaced by decisions from above, criticism is silenced and society is united under a single ideology. Although authoritarianism may seem at first sight like a solution, its consequences lead to the suppression of freedom and often to the disruption of society. The challenge for democratic societies, therefore, is to create an environment where insecurity is not a reason to restrict freedom, but rather to seek effective and inclusive solutions. The authoritarian lure of stabilisation in times of crisis has a strong appeal, but only democracy allows real freedom and personal development, albeit at the cost of complexity and a longer search for solutions.

Nostalgia has a special place in the human psyche. We reminisce about the past, idealise it and often try to find answers to present-day problems in it. But this return to a 'golden age' can be deceptive and dangerous, especially when used as a weapon by authoritarian regimes. Nostalgia thus becomes a powerful propaganda tool, mobilising the masses to accept the idea that everything was better in the past and that the only way forward is to go back. In Poland, for example, the politics of nostalgia is strongly present. The current leaders use the image of a traditional Catholic Poland that was supposedly threatened by liberalism and Western influence. Such propaganda divides society into those who want to 'protect' old values and those who support modern, liberal ideals. Nostalgia here represents not only an idealisation of the past, but also a way of polarising society and reinforcing the power ambitions of authoritarian leaders. Contemporary politics in several countries exploits memories of past periods such as the 1950s and 1960s, when, according to some, 'everything was simpler and fairer'. It is on this false past, which ignores the social problems and inequalities of past eras, that many authoritarian movements build their foundation. For example, the narrative of a 'strong and united' Soviet Union is still alive in some parts of the post-Soviet world, although the reality was very different. When nostalgic notions of the past become official state ideology, it leads to the suppression of critical thinking and the idealisation of the past regime. Society closes itself off to the outside world and anything that deviates from the ideal of the past is perceived as a threat. This creates the illusion that a return to the past is the only way to preserve a nation's identity and values. However, this approach ignores the complex problems of the contemporary world. Although nostalgic memories may bring comfort, they must not become the only compass for the future. A democratic society needs an open debate about its past, the ability to admit mistakes and a readiness to seek new solutions, rather than idealising old models that have often led to oppression and conflict.

In recent decades, social networks have become a powerful tool for influencing public opinion and shaping social events. However, in an environment of authoritarianism, these platforms have acquired a specific function - they have become propaganda tools capable of disseminating one-sided information in a simplistic and rapid manner, polarising the public and manipulating reality. In the past, control of the media was in the hands of the state; today, control is much more subtle. The flood of information on social networks often creates information chaos in which it is difficult to distinguish between truth and disinformation. This chaos can play into the hands of authoritarian leaders, as it allows them to control the narrative by disseminating simplistic, polarising and emotionally charged messages that quickly reach broad sections of the population. Take the example of Brazil, where during the last elections, social networks were flooded with messages full of misinformation and conspiracy theories. These messages often divided society, fostered distrust of democratic institutions and supported candidates who promised 'quick and easy solutions' to problems. The manipulation through social networks was so intense that it affected the mood in the country and undermined people's trust in the democratic process. One of the main mechanisms used by authoritarian regimes on social networks is the dissemination of conspiracy theories. These create an image of a world in which everything is against 'us' and only a strong leader can protect the people from the 'enemies'. This formula reinforces the sense of threat that authoritarian leaders are able to use to consolidate their power and restrict freedoms. Another important aspect is the creation of a false sense of majority. Social networks allow authoritarian regimes to simulate strong support by using bots and fake accounts. In this way, they are able to create the impression that their views are shared by the majority of people, which in turn has a persuasive effect on those who are undecided about the regime. Social networks thus subtly undermine the principles of an open society and reduce the ability of individuals to critically evaluate information. In an environment where misinformation and emotional appeals outweigh facts, democracy is weakened and authoritarian regimes can strengthen their position. The challenge is therefore to find ways to strengthen the digital literacy of society so that we can resist manipulative strategies that use the power of social networks to undermine democratic values.

The division between elites and intellectuals is one of the key moments that allows authoritarian regimes to consolidate their power. In the past, the role of intellectuals and elites has often been linked to the defence of democratic values and principles. But over time, some of them have come to embrace authoritarianism, whether for reasons of personal ambition, ideological congruence or the benefits that accrue. One example of the division of elites can be seen in Hungary. While a certain section of intellectuals and high-ranking figures have remained loyal to democratic principles, others have chosen to support Viktor Orbán and his authoritarian style of government. Often these were those who perceived the democratic system as ineffective and believed that a strong leadership could lead the country to prosperity. These individuals sometimes rejected critical ideas about the loss of freedom because they themselves benefited from the new social order. This phenomenon is not limited to Eastern Europe. In France during the Second World War, some prominent intellectuals and politicians collaborated with the Nazi regime in the hope of securing stability and benefits for themselves and their families. Here, too, we see that economic or social ambition can lead some individuals to support authoritarianism. The division of elites creates a space in which authoritarian leaders can more easily consolidate their power. Those who support them often gain prominent positions, which further entrenches their loyalty to the regime. On the other hand, intellectuals who remain loyal to democratic ideals are gradually marginalised, silenced or publicly discredited. This creates a space where plurality of opinion is replaced by uniformity, which serves the needs of the authoritarian system. This division has far-reaching consequences. The polarisation of elites and intellectuals not only weakens democratic institutions, but creates an atmosphere of distrust and alienation in society. Citizens are gradually beginning to side with one of the elites, further deepening the divisions in society and paving the way for autocracy. The challenge, therefore, is to promote unity and solidarity among democratically minded intellectuals and leaders so that society can resist division and strengthen democratic values.

Undermining trust in institutions is one of the most effective ways for authoritarian regimes to consolidate their power. Institutions such as courts, parliaments, independent media and civil society organisations are the pillars of the democratic system, and weakening them is the key to establishing control over society. The aim of the authoritarians is to create the impression that these institutions are corrupt, ineffective and that they serve only 'elites' or 'foreign interests'. One example of this strategy is the development in Turkey under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Erdoğan has gradually undermined public confidence in the courts and the media by portraying them as corrupt and biased against 'the people'. By introducing legislative changes and constantly attacking independent institutions, he has transformed them into instruments that serve his own political agenda. They are now perceived by the Turkish public as less reliable and therefore less willing to defend democratic values when they are under threat. When trust in institutions breaks down, a power vacuum is created, which authoritarian leaders easily fill with their own authority. As in the case of Hungary, where Viktor Orbán has taken control of the media market and has progressively restricted the independence of the courts, such moves lead to citizens losing the sense that they can trust state institutions as independent arbiters of justice and truth. One of the reasons why this process is so effective is the human desire for certainty and clarity. In a chaotic environment where institutions seem ineffective or even corrupt, many people turn to a strong leader who promises to "make order." This phenomenon has also been present in the United States, where, during the political turmoil led by some leaders, the public has become polarized and trust in basic institutions has been shaken. The consequences of undermining trust are profound. Freedom and democracy are gradually disappearing as society ceases to see democratic institutions as protecting its rights and interests. Citizens are beginning to submit to an authority that promises to protect them from corruption or chaos. It is therefore essential for democracy to maintain public confidence in institutions and to prevent the loss of independence, which is the basis of an open and free society.

The psychology of conformity and the desire for simple solutions are among the main pillars on which authoritarian regimes build their power. In uncertain and chaotic periods when society faces complex problems, many people tend to gravitate towards simple answers and conform to leadership that promises a clear direction. This phenomenon can be traced in many historical periods when nations, driven by fear or frustration, have abandoned democratic principles in favour of security. After the Second World War, at the time of the Cold War, many Eastern European countries, already under the influence of the Soviet Union, turned to authoritarian governments. Their citizens often embraced the new regime not only out of fear, but also because it gave them a semblance of stability and a clear sense of what was 'right'. Adapting to the new system made life easier for those who did not want to risk trouble and conflict with authority. Conformism, however, is not just about obedience to rules. It is also a psychological pressure that creates the need to belong to the group and to be in line with the majority opinion. Authoritarian regimes often create the illusion of mass support - whether through state media, propaganda or censorship - to make citizens feel that everyone agrees with the country's current course. In this way, any deviation from the line becomes socially risky, and individuals themselves tend to adopt views that are in line with the official line. In addition to the pressure of the majority, the tendency for people to settle for convenient and quick solutions also contributes to this. When society is confronted with the complexities of globalisation, technological change or economic problems, some citizens turn to leaders who offer black and white answers. This desire for clear solutions leads to simplistic slogans that become popular despite their superficiality. On the other hand, this phenomenon undermines the democratic process, which naturally requires debate, compromise and an understanding of different perspectives. Authoritarianism, on the other hand, reinforces one-sided decision-making and uniformity of ideas, thus keeping society in a state of 'simple order' that does not allow for a diversity of opinions. If we want to safeguard democracy, it is important to develop critical thinking and encourage openness to complex answers. Only in this way can we resist the pressures of conformity and the tendency to look for quick fixes to problems that require complex approaches and long-term change.

This book offers a comprehensive picture of how democracy can quickly turn authoritarian when societies lose trust in institutions and succumb to the easy answers offered by authoritarian leaders. The Twilight of Democracy reveals the danger that lurks even in apparently safe democracies, when, under pressure from crises, polarisation and misinformation, many citizens turn away from democracy and seek 'strong leadership' that promises quick and easy solutions. Applebaum urges us not to accept this trend, but to actively defend democratic institutions, open debate and pluralism of opinion. Her analysis reminds us that democracy is not a given, but a fragile system that requires constant support and protection. The book is an appeal to individuals and society to reject comfortable conformity and nostalgic illusions of the past and instead develop critical thinking and the courage to defend freedom. Do you have feedback for us? We'd love it if you let us know your opinion on our content! Just send an email to feedback@rewio.app with the title of this book in the subject line and share your impressions!