In this guest article Ursula van Beek looks at recent authoritarian developments. She draws the line from the developments around the world wars of the 20th century and points out a historical repetition – a sharp reversal from postmaterialist to survival values.
The article was first published in Democracy Delivered – Issue 13, A newsletter from the Centre for Research on Democracy at Stellenbosch University, South Africa.
Authoritarian Reflex: The Second Wave
Ursula van Beek
In his highly acclaimed book Cultural Evolution: People’s Motivations are Changing and Reshaping the World, the prominent American political scientist, Ronald Inglehart, posited that people’s values and behaviour are shaped by the extent to which they consider themselves secure. When feeling economically and physically safe people value autonomy and self-expression but when survival is at stake they are inclined to close ranks behind a strong leader, a tendency called the Authoritarian Reflex. This phenomenon first made its unwelcome appearance in the wake of the First World War in Italy and Germany.
Italy, even though one of the winners in the war, failed to use victory as the basis on which to consolidate its political system. Instead, the post-war economic crisis led to an internal social turmoil in 1919-̶1920. The liberal elite, unwilling to switch to a democracy featuring modern political parties, refused to contemplate an alliance with the Italian Socialist Party and the Italian Popular Party. By doing so they had paved the way for the seizure of power by a radical far-right brand of nationalism, which then led to fascism. Fasci di combattimento – or fighting leagues, better known as Fascists – were the creation of the strong leader, Benito Mussolini. On an anti-Left and anti-Bolshevik crusade black-shirted members of the leagues gradually expanded their influence on the national level and then formed a Fascist political party. By April 1924, in an atmosphere of violence and intimidation, the Fascist-dominated bloc won an absolute majority in parliament. During the following two years constitutional rule ended: opposition parties and unions were dissolved, and elections were abolished along with free speech and free association. By the end of the 1930’s antisemitic laws were introduced and a close alliance with Nazi Germany was established. Italian democracy died.
Germany, in the wake of its defeat by the Allies, was branded an international villain. The post-war Treaty of Versailles of 1919 imposed punishing war reparations on the country, leaving the nation struggling with both the psychological aftereffects of defeat and the heavy burden of war debts. The massive hyperinflation of 1923 was followed by the fallout of the Great Depression that had left some six million people unemployed. The dire economic conditions led to popular discontent with the government and – as in Italy – ushered a strong leader who, it was believed, would restore Germany to its former glory. Enter Adolf Hitler, an ardent nationalist who blamed the defeat in World War I on weak domestic leadership, and on Jewish, communist and international conspiracy. Hitler established the fascist National Socialist German Workers’ party, known as the Nazi party, and in 1923 announced his intention to overthrow the democratic government. This was ultimately achieved by stealth, rather than a ‘putsch’. At the onset of the Great Depression in 1929 the Nazi party held 12 seats in the parliament; by 1932 they became the largest party and started their drive to force the resignation of the President, Paul von Hindenburg. By 1933 the aim was reached and Adolf Hiter was named Chancellor, an event that marked the death of democracy in Germany and mapped the road to World War II.
Today, the Authoritarian Reflex rears its ugly head again against democracy. Hungary and – until the recent elections – Poland were the prominent showcases of this trend in Europe, although the rise of right-wing parties in such model democracies as Sweden, Denmark, France and Germany is also beginning to draw attention. To say nothing of the spectre of Donald Trump returning to power, or the congratulations that have rolled in from wherever the far-right holds some sway for the anti-Islam firebrand Geert Wilders after his electoral victory in the Netherlands.
Beyond the Western world the Authoritarian Reflex is even more prominent. India is governed by the hardline nationalist, Narendra Modi, whose party’s narrative holds that the originally pure Hindu state had its Muslim minorities imposed upon it through colonization. In Turkey Muslim believers rally behind the strongman Recep Erdogan. In Latin America right-wing leaders draw support from conservative electorate set against both cultural change and minority rights, and those who blame their erstwhile leftist governments for the current miserable living conditions.
In other parts of the Middle East and Asia as well as in Africa there are too many examples to mention, though one case close to home merits attention. The former ANC Youth League leader, Julius Malema, following his expulsion from the ANC established the Economic Freedom Front (EFF) party. Malema presents himself as the ‘Commander-in-Chief’ to his ardent followers, the red-clad brigade who congregate en masse chanting the liberation struggle songs “one settler, one bullet” and “kill the Boer, kill the farmer”. The ‘Commander’s’ ideas on how to get the country out of the current social and economic quagmire include asking China to reopen all the coal mines and invite Russia to build nuclear power stations to help South Africa resolve its dire power shortages. The EFF manifesto calls for expropriation of land without compensation and for the nationalisation of mines and banks, also without compensation.
And then there are the two hotspots with their potential to ignite a global conflagration. The rallying of far-right nationalist supporters behind Benjamin Netanyahu goes a long way to explain the relentless military offensive by Israel in Gaza, even in the face of increasing censure by global public opinion and calls for the caseation of hostilities. Meanwhile Vladimir Putin claims he can return Rusia to its former glory by pursuing territorial expansion on spurious historical grounds and by brutally eliminating all internal opposition, as did Hitler.
What do the two waves have in common and how do they differ?
Existential insecurity is the common denominator. The first wave was brought on by severe post-World War I economic deprivations. The second wave started rolling with the financial crisis followed by the Covid pandemic and the current war in Ukraine, all of which have impacted economies around the world with dramatic declines in real incomes and job security.
Both waves have been driven by nationalist sentiments resulting in genocide in the first wave, and in the second wave in xenophobia directed against the massive influx of immigrants and refugees. Significantly, in both cases insecurity has been propelling people to support powerful authority figures who are seen as guarantors of better life conditions and protectors of cultural identity against the ‘enemy’ within and without.
The historical replay is now accompanied by a sharp reversal from postmaterialist to survival values with the significant gains liberalism has made in self-expression, gender equality, tolerance of life choices, acceptance of foreigners and other outgroups giving way to economic and physical safety issues and conformity with nationalist ethno-religious norms. The reverse trajectory is well served by disinformation and fake news with their extraordinary power to entrench xenophobic sentiments and hate.
One can only hope, as did Albert Einstein in a speech he gave at the Royal Albert Hall in October 1933, that “the present crisis will lead to a better world.” That didn’t happen then, but maybe we are wiser now.
Ursula van Beek is an authour at our publishing house. Discover her books here.
