West LA Times

The 2024 U.S. presidential election is often framed as a battle between democracy and autocracy, particularly with the release of Project 2025, a far-right playbook purportedly designed for a Donald Trump or other Republican administration.

UCLA sociology professor Cecilia Menjívar, who co-edited a recent double issue of American Behavioral Scientist, explores how autocrats worldwide have used democratic institutions to consolidate power. In her introduction to the issue, titled “The Tools of Autocracy Worldwide: Authoritarian Networks, the Façade of Democracy, and Neo-Repression,” co-written with UCLA alumna and USC assistant professor Deisy Del Real, Menjívar examines the tactics employed by dictators to steer societies toward autocracy.

Menjívar discusses various methods used by authoritarian leaders, including the use of fear, misinformation spread through media, corruption of legal systems, and mobilization of hate groups. These tactics aim to highlight democracy's fragility and raise awareness about the threat of autocracy.

When asked about politicians using fear to justify authoritarian rule, Menjívar explains: "Fear is an efficient and malleable tactic that serves several purposes. First, it allows politicians to create enemies out of anyone." She adds that this tactic creates an "us" versus "them" scenario that makes people more receptive to strong leadership promises.

On manipulating information in mass media, Menjívar notes: "Manipulating the media, especially social media, is one of the most powerful tools autocrats use today." She emphasizes that constant exposure to messages from leaders on social media can have significant psychological impacts on followers.

Regarding democratic candidates pursuing authoritarian goals openly, Menjívar states: "Research has clearly established that the demarcation between democracy and autocracy is not as clear-cut as we might assume." She points out that aspiring autocrats use democratic tools to gain power while dismantling essential pillars like the rule of law once in office.

Menjívar also highlights how authoritarian candidates leverage civil society movements and hate groups: "Leaders with autocratic goals do not act alone; they need supporters." These groups help amplify leaders' messages and attack designated enemies through various means.

Project 2025 is mentioned as an example where such tactics are detailed for future conservative policies. Menjívar remarks: "We are used to thinking of autocrats as individuals... but behind these individuals are vast networks of influential people." The Heritage Foundation organized contributions from multiple organizations for this plan.

Finally, on U.S. immigration policy debates influenced by these tactics, Menjívar observes: "The purported threat of immigrants and immigration is perhaps one of the best examples." This approach fosters an “us” versus “them” dynamic that justifies hostile policies against immigrants.

Menjívar concludes by noting historical parallels in anti-immigrant rhetoric in America: “Given the long history of hostility toward certain immigrant groups in the United States... provide justification for the inhumane treatment.”