Dictators of the twentieth century — Hitler, Stalin, Mao — utilized terror as a means of control. But a pivotal realization occurred at the end of the century: to exert greater control over the population, power must disguise itself.
Dictatorships, Democracies, and The Great Makeover
A dictatorship refers to any nondemocratic government, a synonym for authoritarianism and autocracy. In the 20th century, political experts Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman defined a dictatorship as having tight control over public communication, repressing opposition, punishing critics, enforcing an ideology, and halting external flows of people and information — often overtly as a means of showcasing power. Whether it be Hitler and Mao’s burning of books in bonfires or Haiti’s public displays of government rivals’ executions, intimidation was the key principle in controlling and organizing a population. And yet, in several cases, the more leaders exercised power in this manner — suppressing opposition and inciting violence — the more it paved the way for uprisings. Many former autocratic regimes such as South Korea, Indonesia, and the Philippines broke down as repression increased.
Today, rather than attempting to oppress a population, those in power have realized it is far more efficient to remove the desire to rebel altogether. The exercise of power through overtly violent repression incites a backfiring effect; terrorizing citizens becomes counterproductive and exposes fragile governance. Hence, analysts observed a shift in the 2000s, where most leaders in non-democracies had seemed to come from a different “mold.” Singapore’s Lee Hsien Loong, a Cambridge-educated technocrat, was posting photographs of sunrises and serving as the patron of an NGO on kindness, while a sixteen-year-old blogger was arrested for posting an “obscene cartoon” criticizing the government. In Russia, Putin preserved the facade of elections but manipulated them to ensure favorable outcomes. These examples are not exhaustive, but they highlight that these leaders have championed international openness, held frequent elections, and garnered high approval ratings. This newfound classification of leaders is proposed by Guriev and Treisman as “Spin Dictators.”
The Role of New Media and Technology in Sanitizing Discourse
For Spin Dictators, the game-changer lies in creating a favorable public opinion rather than using violent oppression. Hence, a leader’s approach to utilizing the media serves as the forefront of upholding a democratic illusion — of remaining in power. Moreover, with emerging technologies such as generative AI, today’s Spin Dictators have many more tricks up their sleeves beyond covert misinformation and black propaganda.
Indonesia’s Prabowo Subianto: From Alleged Human Rights Abuser to ‘Cute and Cuddly’ Grandpa
President Prabowo Subianto, a former military general under the Soeharto dictatorship responsible for violent military operations in Timor-Leste, won the 2024 Indonesian presidential elections alongside the former president’s son, Vice President Gibran Rakabuming, with over 59% of the vote.
This was his third time running, after consequently losing to President Joko Widodo. So what changed? Political analysts like Dr. Denny Ali have attributed this victory to his campaign team’s successful rebranding of a strongman populist to “cute” and “cuddly” grandpa. His gemoy (Indonesian slang for cute and cuddly) campaign used AI-generated cartoon avatars of him and TikTok trends — even coining his own gemoy dance. In place of a fiery, oligarchic populist who fueled Islamist populism and Old Order nostalgia emerged a new Prabowo who emphasized messages such as: “We must get along, we must unite, we must be peaceful, we must not divide,” positively signaling hope to the population. Additionally, Subianto never utilized hate speech or fake news as per his last two campaigns. Instead, he strategically avoided interviews and press conferences that may have forced him to confront his bloody past or challenge his future policies.
The Philippines’ Ferdinand ‘BongBong’ Marcos Jr.: Dictator’s Son Turned Human Rights Defender
An eerie parallel occurred in the Philippines’ 2022 elections, in which the son of former dictator Ferdinand Marcos won the electorate with 59%, 31.6 million, votes. His father’s regime was characterized by eminent corruption, killings, tortures, the closing of news organizations, and other atrocities, which led to the 1986 People Power Revolution that instituted a liberal (and elite) democracy in the Philippines. Like Subianto, Marcos Jr.’s campaign ran on calls for unity and avoiding difficult questions by dismissing difficult questions about his father’s rule. When asked, “What do you think is the greatest lesson you learned from your father?” by one of the Philippines’ biggest celebrities in a talk show, Marcos Jr. spoke of his strong leadership and love for the Filipino people. Eventually, he also leveraged platforms like TikTok to spread the narrative that his family was subjected to unjust treatment and that his father’s regime brought wealth and infrastructure into the country. Across different platforms, including Facebook and Instagram, this misinformation was amplified by utilizing micro-influencers and celebrities, successfully swaying the public into collective amnesia.
The Rules of Spin
As proposed by Treisman and Guriev, the first and most important rule of Spin Dictators is to be popular. Unlike classic dictators, they must care about their approval ratings. When the truth is against them, their first line of defense is to distort it. However, unlike classic fear-based dictators who utilized elaborate ideologies and intimidating propaganda, both Subianto and Marcos Jr.’s cases demonstrate how Spin Dictators use subtler methods. When the facts do not work in their favor, they have the media obscure them when possible. In Subianto’s case, no covert misinformation was needed — avoiding difficult questions and having paid users (“buzzers”) drown out his critics with positive messaging sufficed. For Marcos, disseminating the narrative that his father was misunderstood through tech-savvy disinformation and an influencer-driven campaign reframed the former dictator as a hero, leveraging his own public perception.
Beyond manipulating information, Spin Dictators’ image champions democratic values and freedom. Since Marcos Jr. took office, journalist Maria Ressa has noted a “lifting of fear” for journalists, and he has distinguished himself from Duterte’s brutal rule that resulted in the War on Drugs. However, several experts remind Filipinos that he has done the bare minimum; given their track record, the Marcoses are not friends of democracy, human rights, or liberal values. Marcos Jr. has also refused to apologize for the well-documented human rights violations under his father’s regime, and Athena Charanne Presto, a sociologist from the University of the Philippines, has warned that his new image as a human rights supporter may undermine the support and legitimacy of human rights movements.
Implications for Democracy and Political Accountability
The rise of Spin Dictators raises critical questions about the future of democracy. As generative AI and digital media continue evolving, non-democratic leaders gain new tools for deception and control. This warrants greater inspection of election regulations, digital literacy, and public engagement strategies to counter disinformation. Ultimately, the challenge lies in distinguishing genuine democratic progress from the carefully crafted illusions of modern authoritarianism. The cases of President Subianto and President Marcos Jr. illustrate how dictatorships adapt to survive: not through terror, but through perception management. Addressing these challenges requires a concerted effort from civil society, media organizations, and international watchdogs to safeguard democratic resilience in an era of political manipulation.