“…[the leader] has never
hidden his desire to entrench himself in power. Before taking office in 2XXX,
he remarked ominously: “We have only to win once, but then properly.” True to
his word, when handed a big enough majority by...voters, Mr [Leader] hollowed
out the...state, rewriting its constitution, purging the country’s courts and
nobbling the media. In 201X he told an interviewer: “In a crisis, you don’t
need governance by institutions.” Again, he has followed through. A law enacted
on XX means Mr [Leader] can rule by decree—bypassing parliament—until
the coronavirus crisis is over. In films the villain is thwarted after
revealing his hand. But Mr [Leader} is up against the...not James Bond, so he
succeeds.
No one can say there was
no warning. [Leader’s] career—which has encompassed everything from anti-Soviet
liberalism to right-wing nationalism…—has been dedicated to the accumulation
and maintenance of power, rather than the pursuit of principle. Those who knew
him well saw what was to come. In 2009 [the Leader’s biographer], the author of
a critical biography, warned: “Once he is in possession of a constitutional
majority, he will turn this into an impregnable fortress of power.” A
combination of careful strategy, political cunning and a dash of luck have made
this prediction come true.
To the frustration of
those who have spent the past decade trying to stop him via legal means, [the
Leader] is more astute than they think. His “reforms” tend to reach the edge of
legal acceptability, but no further. If [the Leader] ever does hit an obstacle,
he surrenders some gains, while keeping the bulk of them. (The…leader even has
a name for this legal waltz: the peacock dance.) Opposition figures,
civil-rights monitors and commentators around the globe have denounced the
latest move as a big step towards dictatorship…This mealy-mouthed response
stems from the fact that its lawyers see little glaringly wrong with the act as
it is composed. On paper, [Congress] can end the state of emergency if the
government oversteps the mark. In practice, this probably would not happen. [The
Leader’s] …party—over which he has had near-absolute control… It is in this gap
between legal theory and political reality that [The Leader] thrives…
…he is even luckier in
his allies…[the Leader] was treated as an unruly teenager while rearranging the…state,
rather than a tumour in [our] body politic…Bluntly, [the Leader] has not been
removed because a majority of [his enablers] were keen to keep him. It was the [Leader’s
party’s] dwindling band of liberals who winced at [the Leader’s] actions. Now
they are outnumbered by a nationalist strand, who broadly agree with [the
Leader’s] on things like shutting out [immigrants]. The… leader is less of an
outlier… than he first appears.
No happy ending
The tsunami of
international criticism, in which [the Leader] has been labelled everything
from an autocrat to a latter-day Hitler, will not bother the…leader or his
acolytes. It is a fight they want to have. In their minds, the coming crisis is
another chance to prove their critics wrong….[the Leader] does not mind being
called a dictator. As long as he stops short of outright tyranny, he can paint
foes as hysterical. He can also point out that other democracies grant the
government extra powers during an emergency, and pretend his intentions are no
different.
Reining in [the Leader]
will be hard, but not impossible. “The only language he understands is power
and money,”…
TW:
I have watched nervously as country after country internationally the past decade has moved away from robust multi-party democracy towards authoritarianism clothed in a cynical shroud of democracy- Poland, Turkey, India, Philippines, and most of all Hungary (amongst others). Viktor Orban the actual "leader" portrayed in this Economist article from last spring has been an early and aggressive acolyte of carving away liberal democracy one slice at a time. Now by hiding his name and making a few (not very material) edits one can read the article and almost wonder if the article is about someone closer to home for us Americans. This should be inconceivable, but every day that goes by it seemingly becomes less so.
https://www.economist.com/europe/2020/04/02/how-hungarys-leader-viktor-orban-gets-away-with-it
