Fighting the Global Spread of Autocracy

In the quiet halls of London’s Victoria and Albert Museum, the echoes of historical revisionism still resonate today. Standing in the Blavatnik Hall after viewing a Marie Antoinette exhibition, visitors are confronted with a powerful reminder of how propaganda shapes our understanding of historical and contemporary figures alike.

The last queen of France, contrary to popular belief, never uttered the infamous phrase “let them eat cake.” The diamond necklace scandal and allegations of inappropriate behavior with her son were fabrications that fueled public outrage. Yet these falsehoods, repeated often enough, helped send a woman to the guillotine—where, ironically, her final recorded act was an apology to her executioner after accidentally stepping on his foot.

This pattern of weaponized misinformation is not new. Since ancient Rome, when Julius Caesar crafted his own war chronicles to enhance his reputation, propaganda has been a powerful tool for those seeking to consolidate power or eliminate opposition. Throughout history, it has been used to burn “witches,” dehumanize targeted groups, and elevate autocrats to positions of unchecked authority.

The digital age has only accelerated and amplified these dynamics. Social media platforms and 24-hour news cycles create environments where falsehoods can spread globally within minutes, often outpacing fact-checking efforts. The result is an information landscape where emotional appeal frequently trumps factual accuracy.

Political communication experts point to the increasing sophistication of modern propaganda techniques. Unlike the crude state propaganda of the 20th century, today’s misinformation often mimics legitimate news formats, blurring the line between fact and fiction for even discerning audiences.

“The challenge we face today is that propaganda doesn’t announce itself as propaganda,” explains Dr. Helen Margetts, Professor of Society and the Internet at Oxford University. “It presents itself as authentic information, making it increasingly difficult for citizens to separate truth from falsehood.”

Recent elections worldwide have demonstrated the real-world consequences of these information warfare tactics. Democratic processes in multiple countries have been influenced by coordinated misinformation campaigns, often targeting vulnerable populations with emotionally charged messaging designed to increase polarization.

Media literacy advocates emphasize that recognizing these tactics is the first step in building resistance to manipulation. Teaching citizens to identify common propaganda techniques—from emotional appeals and false equivalencies to outright fabrications—has become an urgent priority for educators and civil society organizations.

Portland State University communications professor Janet Matthews notes, “When political figures operate primarily as media personalities rather than policy-makers, the public must develop a heightened awareness of performance versus substance. The consequences of failing to make this distinction extend far beyond mere political disappointment.”

In an era where political leaders increasingly function as “media creatures,” the stakes of uncritical media consumption continue to rise. The transition from democratic governance to autocratic control often begins not with military coups but with information manipulation that gradually erodes public trust in institutions and democratic processes.

International democracy watchdogs have documented this pattern across multiple continents, identifying information manipulation as a precursor to democratic backsliding in previously stable nations. The warnings are stark: without a more sophisticated approach to consuming and sharing information, democratic societies remain vulnerable to manipulation.

As autocratic tendencies gain ground globally, the question becomes more urgent: How can citizens protect themselves and their societies from the contagion of authoritarianism enabled by unchecked propaganda? The answer may lie not just in institutional safeguards but in the collective development of a more discerning, critical approach to the information that shapes our understanding of the world.