Neoauthoritarianism as a Challenge to Global Security

Author:

Khoma NataliiaORCID,Nikolayeva MaiiaORCID

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to determine the features of neoauthoritarianism as a political regime, its tools, and consequences for global security. It is reasoned that neoauthoritarianism is an undemocratic system of methods and means of exercising centralized state power, which is characterized by the formalisation of democratic principles, institutions and procedures, and the use of digitalization to realize the goals of the regime. The features and tools of neoauthoritarianism are systematized, and the probable consequences of neoauthoritarianism on a global scale are assessed. The following features of neoauthoritarian regimes are determined: reduction of the role of ideology; integration into the global capitalist economy; imitation of a democratic facade; covert forms of pressure and control, manipulation, propaganda; providing a legal basis for any undemocratic initiatives; using the advantages of democratization, globalization, digitalization to achieve the regime’s destructive goals, etc. The following tools of neoauthoritarian influence are determined: power tools, tools of influence within the scope of “soft power,” tools of subversion, tools for changing values, electoral tools, tools of pressure on international organizations, etc. It is proven that due to neoauthoritarian intervention, the risks to global security are increased. The main consequence of ascending neoauthoritarianism on a global scale is the fact that neoauthoritarian regimes have endangered democracy as the dominant global model, reshaping the global security architecture.

Publisher

Adam Mickiewicz University Poznan

Reference40 articles.

1. Adler P. S., Adly A., Armanios D. E. et al. (2023), Authoritarianism, Populism, and the Global Retreat of Democracy: A Curated Discussion, “Journal of Management Inquiry”, Vol. 32, No. 1: 3–20.

2. Allison R. (2017), Russia and the Post-2014 International Legal Order: Revisionism and Realpolitik, “International Affairs”, Vol. 93, No. 1: 519–543.

3. Anthony M., Iii V. A., Gauchan N. (2019), Dystopia is Now: Digital Authoritarianism and Human Rights in Asia, “Global Campus Human Rights Journal”, Vol. 3, No. 2: 269–286.

4. Applebaum A., Pomerantsev P., Smith M., Colliver C. (2017), “Make Germany Great Again” – Kremlin, Alt-Right and International Influences in the 2017 German Elections, London School of Economics Arena Program, and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, London.

5. Awad H. (2022), Egypt’s New Authoritarianism from an Institutionalist Perspective: Formal-Informal Interactions Before and After the Egyptian Revolution, “British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies”, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/13530194.2022.2113503?needAccess=true&role=button (05.01.2023).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3