Bad Dictator vs Horrible Dictator

All dictators follow the same blueprint to grab power. But why do some dictatorships last for decades, riding on major public support, while others collapse before they even become full dictatorships? The answer lies in how the authoritarian ruler executes the power grab. The bad dictators do it in subtle and less painful ways almost appearing to be democratic, while the horrible ones shove it down the people’s throats, causing pain and misery along the way. But as is the case in the digital era, even the best of the bad dictators have a short shelf life.

Having analyzed authoritarian regimes in six different countries, here is a four-step formula for a power grab that is common to all, but executed differently by a Bad Dictator and a Horrible Dictator, that makes all the difference in the outcome.

Step 1: Power Grab

Bad dictators actually make it to power through some kind of legitimate means or semblance of it, either through votes or via a "national security emergency." The horrible ones steal the elections and force their way into power, becoming discredited and delegitimised from the very first day. They then spend the rest of their time in power just hoping to survive. The journey to power has its own seeds of failure or success.

Step 2: Censorship & Surveillance

The first act of any authoritarian regime is to control the national narrative. In the dark old days of centralised information systems (newspapers), dictatorships could last for decades. Then came television, the liberalisation of news, and eventually the internet and social media—fully decentralised information networks that completely upended a dictator’s control over the narrative. Much more effort and sophistication are now required to control public perception.

Bad dictators compete in the marketplace of ideas as narrative producers and storytellers, manoeuvring and influencing narratives. The horrible and lazy dictators try to ‘control’ the narrative by abducting journalists or shutting down media outlets, the internet, and social media. A rare breed of horrible dictators even try to install firewalls. They only fast-track their own downfall.

Step 3: Application of Violence & Terror

What is a dictator without the ability and willingness to apply violence and terror against their own people? The bad dictator, however, applies violence (or the threat of it) sparingly and strategically, understanding that they need public love, not fear, to survive.

The horrible dictator will abduct, torture, and kill people, and would do it publicly to induce terror, believing that fear is power. However, the thing about fear is that after a certain point, people get over it, and that moment marks the end of the dictator's hold on power.

Step 4: Constitutional Amendments to Stay in Power Forever

Even the most "benevolent" dictator needs the law and constitution to align with their ambitions. However, the bad dictator would never tamper with judicial independence, recognizing that even the perception of a compromised judiciary sets the clock ticking against them. A bad dictator understands that constitutional amendments are only possible if their regime has enough public credibility and support.

The horrible dictator, on the other hand, neither cares about the public nor its opinions, and uses all brutal tactics against political leaders, judges, and the media to push through constitutional changes. In doing so, the dictator turns the entire system upside down, creates enemies, and becomes an intolerable presence within the system.

In a Nutshell

A bad dictator plays within the system and respects it to gain the support needed for longevity. The horrible dictator is like a bull in a china shop—extremely powerful, reckless, and destined to self-destruct. Such dictators are eventually flushed out by the very system they are trying to "control."

If there is one lesson on power I’ve learned through studying it for the last 15 years, it’s this: no one truly controls power, and that the ultimate price of power is common sense.