AI Says...
Introduction
In many authoritarian regimes, the elite system undergoes a profound inversion. Rather than promoting talent, innovation, and critical thinking, it favors very specific profiles: individuals who are non-threatening, submissive, corrupt, and therefore easily controlled, often mediocre and lacking ambition. This mechanism is not trivial; it lies at the heart of the strategy for maintaining power by authoritarian leaders. It represents a perversion of the elite principle, where merit is replaced by loyalty and complicity.
The Functioning of the Inverted System
The inversion of the elite system relies on several mechanisms:
Selection Based on Loyalty and Submission: Elites are chosen based on their unconditional adherence to the regime's ideology and their ability to obey without question.
Promotion of Corruption: Corruption becomes a tool of control. By involving elites in corrupt networks, the regime makes them dependent and compels them to maintain the status quo.
Promotion of Mediocrity: Competent and ambitious individuals are often seen as threats. To avoid coups or revolts, the regime prefers to promote mediocre people who are incapable of challenging the established order.
Trickle-Down Effect: This phenomenon is observed at all levels of the administration. Corrupt and mediocre elites impose their selection criteria on their subordinates, creating a cascade of insufficient competencies.
Sociological Consequences
This inversion of elites has disastrous consequences for society:
Economic Stagnation: The lack of skills and innovation hinders economic development.
Widespread Corruption: Corruption becomes endemic, infecting all sectors of society.
Loss of Trust in Institutions: Citizens lose faith in institutions and their leaders.
Deterioration of Public Services: Public services degrade, to the detriment of the population.
Comparison Between Different Countries
Algeria, Venezuela, Russia: These rentier states share similar mechanisms of elite inversion. Control over oil and gas allows leaders to enrich themselves and buy the loyalty of their supporters. Corruption is endemic, and elites are selected based on their proximity to power.
Brazil under Bolsonaro and the United States under Trump: These cases are interesting because they show the limits of this model. Bolsonaro and Trump tried to impose their populist vision by relying on corrupt and loyal elites. However, they failed to remain in power, showing that corruption alone does not guarantee long-term electoral victory.
Russia and Egypt: In Russia, Putin has managed to maintain his power through an extremely effective control system. In Egypt, the military has retained power through brutal repression and strict control over society.
Conclusion
The inversion of elites is a characteristic phenomenon of authoritarian regimes. It allows leaders to maintain power by weakening institutions and corrupting elites. However, this model is fragile and can lead to deep economic and social crises. The examples of Brazil and the United States demonstrate that corruption alone is not enough to ensure long-term electoral success.
Related Posts
