WP_Post Object
(
    [ID] => 10165
    [post_author] => 15
    [post_date] => 2026-02-18 19:45:31
    [post_date_gmt] => 2026-02-18 19:45:31
    [post_content] => 

In an era of rising authoritarianism and billionaire autocrats, defenders of human rights cannot afford to retreat.

There's a moment in every struggle when retreat seems like the only rational option. When dictators grow bolder and democracies grow weaker; when the funding dries up and the threats are mounting.

For even the staunchest of human rights defenders, this is often the moment when the temptation to step back, to compromise, to "wait for better times" becomes almost irresistible. But it’s also the moment when it’s most crucial that we hold the line.  

The Illiberal Surge

The numbers tell a grim story. According to the 2025 Democracy Without Borders report, the proportion of the world’s population living in a liberal democracy is now the lowest it’s been in 50 years—less than 12% of people worldwide. In contrast, 72% of the population—equivalent to 5.8 billion people—live under autocratic rule. Even countries once considered democratic beacons are sliding backwards, their institutions hollowed out by leaders who exploit fear, weaponize division, and dismantle checks and balances with disturbing efficiency. Increasingly, even the United States—long regarded as a democratic anchor—is exhibiting patterns of autocratic drift, marked by the concentration of executive power, the erosion of institutional constraints, and the normalization of political coercion and violence.

Across every continent, we are witnessing an unprecedented assault on human rights, rule of law, and democratic norms. According to Freedom House, global freedom has declined for 19 consecutive years. In Russia, Vladimir Putin has transformed a nuclear superpower into a revisionist rogue state, waging wars of conquest under the banner of Russkii Mir (“the Russian World”)—an imperial doctrine that frames violence as civilizational reunification. In practice, this entails the imposition of totalitarian control over territory, society, and political life through authoritarian systems of governance abroad; and at home, the total, systematic elimination of political opposition. In Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has hollowed out judicial independence and imprisoned tens of thousands to entrench personal rule. In China, Xi Jinping has constructed the most advanced surveillance state in human history, fusing cutting-edge technology with unapologetic repression. In Hungary, Viktor Orbán has perfected the model of so-called “illiberal democracy,” an oxymoron that now functions as a practical manual for aspiring autocrats.

Even in formerly Soviet Central Asia, where expectations were never high, the trajectory is alarming. Kyrgyzstan, once celebrated as the region's freest country, now jails journalists, suppresses protests, and coordinates with Russian security services to hunt down dissidents. Kazakhstan, despite its carefully cultivated image as a modernizing state and economic powerhouse, brutally crushes peaceful protests, including inviting Russian troops to massacre its own citizens—killing over 200 people in what the government euphemistically called "anti-terrorist operations" in January 2022. Uzbekistan continues to restrict civil liberties, while the EU prepares to reward it with enhanced trade deals; and Tajikistan and Turkmenistan remain totalitarian nightmares that don't even try to pretend otherwise.

The Billionaire Autocrat: Democracy's New Nemesis

Making this era particularly dangerous is not just the rise of traditional autocrats, but the emergence of a new breed: the billionaire strongman who wields wealth as a weapon and treats nations like personal subsidies.

These are not just politicians who happen to be rich, but oligarchs who view governance as an extension of their business empires, who treat public office as private property, and who recognize no distinction between state resources and personal assets. Unlike traditional dictators, who seize power through military coups or revolutionary movements, this modern autocrat often arrives through elections—then uses his power for self-enrichment and for dismantling democracy from within, ensuring he can remain in power indefinitely.

Look at Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency, backed by the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, who has used his ownership of X (formerly Twitter) to amplify destructive and hateful narratives and undermine democratic discourse while on his path to becoming the world’s first trillionaire. Look at the tech billionaires who increasingly view themselves as above the law and accountable to no one, while wielding unprecedented influence over information flows and public opinion. Intoxicated by this unchecked power, some have gone further—intervening in the domestic politics of other countries, amplifying or aligning with extremist and openly fascist movements, and actively threatening democratic processes far beyond their own borders. This concentration of power is not accidental: It is built on decades of privileged access to public resources, publicly funded research, state subsidies, regulatory forbearance, and the extraction of value from user-generated data and public infrastructure.

This marriage of authoritarian governance and extreme wealth has created a feedback loop of power consolidation, where wealth buys political influence, and political influence protects and expands wealth—a cycle that continues until the very concept of public interest becomes quaint and obsolete.

These billionaire autocrats also work in tandem, threatening human rights both in their home countries and abroad: They fund each other's regimes, help evade sanctions, provide safe havens for each other's stolen assets, and create international networks of corruption that transcend borders.

The result is a global ecosystem of kleptocracy where the rules apply to ordinary people but never to the powerful. When a Kyrgyz president is overthrown for corruption, he flees to Belarus or Russia. When Russian oligarchs need to launder money, they find willing accomplices in London, Dubai, and New York. This is not limited to traditionally authoritarian states, either. Under Donald Trump, the United States also recently adopted a recognizably autocratic maneuver: Shortly after kidnapping President Nicolás Maduro, proceeds from the sale of Venezuelan oil—reportedly totaling $500 million—were routed into multiple offshore accounts, the largest held in Qatar.

The Funding Crisis

The cruel irony is that, as threats of global authoritarianism continue to multiply, the resources to defend against them are evaporating.

The organizations that document war crimes, defend political prisoners, expose corruption, and provide legal aid to vulnerable populations are being forced to cut staff, close offices, and scale back operations. Small grassroots groups—often the most effective, because they're closest to the communities they serve—are disappearing entirely.

Human rights organizations across the world are facing unprecedented funding cuts. Governments that once supported civil society are redirecting resources to "national priorities"—often code for building walls and buying weapons. Private foundations are "pivoting" to other issues. International donors are suffering from "democracy fatigue," as if defending basic rights were a trend rather than a fundamental imperative.

Why We Cannot Retreat

In the face of these challenges, some have argued for strategic retreat. "Wait for the political climate to improve," they say. "Focus on less controversial issues." "Don't antagonize powerful governments." "Be realistic about what's achievable."

This advice is seductive precisely because of its supposed practicality. But it's also wrong.

History teaches us that authoritarianism, once given space to breathe, metastasizes. Dictators interpret hesitation as weakness and compromise as surrender. When human rights defenders go quiet, they don't buy time—they lose ground.

The window for resistance doesn't widen with patience; it narrows with delay.

Every time we soften our demands for accountability, every time we accept "reforms" that are purely cosmetic, every time we prioritize short-term economic interests over long-term democratic values, we hand authoritarians another victory. Consider the trajectory of Russia. In the 1990s and early 2000s, Western governments believed they could moderate Putin through engagement and economic ties. But each concession, each instance of looking the other way, each prioritization of "stability" over justice only emboldened Putin further. By the time the West decided to take a firm stance, Russia had already become the authoritarian menace it is today—and Ukraine is still paying the price for it in blood.

It is imperative, then, that we do not repeat our predecessors’ mistakes: Where they ceded ground, we must now hold the line.

What Holding the Line Means

Holding the line doesn't mean mindless stubbornness, or a refusal to adapt. Instead, it means refusing to compromise on core principles, regardless of the circumstances—a collective effort that requires each of us.

It means human rights organizations should continue documenting abuses even when governments threaten their staff. It means journalists investigating corruption even when they risk imprisonment or death. It means activists organizing protests, even when they’re banned and participants are beaten.

Holding the line means attaching real, enforceable human rights conditions to every cooperation agreement, trade deal, and aid package. It means wealthy democracies cannot allow their financial systems to become laundromats for dictators' stolen wealth. It means tech companies cannot provide surveillance tools to authoritarian regimes. It means universities cannot accept money from kleptocrats seeking to buy respectability. It means investigating and sanctioning corruption, regardless of whose feelings it hurts.

It also means confronting the uncomfortable truth that extreme wealth concentration must be dismantled. A world where a handful of billionaires wield more power than elected governments is inherently incompatible with democracy and human rights. When individuals accumulate resources equivalent to national budgets, they become unaccountable centers of power that can manipulate democracies, fund authoritarian movements, and evade any meaningful oversight.

To truly hold the line, then, we also need wealth taxes that prevent the emergence of quasi-monarchical fortunes. We need to abandon the fiction that billionaires are somehow more enlightened, more competent, or more deserving of power than democratically elected officials. We need corporate governance reforms that prevent oligarchs from treating companies as personal fiefdoms. We need to close the legal loopholes that allow the ultra-wealthy to operate in regulatory twilight zones.

We need to hold not just one line, but all the smaller lines that make up the whole.

The Cost of Retreat

And if we don't?

In the 1930s, democracies chose appeasement over confrontation, economic interests over moral clarity. They told themselves that engaging with fascist regimes would moderate them, that war could be avoided through compromise—and millions died because of it.

Today's authoritarians are learning the same lesson their predecessors did: Democracies will tolerate almost anything if you frame it as "stability" or "economic necessity." And they've adjusted their behavior accordingly—becoming bolder, more brutal, and more brazen in their contempt for human rights and international law.

If we retreat now, the next generation won't just face an "illiberal surge"—they'll face an illiberal world order where authoritarianism is the norm, the powerful answer to no one, and human rights are quaint historical curiosities.

Hope Is a Discipline

Make no mistake: Holding the line is exhausting. The victories are small and the setbacks are devastating. There will be moments when continuing seems impossible, when the challenges we face feel insurmountable.

But hope is not about believing everything will work out. Hope is the discipline of continuing the fight even when the odds are terrible. Hope is understanding that the line we hold today creates and protects the space where tomorrow's resistance will grow. And sometimes, against all odds, that resistance succeeds.

We’ve seen it in our lifetimes: the fall of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of the USSR, the end of apartheid, the Arab Spring’s brief flowering, the popular uprisings across Latin America and Central Asia, Ukraine’s Revolution of Dignity. These weren't inevitable—they happened because people refused to accept authoritarianism as permanent.

They happened because people held the line until the moment came to advance.

A Call to Action

To human rights defenders everywhere: When funding disappears, innovate. When governments threaten you, document everything. When allies waiver, remind them what's at stake.

To democratic governments and international institutions: Stop the charade of believing trade will transform autocrats. Attach real conditions to every agreement. Support civil society unreservedly. Sanction corruption aggressively. And recognize that your credibility depends not on what you say but what you do when authoritarians call your bluff.

To citizens of global democracies: Recognize that your freedoms are not guaranteed. They exist because previous generations fought for them and current defenders maintain them. Support human rights organizations. Find your people. Build coalitions. Hold your governments accountable when they prioritize profits over principles. And understand that authoritarianism will eventually come for you if it is allowed to flourish unchecked.

To journalists: Keep investigating. Keep publishing. Your work is dangerous precisely because it's effective. Every investigation you complete, every truth you reveal, chips away at the foundations of authoritarian power.

And to those who have already retreated, who have compromised, who have gone quiet: It's never too late to return to the fight. The line is thinner than it should be, and we need everyone who still believes in human rights and rule of law to stand with us.

The Choice Before Us

We stand at an inflection point. The choices we make now—as individuals, organizations, and societies—will determine whether the 21st century becomes an era of hard-won freedom or deepening oppression.

The authoritarians are betting we'll fold. They're counting on our exhaustion, our divisions, our tendency to prioritize short-term comfort over long-term principles. They believe that funding cuts will silence us, that threats will intimidate us, that time is on their side.

They're wrong.

We will hold the line. Not because it's easy, but because it's necessary. Not because victory is guaranteed, but because surrender is unthinkable.

The line we hold is not just a metaphor. It's the space where lawyers defend political prisoners. Where journalists expose corruption and abuse. Where activists organize communities. Where ordinary people refuse to accept injustice as inevitable.

We see this in action with every political prisoner who receives legal representation because a human rights organization refused to close. Every corruption scandal exposed because a journalist refused to be silenced. Every protest that happens because activists refused to give up. These are not marginal victories—these are the threads that keep the fabric of resistance intact.

This line is under assault from authoritarians, oligarchs, and billionaire autocrats who recognize no limits to their ambition and no accountability for their actions. They have money, power, and momentum.

But we have something stronger: the conviction that human dignity matters, that our rights are not negotiable, and that no amount of wealth or power places anyone above justice.

So we hold the line. Today, tomorrow, and for as long as it takes.

Because if we don't, there won’t be one left to hold onto.

[post_title] => We Must Hold the Line [post_excerpt] => In an era of rising authoritarianism and billionaire autocrats, defenders of human rights cannot afford to retreat. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => hold-the-line-fascism-autocracy-kleptocracy-billionaires-threats-authoritarianism-protest-activism-preserving-democracy-politics-human-rights [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2026-02-18 19:45:33 [post_modified_gmt] => 2026-02-18 19:45:33 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://conversationalist.org/?p=10165 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw )
An illustration of a flock of birds in formation to form a bigger bird, facing off against a fighter jet.

We Must Hold the Line

WP_Post Object
(
    [ID] => 8231
    [post_author] => 15
    [post_date] => 2025-04-22 02:08:57
    [post_date_gmt] => 2025-04-22 02:08:57
    [post_content] => 

Despite the threat of police violence and arrest, student-led protests against President Erdoğan and his ruling party continue across Turkey.

A wave of street demonstrations began rapidly taking over Turkey last month after a crowd of students at Istanbul University pushed back against, and ultimately overcame, a riot police barricade attempting to block their path. This feat was seen as a moment of encouragement and empowerment for a country that has long felt silenced by its current government, and has led to continued demonstrations across Turkey in the weeks since.

The students on March 19 were protesting the imprisonment of Ekrem İmamoğlu, Istanbul’s current mayor, and the biggest rival of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in the next presidential election. They were also protesting a court decision made the day prior that nullified İmamoğlu’s diploma, a controversial ruling that meant the mayor, a member of the main opposition Republican People’s Party, the CHP, would not be directly eligible for candidacy. 

The ruling was taken as a major blow to democracy and rule of law both by his supporters and by the opposition, with the party’s chairman calling it a “black mark.” But it was only a foreshadowing. The next morning, İmamoğlu, along with some 100 people, including aides, business people, and other mayors of the metropolitan’s districts, were detained in their homes. İmamoğlu had been accused of corruption and terror for allegedly establishing an electoral alliance with the Kurds in previous mayoral elections. 

The case against him was widely taken as politically-motivated—the law being utilized once again as a weapon to extend Erdoğan’s reign, and discourage and limit his critics. Many were also quick to call out the hypocrisy of the charges: President Erdoğan, founder of the ruling Justice and Development Party, the AKP, has himself been in talks with Turkey’s pro-Kurdish DEM Party to release Abdullah Öcalan, the imprisoned leader of the separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party, the PKK, designated as a terror entity by Turkey and the U.S. alike.

In a handwritten note posted on Twitter/X while he was detained, İmamoğlu wrote, “My people will respond to those who steal the people’s will.”

Massive demonstrations immediately erupted across the country, in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, and tens of provinces, including Konya in central Turkey, a very conservative AKP stronghold. All were met with brutal police violence. At many of the protests, the riot police used tear gas, rubber ball rifles, and water cannons against the young protestors, many of whom had their faces covered to hide their identities, out of fear of losing their livelihoods. 

For many, it was their first street demonstration. Many held various sizes of the Turkish flag, and banners—some humorous—expressing their resilience and upset. 

Bülent Kılıç

On March 22, at the legal end of the mayor’s detention period, İmamoğlu and the CHP Chairman Özgür Özel both called for a demonstration at Sarachane, the metropolitan municipality’s headquarters in Istanbul’s historic Fatih district. 

“The walls of fear have been overcome,” İmamoğlu said in his call, posted on Twitter/X—referencing a culture of fear that has been especially prevalent since 2015, when a war re-erupted with the PKK, and since 2016, when a U.S.-based Turkish cleric was accused of orchestrating a coup. Both paved the way for a more authoritarian environment, in which civil dissent would often be marginalized.

Hoping to deter protestors from attending the demonstration in Sarachane, the Interior Ministry imposed various travel restrictions in key provinces, including shutting down metro and bus stations to limit travel. But their efforts were unsuccessful. Hundreds of thousands surrounded the municipality in support of İmamoğlu, while many other demonstrators of various ages stood outside the courthouse in Caglayan, where the mayor’s hearing would be held throughout the night. 

Ultimately, demonstrators were protesting what they believed to be an attack on Turkey’s democracy and core values. Facing a riot police barricade encircling the massive building, hundreds chanted, “Turkey is secular; it will remain secular,” and the famous Bertolt Brecht line: “All of us, or none!”

The court ruling came at early dawn: İmamoğlu and tens of aides were arrested for corruption, pending trial, which has since been postponed to July 11.

The decision drew masses more to the streets, mainly young people, many of whom viewed the ruling as an extension of Erdoğan’s corruption. For millions across the country, it was a drop too much following years of polarizing rhetoric and the criminalization of dissent in a crumbling economy.

“We are not here to support any political party,” Beyza Ozdemir, a 30-year-old screenwriter said in Sarachane, a day after the mayor was arrested. “I came because I want to defend my rights, my country; to stand against injustice. I’m here for the ruling government to resign.”

Alongside her friend, 27, Ozdemir explained that, like much of the population, they were just “surviving.” Under near-80 percent inflation, it has become nearly impossible to travel, own property, or make plans for the future in Turkey, something they blamed on Erdoğan and the AKP. 

Other demonstrators said they were protesting for freedom of expression, justice, and in support of earthquake-proofing cities, following the devastating damage caused by the 2023 earthquake. Others said they were there because of the alarming femicide numbers, the destruction of nature, and the killing of strays in shelters. A majority said they came to protect the secular democracy entrusted to the Turkish youth by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder of modern Turkey.

President Erdoğan, who’s been in the official power seat since 2003, called the demonstrations “a movement of violence” and “street terror.” But Beyza’s friend said that he felt like “a phoenix” standing among the crowds, chanting in solidarity, after years of being silenced following the massive 2013 Gezi Park protests against the same government, protests that were criminalized to the point of terror charges and a life sentence for a Turkish philanthropist, who is accused of undertaking an alleged organizational role.

Bülent Kılıç

Twelve years later, in Sarachane, the authorities would take similar, disproportionate measures once again. Caught on camera by photojournalists and protestors on the night of March 23, hundreds of riot police sprayed tear gas and fired heavy barrages of rubber balls directly at demonstrators, many of whom were just walking back to the metro at the end of the night. 

Dozens of shoes were left behind by those who could flee. The next morning, members of the media, including internationally-acclaimed photojournalists, were detained on morning raids along with hundreds of young demonstrators, many of them university students.

All were accused of violating the law on meetings, and were imprisoned pending trial. Immediately, a public campaign to release them began, underlining that they were simply using their constitutional rights to protest. The campaign gained momentum on various social media and opposition platforms, which seems to have helped most of them to be freed, but with tens still imprisoned.

The protests continued. Following the last day of the mass gathering in Sarachane, on March 25, the CHP announced a demonstration in Maltepe, across the Bosphorus, the weekend following. They claimed 2.2 million people attended the event in solidarity. 

The next day was the beginning of a government-imposed nine-day religious holiday, Eid al-Fitr, putting a temporary end to the mass demonstrations. In response, the opposition called for a day of nationwide mass boycott to curb the AKP’s economic hinge, by stopping consumption fully, a goal that was supported by many shops and restaurants, which all closed for the day.

Some actors who supported the boycott were removed from their roles in state-owned streaming platform Tabii, while Cem Yiğit Üzümoğlu, who stars as Mehmed the Conqueror in Netflix’s Rise of Empires: Ottoman, was briefly detained.

While the heat of the mass street demonstrations has since slowed down because of the break, boycotts against pro-government brands and the student-led protests have continued. This month, videos of demonstrations held by high school students from various provinces have also started circulating. In one, tens of riot police are stationed outside Vefa High School in Istanbul, where one student holds a banner reading, “Rights, Law, Justice!”

Many universities across the country have also continued to hold sit-ins and forums, calling for more demonstrations on campuses and in the streets. They continue to demand the release of the remaining imprisoned students, and to defend their right to constitutional welfare and secular democracy under new leadership. 

Bülent Kılıç

On April 8, a “resistance and solidarity concert” was held in Kadikoy, attended mostly by university students, with hundreds of riot police standing by. While letters from imprisoned students were read aloud on stage, slogans against Erdoğan and his government were chanted throughout.

“Turkey has major problems of injustice and corruption. These come together and threaten our future,” Ayse, a 25-year-old student, who did not want to provide her last name, said. She’s about the same age as the AKP’s political power.

“Our fight will not end upon the students’ and İmamoğlu’s release, but when Turkey becomes a just and equal country, providing a bright future for its youth,” she said. “Though, they should be released because they were only practicing their constitutional rights.” 

Despite the growing authoritarianism, Ayse said she feels more empowered than ever before, thanks to the crowds surrounding her.

[post_title] => "A Drop Too Much" [post_excerpt] => Despite the threat of police violence and arrest, student-led protests against President Erdoğan and his ruling party continue across Turkey. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => turkey-protests-istanbul-university-ekrem-imamoglu-president-recep-tayyip-erdogan-politics [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2025-09-16 06:33:15 [post_modified_gmt] => 2025-09-16 06:33:15 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://conversationalist.org/?p=8231 [menu_order] => 21 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw )
Protestors in Turkey stand in a line, all with their faces covered. In the center, someone in a ski mask is gesturing with their hand, seemingly yelling; in front of them, a child with their face covered is holding a protest sign and a red rod.

“A Drop Too Much”