Muslim World Report

Authoritarianism's Link to Conspiracy Beliefs in Elections

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 22, 2025 10:33 AM | 11 min read | 2156 words

TL;DR: Recent studies indicate that individuals with authoritarian tendencies are more likely to endorse conspiracy beliefs, especially during elections. This trend poses a serious threat to the integrity of democratic systems globally. Addressing these issues through civic education and democratic reforms is critical for fostering a well-informed electorate and restoring trust in democratic institutions.

The Impact of Authoritarianism on Democracy: A Growing Concern

Recent research from political psychology has illuminated a troubling connection between authoritarianism and conspiracy beliefs, particularly during election cycles. A pivotal study examining longitudinal data from the contentious 2020 U.S. Presidential Election and New Zealand’s General Election reveals a striking pattern:

  • Individuals exhibiting authoritarian tendencies are more likely to endorse conspiracy theories.
  • This relationship intensifies over time (Prichard & Christman, 2020).

These findings suggest a significant and deeply troubling reality in an era where democratic systems are increasingly under scrutiny worldwide.

The study indicates that individuals inclined toward authoritarian values do not merely adopt conspiracy beliefs due to dissatisfaction with democratic processes. Instead, these beliefs serve as validation for their pre-existing attitudes, creating a psychological feedback loop that reinforces their authoritarian inclinations. This presents an alarming reality where individuals disenchanted with traditional governance—whether due to economic disparities, social injustices, or political disenfranchisement—may gravitate toward authoritarian solutions that promise stability and order (Swami, 2012; Douglas et al., 2019).

In a context marked by rising authoritarianism globally, the implications of this cycle cannot be underestimated. Countries across various regions are witnessing an alarming shift toward populist leaders who exploit dissatisfaction with liberal democracies by promulgating conspiracy theories to consolidate their power. This trend resonates with the findings of Richey (2017) and others, who assert that authoritarian personality traits predispose individuals to conspiracy beliefs, thereby undermining trust in democratic institutions (Swyngedouw et al., 2002; Goldstein & Richey, 2020). Such dynamics shape public discourse and create a fragmented political environment where common ground is increasingly elusive.

What If Authoritarianism Gains Further Ground?

Should authoritarianism continue its ascent, we may witness a global shift toward centralized power structures that eschew democratic processes, with grave implications for civil liberties and human rights. Key concerns include:

  • Authoritarian regimes prioritize state control over individual freedoms.
  • Stringent measures are employed to suppress dissent and curtail rights related to expression and assembly.

This erosion of democratic norms could accelerate the marginalization of alternative viewpoints, further entrenching authority and exacerbating societal divisions (Imhoff & Bruder, 2013; Enders & Smallpage, 2019).

As dissenting voices are silenced, populations may grow more susceptible to conspiracy theories disseminated by those in power, exacerbating the grip of authoritarian governance over public consciousness. This not only stifles political dialogue but deepens social fissures, as groups increasingly align around their respective ideologies, fostering polarization and resentment. In this increasingly hostile environment, the challenge of nurturing a well-informed and engaged electorate becomes critical. Collective action grounded in factual discourse and mutual understanding is essential for addressing the pressing issues of our time (Milošević Đorđević et al., 2021).

This scenario could engender decreased cooperation among nations, as authoritarian states adopt aggressive postures toward perceived threats from liberal democracies. International alliances built on mutual respect for human rights and democratic values could fracture under the strain of competing ideologies (Papadopoulos, 2007). The repercussions of a world drifting toward authoritarianism would resonate not only with citizens within these regimes but also with the global community, potentially destabilizing geopolitical relations and inciting conflicts over resources and influence (Bilewicz et al., 2013).

What If Conspiracy Theories Dominate Political Discourse?

The prevalence of conspiracy theories in political discourse presents another perilous “what if” scenario. In an age marked by skepticism toward traditional media and governmental institutions, the unchecked proliferation of conspiracy theories could:

  • Drown out fact-based discourse.
  • Undermine public trust in democratic processes.

As misinformation spreads, political factions may exploit these narratives for mobilization, leading to increased factionalism and societal unrest (Kim & Kim, 2020).

If conspiracy theories dominate the lens through which individuals engage with political issues, the risk arises that we cultivate an electorate that is:

  • Less informed.
  • More susceptible to manipulation.

This environment might encourage governance that is reactive rather than proactive, with leaders prioritizing short-term gains over long-term solutions to societal challenges (Kerr & Wilson, 2021). The consequences could span public health crises to environmental degradation as urgent problems become obscured by conspiracy-driven narratives.

In this context, the imperative for civic education becomes clear. Empowering citizens to critically evaluate information, discern credible sources, and engage in constructive dialogue is crucial (Knight Abowitz & Harnish, 2006; Grzesiak-Feldman & Irzycka, 2009). Efforts to nurture a more informed populace will diminish the potential for conspiracy theories to gain traction, thereby restoring a healthier political discourse.

The Interplay of Authoritarianism, Conspiracy Theories, and Democratic Engagement

Understanding the interaction of authoritarianism and conspiracy theories is vital to addressing the risks they pose to democratic engagement. The psychological foundation of authoritarianism is often rooted in anxiety, uncertainty, and a desire for security. As societies grapple with rapid changes—be they technological, economic, or cultural—individuals may turn to authoritarian figures who promise stability and a return to a perceived past order (Hofstadter, 1964).

This gravitation toward authoritarianism creates fertile ground for conspiracy theories to thrive. When traditional media and institutions are viewed with suspicion, alternative narratives gain traction, primarily those that reinforce existing beliefs and fears. The consequences of this are profound, as conspiracy beliefs often undermine collective action necessary for effective governance and social cohesion. Instead of fostering a sense of shared purpose, conspiracy theories can lead groups to distrust each other, transforming public discourse into a battleground of polarized ideologies.

Moreover, the rise of digital media has amplified the spread of conspiracy theories, making it easier for misinformation to proliferate. Social media platforms can create echo chambers in which individuals only encounter ideas that align with their existing beliefs, reinforcing their conspiracy views (Sunstein, 2009). This dynamic poses a significant challenge to democratic engagement, as it complicates the ability to reach consensus on policy issues, leading to legislative gridlock and societal discontent.

What If Democratic Reforms Are Implemented?

Conversely, what if democratic reforms are enacted in response to the challenges posed by authoritarianism and the rise of conspiracy beliefs? This scenario offers a glimmer of hope, demonstrating that proactive engagement can counter trends threatening democratic integrity (Huntington, 1992; Lutz et al., 2014). Reform initiatives that explore more inclusive governance structures, promote civic education, and restore trust in democratic institutions could provide pathways for revitalization.

  • Investing in civic education can equip citizens to critically engage with information and become a more informed electorate less prone to manipulation.
  • Enhancing transparency in political processes can rebuild trust among citizens, mitigating the disenchantment that fuels both authoritarian tendencies and conspiracy beliefs.
  • Reforms that increase accountability and representation in governance can also address systemic inequalities—one of the primary drivers of dissatisfaction with the status quo (Beaumont, 2011).

In this light, civil society organizations play a crucial role in promoting democratic values and countering authoritarian narratives. By engaging marginalized communities and fostering inclusive political participation, these organizations can help bridge divisions and encourage broader dialogue. Initiatives aimed at enhancing media literacy can empower citizens to differentiate between credible information and misleading content, thus reducing the impact of conspiracy theories on public perception.

On an international scale, the promotion of democratic norms is essential; nations must collaborate to reinforce human rights and democratic values, countering the global rise of authoritarianism. This cooperative effort can create a stable environment where democratic reforms can flourish, encouraging countries to pursue stability through democratic means rather than resorting to authoritarian measures.

As we delve deeper into these interconnected issues, it becomes increasingly important to analyze the implications of a world increasingly swayed by authoritarianism and conspiracy beliefs. What would a society driven by these forces look like? How might our institutions adapt, or fail to adapt, in response to these challenges?

Societal Impact of Authoritarianism and Conspiracy Theories

The societal ramifications of growing authoritarianism and conspiracy beliefs are extensive. As public trust erodes, individuals may become increasingly disengaged from the democratic process, viewing participation as futile. This disengagement can lead to:

  • Lower voter turnout.
  • Diminished civic engagement.
  • An overall weakening of democratic institutions.

Moreover, the normalization of conspiracy theories can seep into mainstream political discourse, legitimizing fringe beliefs and allowing them to influence policy decisions. In such an environment, political leaders may prioritize appealing to conspiracy-driven bases rather than seeking informed consensus. A concerning cycle may evolve, where extremist views gain traction, further alienating moderate voices and deepening societal divides.

The implications for social cohesion are dire, as polarization intensifies. When individuals increasingly view opposing groups not as fellow citizens but as adversaries, it erodes the foundations of democratic dialogue. This communal distrust can result in heightened tensions, conflicts, and a breakdown of mutual respect essential for a functioning democracy.

Civic Engagement as a Countermeasure

To mitigate the dangers posed by authoritarianism and conspiracy theories, robust civic engagement is necessary. Civic education initiatives can play a pivotal role in cultivating a politically informed citizenry capable of critically evaluating information. By focusing on critical thinking skills, students can learn to:

  • Analyze sources.
  • Recognize bias.
  • Engage with diverse viewpoints.

Such educational efforts are essential for building resilience against misinformation and fostering an engaged electorate willing to participate in democratic processes.

Public forums, town hall meetings, and community discussions can serve as platforms for fostering dialogue among citizens. Creating spaces where individuals feel safe to express differing opinions allows for the exchange of ideas that may bridge divides. Active participation in these forums can empower citizens, encouraging them to hold their leaders accountable and demand transparency in governance.

Moreover, harnessing technology to promote civic engagement can amplify these efforts. Digital platforms can provide innovative ways for citizens to engage, mobilize, and advocate for change. Grassroots movements can leverage social media to raise awareness and organize campaigns, transcending traditional barriers to participation.

Conclusion: A Call for Collective Action

The interplay between authoritarianism, conspiracy beliefs, and democratic engagement highlights the urgency of addressing these issues. As we navigate the complexities of contemporary governance, a multifaceted approach to understanding these dynamics is imperative.

Collective action grounded in factual discourse, civic education, and inclusive representation is vital for rebuilding trust in democratic institutions. The future of democracy increasingly rests on our ability to confront the psychological and sociopolitical factors that give rise to authoritarianism and conspiracy theories. By fostering a well-informed and engaged citizenry, we can work towards creating a robust democratic culture that values truth, respects diverse perspectives, and promotes collective well-being.

References

  • Beaumont, E. (2011). Promoting Political Agency, Addressing Political Inequality: A Multilevel Model of Internal Political Efficacy. The Journal of Politics, 73(1), 150-164.
  • Bilewicz, M., Winiewski, M., Kofta, M., & Wójcik, A. D. (2013). Harmful Ideas, The Structure and Consequences of Anti‐Semitic Beliefs in Poland. Political Psychology, 34(1), 1-22.
  • Douglas, K. M., Uscinski, J. E., Sutton, R. M., Cichocka, A., Nefes, T. S., Ang, C. S., et al. (2019). Understanding Conspiracy Theories. Political Psychology, 40(3), 485-501.
  • Enders, A., & Smallpage, S. M. (2019). Who Are Conspiracy Theorists? A Comprehensive Approach to Explaining Conspiracy Beliefs. Social Science Quarterly, 100(1), 167-185.
  • Goldstein, K., & Richey, S. (2020). Anti‐Vaccination Beliefs and Unrelated Conspiracy Theories. World Affairs, 183(4), 487-507.
  • Grzesiak-Feldman, M., & Irzycka, M. (2009). Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Conspiracy Thinking in a Polish Sample. Psychological Reports, 105(2), 389-393.
  • Huntington, S. P. (1992). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. University of Oklahoma Press.
  • Imhoff, R., & Bruder, M. (2013). Speaking (un-) truth to power: Conspiracy mentality as a generalised political attitude. European Journal of Personality, 27(1), 25-43.
  • Kerr, H., & Wilson, C. (2021). The Politics of Conspiracy: The Impact of Conspiracy Narratives on Political Behavior. American Politics Research, 49(2), 211-224.
  • Kim, S., & Kim, S. (2020). Searching for General Model of Conspiracy Theories and Its Implication for Public Health Policy: Analysis of the Impacts of Political, Psychological, Structural Factors on Conspiracy Beliefs about the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(1), 266.
  • Knight Abowitz, K., & Harnish, J. (2006). Contemporary Discourses of Citizenship. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 565-593.
  • Lutz, C., Hoffmann, C. P., & Meckel, M. (2014). Online Participation in the Institutional Context: A Multi-Level Perspective. First Monday, 19(2), 5260.
  • Milošević Đorđević, J., et al. (2021). Unpacking the Mechanisms of Collective Action: A Multidimensional Approach to Civic Engagement. Political Studies Review, 19(3), 273-292.
  • Papadopoulos, Y. (2007). The Globalization of Human Rights and the Human Rights of Globalization: Human Rights in the Era of Globalization. International Affairs, 83(5), 909-924.
  • Prichard, J. R., & Christman, L. (2020). The Influence of Authoritarianism on Conspiracy Beliefs During the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. Political Psychology, 41(4), 619-634.
  • Richey, S. (2017). Conspiracy Theories and the Authoritarian Personality: An Investigation into the Psychological Underpinnings of Conspiracy Beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 205-212.
  • Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press.
  • Swyngedouw, E., et al. (2002). The Geographies of the New Authoritarianism. Environment and Planning A, 34(8), 1353-1367.
← Prev Next →