How to stop a dictator
Vox
February 23, 2026
AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary
The survival of democracy in the face of authoritarian threats depends on how clearly those threats are perceived by key segments of society, according to research and case studies from Brazil, South Korea, and Poland. When elected leaders like Jair Bolsonaro, Yoon Suk Yeol, or the Law and Justice (PiS) party in Poland begin to undermine democratic institutions, their actions often reveal a clear and present danger to core freedoms. This legibility of threat—whether through overt authoritarian moves or subtle power grabs—spurs pushback from elites, opposition parties, and citizens alike, as seen in these three democracies where resistance ultimately succeeded.
In Brazil, Bolsonaro’s brazen attempts to consolidate power, such as packing the Supreme Court and promoting military figures into key roles, made his intentions unmistakable. This clarity galvanized elite institutions, like the Supreme Court, to resist, alongside Congress and civil society. Similarly, in South Korea, President Yoon Suk Yeol’s declaration of martial law was so overt that it united the public and legislature against him. In Poland, while PiS’s tactics were more insidious—targeting media and judiciary independence—the opposition coalesced around a shared threat, ultimately defeating PiS at the polls.
The implications for the United States are significant. While some argue that democracy is too abstract to motivate voters, evidence from these cases shows that when citizens perceive an immediate danger to their freedoms, they are willing to act. Protests against Trump’s policies, such as the Tesla Takedown movement and anti-ICE activism, demonstrate how public mobilization can force accountability. By framing issues like immigration enforcement or executive overreach as threats to democracy, leaders and activists can
Verticals
politicsnews
Originally published on Vox on 2/23/2026