Written by: Daniel Xie

On Mar. 30, the Hungarian Parliament, which is controlled by far-right prime minister Viktor Orbán’s party, Fidesz, voted to cancel all elections, suspend its own ability to legislate, and give the prime minister the right to rule by decree—indefinitely. The legislation granting Orbán sweeping powers would introduce draconian prison sentences for “obstructing” any means that the government would take in fighting the pandemic. For instance, if someone spreads misinformation that could supposedly hinder the government’s response to the pandemic, they receive up to five years in prison. If someone breaches quarantine rules, they are sentenced up to eight years in prison.

The measure passed by 137-53, the majority commanded by Fidesz allowing the law to easily pass in Parliament. Opposition parties, while voicing concerns about the scope of the emergency powers granted to Orban, believed that the emergency situation in the nation warranted drastic measures perceived as necessary in fighting the crisis. They have expressed hope that these measures will be revoked when Hungary recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Human rights organizations have condemned what has been described as a political “coup”, with Amnesty International’s Dávid Vig stating that “this is not the way to address the very real crisis that has been caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.” In response to allegations of expanding authoritarian powers, Orbán spokesman Zoltán Kovács defended the legislation as necessary in defending Hungary against a “pandemic the likes of which we have not seen in a century”. He singled out criticism of Orbán’s consolidation of power as taking “liberal media cynicism to new, despicable lows”.

Growing authoritarianism in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic isn’t restricted to Hungary. Around the world, various leaders, particularly far-right nationalists, have been using the COVID-19 outbreak as a pretext for granting themselves sweeping powers under the pretext of fighting the COVID-19 outbreak. In the Philippines, president Rodrigo Duterte has threatened to “shoot dead” and “bury” anyone violating quarantine laws in the Philippines using police and military forces. One man has already been shot dead as a result of Duterte threatening state violence against anyone violating quarantine laws.

In India, prime minister Modi has escalated police brutality in order to enforce curfews tied to the country’s lockdown enacted in response to the COVID-19 outbreak Police force young boys to perform frog jumps for violating curfew and the presence of police being increased on mosques, all while Modi enters into an arms deal with Israel rather than acquiring proper medical equipment to handle the outbreak.

These incidents often lead to increased brutality against Muslims, with police waiting outside of mosques to beat up Muslims for violating the lockdown. In Turkey, prime minister Edrogan has also used the Coronavirus outbreak as a pretext for consolidating authoritarian rule, except, unlike the cases mentioned above, actually tried to downplay the threat of the Coronavirus in his power grab by targeting those warning of the threat of the virus--arresting hundreds of people for posting concerns about the virus on social media as well as arresting medical professionals calling for action to be taken against the virus.

What do these scenarios have in common? All of the above scenarios feature populist and far right leaders that have taken any opportunity presented to them to consolidate authoritarian power at any means necessary. They escalate political repression and xenophobia against minorities suspected to carry the virus; COVID-19 being the latest pretext for the expansion of authoritarian power.

These scenarios where world leaders consolidate power at the expense of civil and political rights in the wake of the virus outbreak highlight a disturbing trend regarding the response to the coronavirus towards the entrenchment of authoritarianism--which may quickly become the new normal after the crisis, or rather, enforce the state of normalcy already existing prior to the outbreak.

The outbreak of COVID-19 has, in the minds of many, exposed that the state of “normalcy” under capitalism constitutes not a pleasant state that we should go back to, but rather a state of rampant inequality, rampant homelessness, white supremacist dominance, and living from paycheque to paycheque with the shadow of eviction hanging over their heads. The need to socially isolate during this time of crisis has exposed the fact that for many, it is simply not an option without a strong support system in place. In response to the inability for many to socially isolate, economic aid packages, tuition freezes along with mortgage freezes were being considered by governments around the world.

As seen in Canada with the lack of support given towards renters facing eviction, along with the $5,000 yearly pay requirement for Canada’s employee care package(which itself is inadequate in covering rent charges), many of these support programs are woefully inadequate in allowing people to self-isolate. This in turn gave rise to rent strikes across Canada led by movements such as Keep Your Rent Toronto. Mutual aid networks are being set up to allow people to reach out across social isolation and provide supplies to those needing it the most.

They are growing at a time when government responses seem to be inadequate in ensuring everyone is given the proper resources to self-isolate. These movements in turn, are not only mobilizing around the expansion of measures in place to be much more sufficient and adequate to allow for social distancing, but also to make sure the current measures imposed to alleviate mortgage and student loans become permanent.

History has shown that when confronted with a severe crisis undermining its legitimacy, the capitalist system is willing to allow progressive reforms to ensure stability. For instance, the foundations of the 20th century welfare state was established in response to the Great Depression. However, said reforms will inevitably be rolled back in exchange for more austerity once it’s economically convenient. What is not rolled back are the repressive measures also implemented during crises, often used to curb radicalism, anti-capitalist political movements, and direct action.

Thus, we may be in a situation where the Coronavirus crisis ends and with it, the rolling back of any welfare measures implemented to foster social distancing. Yet, the authoritarian measures established allegedly to enforce quarantines--already championed by Hungary, India, the Philippines, and Turkey — are not rolled back, and are used to suppress political dissidents whenever they arise; essentially enforcing capitalist “normalcy”. This consolidation of authoritarianism in times of crisis is something we must oppose whenever it arises--including in liberal democratic societies such as Canada and the United States.

One may look at these incidents and perhaps think that they won’t happen in an liberal democratic society. They may believe that societies are as immune to fascism and creeping authoritarianism as they can be, and that any harsh measures taken during times of crisis will be rescinded at its end. However, we may only need to look to our very recent history to see otherwise, let alone the events of the past 100 years or more.

The War on Terror has seen a massive and gradual increase in the powers of the American Surveillance state in response to Islamic terrorism; now, you can be indefinitely detained under suspicion of terrorism without due process. In this current crisis, we are seeing the American government already use the Coronavirus outbreak as a pretext to escalate tougher border policies and ramp up the expulsion of asylum seekers. In addition, the Department of Justice is planning measures to suspend constitutional rights during times of national crises — including the COVID-19 outbreak.

America is not alone in using the COVID-19 outbreak as a pretext for authoritarianism among western democracies. In the United Kingdom, the UK health secretary has threatened to ban outdoor exercise in response to the COVID outbreak if people in Britain don’t “follow the rules” the government enacts to enforce social distancing. In Israel, the Netanyahu government has planned to shut down the Israeli judicial system and use surveillance to monitor Israeli civilians to enforce self-isolation; all while the Israeli government and Israeli settlers continue settler colonialism in Palestine.

Ultimately, all these instances of creeping authoritarianism show that already, even as the response to COVID-19 by various governments-including “democracies”-prove to be very lacking in fostering the ability of people to socially isolate through enacting social reform, already are drawing up plans for authoritarian measures using the need to quarantine COVID-19 as a pretext--measures that may continue to exist indefinitely once we return to the state of capitalist normalcy, and subsequently deployed against all possible forms of dissident in order to enforce normalcy.