Sungeun Choi

“The coolest dictator in the world.” This is how El Salvador’s President, Nayib Bokele, describes himself on social media. It might sound like a joke, but it shows a serious problem in democracy. This is when democracy slowly breaks from the inside. Democracy in El Salvador is in danger. Data from Freedom House in 2026 shows that El Salvador scored 43 percent out of 100 regarding overall ‘freedom in the world 2026’. Political rights scored 15% out of 40, and civil liberties scored 27% out of 60. These data categorize El Salvador as ‘Partly Free’ country. One of the most significant reasons El Salvador is categorized as ‘Partly Free’ country is the leadership of President Nayib Bukele. Current president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, who has been in the office since 2019, relies on ‘Millennial Authoritarianism’ according to a journal from Journal of Democracy. He uses traditional authoritarianism strategies while adopting new styles of authoritarianism. Rather than representing an immediate collapse into traditional dictatorship, El Salvador under Nayib Bukele demonstrates a contemporary pattern of democratic erosion in which populist rhetoric, institutional weakening (explained in Gandhi’s 2019 article) and media-driven personalism gradually undermine liberal democratic accountability.

First of all, he attracts attention from citizens by attacking and criticizing opponents and even judiciary institutions. He scratches the itch that people have been having due to distrust to two major parties that have been leading legislature. FMLN (Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front) and Arena (Nationalist Republican Alliance) have given impressions of corruption and unreliability to Salvadorians. This helps explain why many Salvadorians are drawn to Bukele’s populist rhetoric. Next thing is authoritarian behavior. There are many authoritarian behaviors that are mostly used by authoritarians. Among them, Bukele is using some of those behaviors as well. It is clearly seen. In May 2021, he used his legislative supermajority to fire and replace five judges of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court and Attorney General, which attempted to investigate corruption of the government. This can be understood as executive aggrandizement and judicial independence weakening. This makes it impossible to maintain checks and balances on power. 

By weakening institutions, Bukele is able to concentrate power and reduce constraints on executive. In September 2021, he attempted to amend Salvadorian Constitution, and one proposed change would extend presidential term limits. This suggests his desire to concentrate power. In 2022, he declared state of emergency in El Salvador to sweep off gangs in the country through armed forces. By his declaration, homicide rates have dropped dramatically. Because his anti-gang policies appear to have improved public security, many Salvadorans support Bukele. However, he did not use these forces only to gangs. He also arrested opponents and lawyers who criticized Bukele and the government in El Salvador. Because of this violence, many journalists and lawyers were afraid of him and decided to leave the country. His violence weakened critical force. 

These actions reflect both traditional and contemporary authoritarian tactics, including emergency rule, the silencing of dissidents, attacks on institutional checks, and the manipulation of judicial power. Lastly, he created his image as a savior for the people. Through social media, he referred himself as ‘ the coolest dictator in the world’ and even mocked opponents to attract attention from many young voters. This explains how strategically he is collecting voters through social media and populism speeches. By weakening civil society and public criticism, Bukele makes it harder for civil society to sustain social foundations for polyarchy (a concept introduced by Dahl in 1972).

These patterns closely match the authoritarian methods discussed in class. As he destroys horizontal accountability (accountability between executive, legislative, and judicial power), eliminates opponents, and manipulates public, Salvadorians are experiencing democracy backsliding (as explained in Bermeo’s 2016 article) and erosion simultaneously. Bukele’s attempt to centralize power clearly reflects authoritarianism. By analyzing El Salvador’s democracy, I realized that free and fair elections are not sufficient for democracy. Not only having fair and free elections, remaining good conditions for institutions is one of the most crucial thing for better democracy because institutions are the ones that keep checking and balancing power of the president. Institutions are the last barriers to stop authoritarianism and means of protecting democracy. However in El Salvador, Bukele is using these institutions as tools for reinforcing private political power. In other words, Bukele is destroying ‘Horizontal Accountability’. Executive, legislative, and judicial power must check each other to keep maintaining balance and create accountability inside the nation. However, by neutralizing legislative and judicial power, Bukele makes it difficult for El Salvador to sustain horizontal accountability. This lack of accountability gives executive power ultimate access upon nation. This concentration of power opens a path to democratic erosion. 

Another essential element for protecting democracy is ‘existence of opponents’. I think removing and diminishing opponents could be enormously dangerous since it makes authoritarian continue to enhance ultimate authority in the nation. Without opponents, there are no balances between power. As I end looking at El Salvador’s democracy, I wonder what might happen in the next several years. Maybe when the conflicts become to grow and reach the tipping point, the governments might use armed forces to oppress protesters. And this causes deep and never-ending democracy erosion in El Salvador. To prevent this democratic erosion, the first essential thing is protecting institutions by sustaining horizontal accountability. Next thing is to keep opposition expressing their voice. Elections alone do not fully guarantee that democracy is safe. Along with elections, checking and balances in power, and having opponents who properly reflect public’s voice make democracy possible.

Image: Photo by Casa Presidencial de El Salvador, “President Nayib Bukele at Casa Presidencial” (Flickr), Creative Commons Zero license.