Modern democracy, as formulated in the ideals of the Enlightenment, arises under the promise of freedom, justice, and collective representation in political decisions. Figures such as Rousseau, Locke, and Montesquieu, among others, laid the groundwork for a political system based on reason, human rights, and the informed will of the citizenry. However, in recent decades, the concept of “Deep State” has emerged to describe a bureaucratic and institutional network that transcends governments and often colludes with corporations and private economic interests.
This dynamic threatens to distort democratic principles in favor of hidden agendas and, although not overtly visible, profoundly influences political decisions and public perception. This concept is explored in depth in literature, cinema, and political examples in Europe and the United States, illustrating how information manipulation and censorship serve interests that subvert the foundational principles of democracy.
Information manipulation as a long-standing strategy
Manipulating information is a long-used strategy to influence public opinion, documented since the times of classical Greece. In his History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides recounts how the elites of Athens and Sparta used rhetoric and selective information to drive the public toward their ends, especially in times of conflict. This mechanism has been modernized and adapted in contemporary democracies to channel public opinion through media and official narratives.
A clear example of this phenomenon can be seen in U.S. politics, where labeling and dehumanization have become effective tactics for neutralizing political adversaries. According to Dennis Prager, terms like “fascist” or “Nazi” are used to disqualify political figures, generating visceral hatred that eliminates any possibility of rational debate. Prager argues that this banal use of historically charged terms, such as “Nazi”, robs these words of the profound weight and meaning they should retain to describe totalitarian and genocidal regimes. This type of language not only confuses but also trivializes historical atrocities and conditions society to react emotionally rather than rationally to complex political issues. This dynamic recalls the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, described by Hannah Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism, where the use of dehumanizing labels justified repressions and punishments without public questioning.
In Europe, this phenomenon was also evident in countries like the United Kingdom during the Brexit era. In media coverage and political discussion, opponents on each side were frequently portrayed as traitors, extremists, or manipulators. This polarizing rhetoric created a deep social divide and reduced the debate over Brexit to an emotional, binary confrontation rather than a rational discussion on political and economic implications.
Institutionalized censorship and state-corporate collaboration
Cinema and literature have been effective media for exploring institutionalized censorship and the collaboration between the state and corporations. The film The Manchurian Candidate, both in its 1962 and 2004 versions, exposes how government and corporate interests manipulate information and people to steer political outcomes. This kind of censorship also recalls Emperor Augustus in ancient Rome, who controlled public narrative by imposing limits on writers such as Ovid, whose content was considered dangerous to the established order.
Currently, analyst Mike Benz describes how this type of censorship takes sophisticated forms in the digital sphere. In what he calls the “Whole of Society” model, the government, in collaboration with corporations, NGOs, and universities, exerts control over information distributed on social platforms and in the media under the pretext of protecting society from “disinformation”.
This dynamic is reminiscent of the censorship orchestrated by the Nixon administration in the United States when it sought to suppress information about the Watergate scandal, portrayed in All the President’s Men, an example of how the state and private interests can collaborate to suppress information and manipulate public opinion for their own benefit.
In Europe, France has implemented digital censorship policies under the guise of combating extremism, forcing companies like Google and Facebook to remove content that the state considers harmful to social stability. Although the stated intention is to combat disinformation and terrorism, these laws raise concerns about freedom of expression and the role of the state in moderating information.
Radical language as a tool for social control
The use of extreme or radical language to dehumanize political opponents not only manipulates public perception but also polarizes and divides society. George Lakoff, in Don’t Think of an Elephant, explains how political language serves to construct mental frameworks that condition people’s thinking and decisions. In George Orwell’s novel 1984, “Newspeak” limits autonomous thought and reduces freedom of expression, a clear parallel to how radical language in current politics creates an “us versus them” atmosphere that limits room for dialogue.
In the political arena, the United States has witnessed an increase in the use of derogatory terms like “socialist», “fascist,” and “Nazi” to label candidates of different ideologies, creating an effect of radicalization and stigmatization. This phenomenon was reflected in the 2020 elections, where polarized campaigns and extreme language contributed to a deep division within American society.
Europe is not exempt from this dynamic. In countries such as Italy and Hungary, the use of radical language has become a recurrent strategy to polarize citizens and reduce debate to a “we against them” conflict. In Italy, parties like the Northern League and the Five Star Movement have resorted to extreme rhetoric, often labeling their opponents as traitors or linking them to foreign powers, creating a narrative of distrust that fractures society.
Similar tactics have been used from the left of the European political spectrum to consolidate their base and delegitimize critics. In Spain, Podemos has criticized the right-wing opposition by alluding to its historical ties with the Francoist dictatorship, constructing a narrative of latent “fascism” in figures from traditional political parties. In Greece, Syriza has branded its critics as “anti-patriotic neoliberals,” dividing the discourse along national and social loyalty lines, making open discussion on austerity policies and financial rescue measures difficult during the debt crisis.
Economic implications and power concentration
The power of the Deep State and its collaboration with large corporations also has profound economic implications, creating a system that limits competition and allows the concentration of resources in the hands of a few. In Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, Ayn Rand describes this phenomenon as “crony capitalism,” where the government grants privileges to certain corporations, perpetuating structural inequality. Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations, warned of the dangers of an economy where private interests and the state conspire to control resources, noting that this leads to an imbalance that directly affects society.
In the United States, the 2008 crisis exposed how large financial corporations received government bailouts while the middle class bore the consequences. This type of state support for corporations illustrates how the Deep State and economic elites collaborate to protect their interests at the expense of the citizenry. In Europe, the management of Greek debt over the past decade is an example of how the state and financial institutions control the national economy, imposing austerity policies that benefited creditors while plunging the population into a crisis of poverty and unemployment.
Psychological and cultural impact of informational manipulation
The psychological and cultural impact of informational manipulation and dehumanization is deep and widespread. In 1984, Orwell describes how a system of political manipulation represses individuality and shapes the population through fear and constant surveillance, aspects reflected in the use of “Big Brother” to supervise and control every citizen’s life.
From a psychological perspective, Hannah Arendt argues in The Origins of Totalitarianism that this process of dehumanization and cultural control not only annuls individual identity but also eliminates empathy and solidarity, promoting a culture of hatred and suspicion that weakens social bonds and resistance to power abuse.
In contemporary culture, the movie The Matrix explores how controlling human perception allows the state and elites to subdue the population, an allegory of the invisible control that often goes unnoticed by those caught in it. This kind of reality manipulation is also evident in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, where books, symbols of the diversity of thought, are banned and burned, creating a conformist society subjugated to state information control.
The defense of democratic principles
Ultimately, defending democratic principles and freedom in the context of an increasingly powerful “Deep State” requires an active response and constant vigilance from the citizenry. Here are ten measures to protect democracy:
- Promotion of Media Education: Integrate media literacy into formal education to develop an informed and critical citizenry.
- Transparency in Public Management: Promote information access laws for true accountability from government leaders.
- Regulation of Censorship on Digital Platforms: Establish regulations to limit the power of tech corporations to censor, ensuring online freedom of expression.
- Support for Independent Journalism: Create funds and policies to support independent media to counter corporate influence in the press.
- Economic Power Decentralization: Promote antitrust policies to prevent power concentration and promote free and fair competition.
- Ideological Diversity in Academia: Ensure universities are spaces for the free exchange of ideas, fostering critical thinking.
- Intelligence Agency Oversight: Set up independent audits to control intelligence agencies and guarantee transparency.
- Protection for Whistleblowers: Provide legal protection for those who expose irregularities in the state or corporations.
- Encouragement of Pluralistic Debate: Create accessible public spaces for idea exchange and promote broad discussion on social and political issues.
- Education in Human Rights and Democracy: Include human rights and democratic values in educational programs to foster respect for diversity and critical thinking.
Defending these principles requires an active, educated, and aware citizenry. Only with sustained commitment and a willingness to uphold genuine democracy will it be possible to protect the fundamental values of freedom, justice, and representation for all citizens.
Referencias:
Arendt, H. (1951) <<The Origins of Totalitarianism>>. Harcourt, Brace & Company.
Balfour, S. (2005) <<The Politics of Contemporary Spain>>. Routledge.
Collins, S. (2008) <<The Hunger Games>>. Scholastic.
Douzinas, C. (2017) <<Syriza in Power: Reflections of an Accidental Politician>>. Polity Press.
Fassin, D. (2018) <<The Will to Punish>>. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190888589.001.0001
Finley, M. I. (1975) <<Democracy Ancient and Modern>>. Rutgers University Press.
Fukuyama, F. (2018) <<Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment>>. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Habermas, J. (1989) <<The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society>> (Trans. by Burger T. with the Assistance of Lawrence F.). Polity Press, Cambridge, 161.
Israel, J. I. (2011) <<Democratic Enlightenment: Philosophy, Revolution, and Human Rights, 1750–1790>>. Oxford University Press.
Krastev, I., & Holmes, S. (2019) <<The Light That Failed: Why the West Is Losing the Fight for Democracy>>. Pegasus Books.
Lakoff, G. (2004) <<Don’t Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate>>. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Orwell, G. (1949) <<Nineteen Eighty-Four>>. Secker & Warburg.
Postman, N. (1985) <<Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business>>. Viking Penguin.
Rand, A. (1967) <<Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal>>. New American Library.
Smith, A. (1776) <<An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations>>. W. Strahan and T. Cadell.
Stephenson, N. (1992) <<Snow Crash>>. Bantam Books.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2010) <<Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy>>. W.W. Norton & Company.
Syme, R. (1939) <<The Roman Revolution>>. Oxford University Press.
Varoufakis, Y. (2016) <<And the Weak Suffer What They Must? Europe’s Crisis and America’s Economic Future>>. Nation Books.
Zuboff, S. (2019) <<The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power>>. PublicAffairs.
policyexamination.com 