The Dictatorship
Viktor Orbán’s loss in Hungary shows how a strongman can be defeated
Strongman rule often appears unbeatable at the ballot box, but the defeat of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán on Sunday shows even entrenched systems can be challenged with the right strategy.
Peter Hungariandisrupted Orbán’s 16-year tenure with the support of a broad, unlikely coalition united by three core messages: Orbán must go, corruption must end and Hungary must align with the West rather than Russia. He also emphasized national sovereignty and strict border control, defying easy ideological categorization.
Péter Magyar disrupted Orbán’s 16-year tenure with the support of a broad, unlikely coalition united by three core messages: Orbán must go, corruption must end and Hungary must align with the West rather than Russia.
Magyar, the ex-husband of Orbán’s former justice minister, drew on personal knowledge of the government’s inner workings and crafted a bold, patriotic campaign. His social media strategy centered on a relatable persona. This winning combination goes a long way toward reshaping what effective opposition can look like.
For years, the “Orbán playbook” served as a manual for capturing power through elections — and then systematically dismantling checks and balances, hollowing out independent institutions, and consolidating control over the media and business sphere. Now, Hungary’s politics may be offering a different kind of playbook: one for how to bring down a strongman. Three points are particularly notable.

Change can come from within
It is tempting to view everyone inside an illiberal system as complicit. But such systems are often most vulnerable to those who understand them intimately. After 16 years of failed opposition efforts, Magyar became an effective challenger thanks in part to his insider knowledge — rather than outsider credentials.
Consider: His rise began just two years ago with a Facebook post and a viral interview exposing corruption in the Orbán regime. A meteoric ascent followed. Magyar drew on his insider understanding of how Orbán’s government exerts control over business, education, the judiciary and the media. He named methods and perpetrators with a precision, and a sense of humor, that few outsiders could match, while sharply criticizing the opposition for its weakness and lack of political imagination. This positioning — outside the regime yet deeply familiar with it, and distinct from an ineffective opposition — created a powerful advantage, one that appealed to an electorate in search of change.
Patriotism must be contested, not conceded
This point resonated with Hungarians and could be equally resonant among many Americans. Orbán consolidated power not only through his control of institutions but also by monopolizing national identity. His long-standing strategy has been to frame patriotism as the exclusive domain of his political camp — and the left, to its detriment, largely ceded the point.
Along came Magyar, whose surname literally means “Hungarian,” with several methods for reversing this dynamic. From the prominent use of the national flag at campaign events to his cross-country tour in a flatbed truck decorated in the tricolor, his campaign reclaimed patriotism, visually and rhetorically, as a shared national identity rather than a partisan weapon. He gave speeches urging citizens to “take back” their country “step by step, brick by brick,” making clear with both symbols and words that patriotism is not the property of any single party.
Crucially, Magyar has avoided issues that could fracture his diverse coalition. He has largely steered clear of culture-war flashpoints, including the 2025 Pride parade in Budapest, which was banned by Orbán but more widely attended than ever. By staying laser-focused on regime change, anti-corruption and Western orientation, especially toward the European Union and NATO, he has maintained a fragile but expansive alliance across urban and rural divides and across ideological lines.
Many Hungarian voters may not support Magyar enthusiastically — but enough were eager for change that they were willing to support his campaign.
Charm matters
In a media environment where many of us pay more attention to personality than to institutions, values and factsMagyar’s energetic and athletic persona and willingness to show vulnerability at times contrasted with Orbán’s carefully curated and inherently insulated image. Social media does not simply compare ideas; it stages a continuous visual contest of bodies, lifestyles and vitality. Even Orbán’s formidable propaganda apparatus has struggled against a challenger who appeared unscripted and dynamic, which resonated as authentic.
Magyar’s ability to withstand constant propaganda attacks with a small but agile communications team, combining start-up-style social media tactics with large-scale, well-produced public events, further reinforced perceptions of him as a resilient political challenger.
Orbán’s long-standing strategy has been to frame patriotism as the exclusive domain of his political camp — and the left, to its detriment, largely ceded the point.
Even moments that would be vulnerabilities in traditional politics, such as outbursts of anger or bouts of passionate partying, ultimately contributed to his appeal as a flawed but driven figure — a Hungarian determined to bring change to his beloved country. Magyar emerged as a folk hero, set against an entrenched incumbent who appeared overweight, both politically and physically. The contest became, in part, one of masculinity; and here, too, the 45-year-old, more athletic Magyar claimed the advantage — even though 62-year-old Orbán has long cultivated an image as a sports enthusiast, especially in soccer.
As opposition movements across democracies struggle against entrenched populist leaders, Hungary’s election outcome offers cautions and insights. Success may depend less on ideological purity than on strategic adaptability. An electorate’s openness to unconventional figures, especially those who make an effective argument to reclaim patriotism, can allow for the construction of cross-ideological coalitions. Leaders must also project authenticity, particularly on social media. A broad, inclusive coalition united around change may be enough to upend even entrenched incumbents, leaving the harder questions of how to govern for the days that follow.
Julia Sonnevend is a sociology professor and co-director of the Center for the American Experience at The New School in New York City. She is the author of “Charm: How Magnetic Personalities Shape Global Politics.” She grew up in Budapest, Hungary.
The Dictatorship
I’m not voting for Spencer Pratt — but I’m still glad he’s running for L.A. mayor
ByHelaine R. I am
No one should be surprised that a reality show star-turned-social media influencer can do well in a political race. We just need to look to the White House to know that. They have a knack for speaking uncomfortable truths in a way that gets maximum attention.
What is forever the shock at who is doing that. So, let me get this out of the way at the outset: No, I don’t support Spencer Pratt’s quest for mayor of Los Angeles. I have even donated to one of his opponents, Los Angeles City Council member Nithya Raman. But I am surprised to discover that I owe Pratt – yes, the same Spencer Pratt best known as the villainous, troublemaking cad on the MTV’s The Hills – a debt of gratitude for interjecting a much-needed dose of reality into the city’s mayoral race.
Think of it as the electoral equivalent of saying “the emperor has no clothes,” updated for the social media age.
A registered Republican in a largely Democratic city, Pratt is shaking up what looked to be a sleepy mayoral election. He has jumped to second place in the polls by using social media (including supporter-generated AI content) to channel voter rage at not just the city’s striking deterioration, but the political establishment’s seemingly complacent attitude toward it. He’s particularly highlighted the failures that led to the devastating Pacific Palisades wildfire – in which Pratt, his family, and thousands of other city residents lost their homes – and the city’s intractable issues with homelessness and tent encampments. Think of it as the electoral equivalent of saying “the emperor has no clothes,” updated for the social media age.
He’s far from alone in his fury. Many residents believe the City of Angels has become a hellishly difficult place to live. Housing prices – both to buy or rent — are high. The streaming bubble has burstand Hollywood is in a protracted recession. Shoots increasingly likely to take place in locales offering more generous tax credits and easier, cheaper permitting. The roads are increasingly dotted with potholesas the cash-strapped city has ceased most repaving projects. Even the city’s animal shelters are mired in crises and scandal. Corruption and incompetence are endemic, with $2.4 billion in homeless funds simply unaccounted for. No surprise, a large majority of voters say the city is headed in the wrong direction.
Yes, it’s quite likely Pratt’s not up for the job. When asked, he said he would rely on an unnamed expert “team” to advise him. TMZ scooped that though Pratt cut a campaign ad claiming he is residing in a trailer, he’s actually been living in a swanky Bel Air hotel. And according to TMZ and Deadline, production on a reality show about his campaign is underway, with Pratt’s full participation. A “reality show” mayor is not the solution to the city’s problems.

But the performance of the city’s political class hardly inspires confidence. Incumbent Karen Bass infamously skipped town before the outbreak of the Pacific Palisades wildfire on a less-than-necessary diplomatic mission to Ghana, and failed to return early even after Hurricane Katrina-like wind warnings were issued. Bass says that film and TV productions are up from their lows and homelessness is down from the highs. But these very incremental gains are clearly thin gruel to many voters.
The other main challenger, DSA-affiliated Raman, often speaks eloquently on the need to tackle the city’s housing and business bureaucratic bottlenecks, And her assessment of Pratt as a “mini Trump” is hyperbolic but understandable, given the thinness of some of his suggested fixes and the nastiness undergirding many of his attacks. Yet her suggestion that the city should up its outreach and better coax people living on the streets to accept help sounds more like a doubling down on the unpopular and largely ineffective status quo.
As of now, few analysts believe Pratt – currently polling in second place – can prevail in a general election.
Pratt is calling much of this out: “Business as usual is a death sentence for Los Angeles,” he says, and promises he will make the city “camera-ready again.” Instead of rationalizing the city’s homeless crisis, he calls for “no more encampments” and says he will have “zero tolerance” for public drug use. As for Raman’s plan? “These people don’t want a bed. They want fentanyl or super-meth.” (He also suggested if she actually approached a homeless addict, she could “get stabbed in the neck.” Charming.) At a mayoral debate earlier this month, Pratt made mincemeat of Raman, forcing many pundits to reckon more seriously with his campaign.
The jungle primary is in less than two weeks, with the top two finishers competing in November. Polls have Bass in the lead — but with only about 30 percent of the vote. This, you probably don’t need me to tell you, is a dreadful showing for an incumbent – and one that bespeaks problems in November.
As of now, few analysts believe Pratt – currently polling in second place – can prevail in a general election. Los Angeles is always a Democratic stronghold, ICE raids weigh heavily in voters’ minds, and Trump is so unpopular here that his recent support for Pratt are more likely to hurt the reality star than help him. Yet while Raman currently stands a better chance in a one-on-one against Bass, polls put her in third place, behind Pratt.
But, in the meantime, Pratt’s done Los Angeles a favor. The Hills was, in its own way, a love letter to Los Angeles. Forcing the city’s political establishment to acknowledge voter concerns and at least begin to address them is also an act of love. Even when it’s done by an operator like Spencer Pratt.
Helaine R. I am
Helaine R. Olen is the author of “Pound Foolish: Exposing the Dark Side of the Personal Finance Industry” and a co-author of “The Index Card: Why Personal Finance Doesn’t Have to Be Complicated.” She has been a columnist for The Washington Post and Slate, and her work has also appeared in numerous other publications, including The New York Times and The Atlantic.
The Dictatorship
Pope Leo XIV apologizes for Vatican’s role in legitimizing slavery
VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Leo XIVmade a historic apology on Monday for the role the Holy See played in legitimizing slavery and for having failed to condemn it for centuries, calling the Vatican’s record a “wound in Christian memory.”
Past popes have apologized for Christians’ involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. But no pope had ever publicly acknowledged, much less apologized for, the role that past popes played in giving European sovereigns explicit authority to subjugate and enslave “infidels.”
History’s first U.S.-born pope, whose family historyincludes both enslaved people and slave owners, delivered the apology in his first encyclical, “Magnifica Humanitas,” (Magnificent Humanity), which was released Monday.
The sweeping manifesto is about safeguarding humanity in an era of increasing reliance on artificial intelligence. Leo raised the trans-Atlantic slave trade in relation to what he called the new forms of slavery and colonialism that the digital revolution is fueling, such as the unregulated labor practices in procuring rare minerals needed for AI chips.
Anthea Butler, senior fellow at the Koch History Center, Oxford University, said Leo needed to acknowledge and atone for the Catholic Church’s complicity in historic slavery if he wanted to credibly “speak to the current issues of technological enslavement.”
“For descendants of enslaved persons, this is once again a much needed apology from the pope,” said Butler, who is Black.
Black American Catholics, activists and scholars have long called for the Holy See to atone for its role in the colonial-era trade in human beings, beyond more generic apologies for the involvement of individual Christians.
“It is impossible not to feel deep sorrow when contemplating the immense suffering and humiliation endured by so many in stark contrast to their immeasurable dignity as persons infinitely loved by the Lord,” Leo wrote. “For this, in the name of the church, I sincerely ask for pardon.”
Centuries of legitimizing slavery for European colonizers
The Vatican has insisted that it always upheld the dignity of all human beings as children of God. But a series of 15th-century directives from the Vaticanauthorized Portuguese sovereigns to conquer Africa and the Americas and enslave non-Christians.
In 1452, for example, Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas, which gave the Portuguese king and his successors the right “to invade, conquer, fight and subjugate” and take all possessions — including land — of “Saracens, and pagans, and other infidels, and enemies of the name of Christ” anywhere.
The bull also gave the Portuguese permission “to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery.”
That bull and another issued three years later, Romanus Pontifex, formed the basis of the Doctrine of Discoverythe theory that legitimized the colonial-era seizure of land in Africa and the Americas.
Nicholas V’s permissions to the Portuguese were confirmed or renewed by Pope Callixtus III in 1456, Pope Sixtus IV in 1481 and Pope Leo X in 1514, according to the Rev. Christopher J. Kellerman, a Jesuit priest and author of “All Oppression Shall Cease: A History of Slavery, Abolitionism, and the Catholic Church.”
Spanish kings received the rights for the Americas.
In 2023, the Vatican formally repudiated the Doctrine of Discoverybut it never formally rescinded, abrogated or rejected the bulls themselves. The Vatican insists that a later bull, Sublimis Deus in 1537, reaffirmed that Indigenous peoples shouldn’t be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, and weren’t to be enslaved.
Holy See late to condemn slavery, Leo says
In his encyclical, Leo recalled that his namesake, Pope Leo XIII, was the first pope to explicitly condemn slavery in 1888, long after many countries had abolished it. Before that, in antiquity and the Middle Ages, even church institutions had slaves.
In acknowledging the Holy See’s role and the 15th-century papal bulls, Leo wrote in his encyclical: “Already in the early modern period, the Apostolic See of Rome, responding to the requests of sovereigns, intervened several times in order to regulate and legitimize forms of subjugation, and, in certain cases, including the enslavement of ‘infidels.’”
Leo said that it wasn’t possible to judge the morality of the decisions with today’s standards.
“Yet neither can we deny or diminish the delay with which both society and the church came to denounce the scourge of slavery,” he said.
The pope said that the church has long affirmed the dignity of every human being as the basis of its doctrine, “even if it took eighteen centuries for its full incompatibility with slavery to be explicitly recognized.”
“This constitutes a wound in Christian memory, one from which we cannot consider ourselves detached,” he said.
Leo said that the church must firmly condemn all forms of trafficking related to the digital technological revolution “if we want to avoid the need to ask for pardon again in the future for having failed to respect the treasure of human dignity that is required by our faith.”
Leo’s own family history and past apologies
Kellerman, the scholar, welcomed Leo’s apology but said more needs to be done to further acknowledge and atone for how the Catholic Church legitimized and expanded slavery.
“Pope Leo has strengthened the moral credibility of the church with this admission and apology today,” he told The Associated Press. “Hopefully a future document will explain in more detail the church’s involvement with slaveholding. As a scholar I have some quibbles with the wording, but this is a truly remarkable moment.”
During a 1985 visit to Cameroon, St. John Paul II asked forgiveness of Africans for the slave trade on behalf of Christians who participated in it. In a 1992 visit to Goree Island, Senegal, which was the largest slave-trading center in West Africa, he denounced the injustice of slavery and called it a “tragedy of a civilization that called itself Christian.”
According to genealogical research published by Henry Louis Gates Jr., 17 of Leo’s American ancestors were Black, listed in census records as mulatto, Black, Creole or a free person of color. His family tree includes slaveholders and enslaved people, Gates wrote in The New York Times.
During a visit to Angola last month, Leo prayed at a Catholic shrine at the site of an important hub of the African slave tradeduring Portugal’s colonial rule. While at the Sanctuary of Mama Muxima, Leo recalled the “sorrow and great suffering” Angolans endured for centuries, but he didn’t refer specifically to slavery.
The Dictatorship
Elon Musk is losing the culture war — he just doesn’t know it yet
ByJohn DeVore
Elon Musk has been busy: SpaceX filed for a blockbuster IPO. On Monday, a U.S. jury dismissed his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI. And last Wednesday, he accompanied President Donald Trump, and an entourage of tech moguls, to China for an elaborate state visit.
And yet, the richest man in the world spent much of the past week heckling a movie he hasn’t seen yet, directed by one of Hollywood’s most successful and celebrated directors, and starring a small army of A-list actors, including Matt Damon, Anne Hathaway, Robert Pattinson, Zendaya, Tom Holland, and Jonathan Bernthal. He seemed especially angry that a woman of color was cast in two roles.
In a just-dropped Time Magazine interviewdirector Christopher Nolan confirmed that Oscar-winning actress Lupita Nyong’o is playing two iconic roles in his $250 million adaptation of the Greek myth “The Odyssey.” In the ancient poet Homer’s epic “The Iliad,” which precedes “The Odyssey,” the Trojan prince Paris abducts Helen, wife of the Spartan king Menelaus, sparking a 10-year war with Greece that ends in tragedy. Nyong’o will portray Helen, “the face that launched 1,000 ships,” as well as Helen’s sister, the murderous Clytemnestra.
Musk quickly took to X to voice his displeasure with this casting choice: “Chris Nolan desecrated the Odyssey so that he would be eligible for an Academy Award.” Never mind the fact that the Academy’s eligibility criteria have nothing to do with casting.
Chris Nolan desecrated the Odyssey so that he would be eligible for an Academy Award …
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 15, 2026
Musk also reposted conservative commentator Matt Walsh, who wrote“Not one person on the planet actually thinks that Lupita Nyong’o is ‘the most beautiful woman in the world.’ But Christopher Nolan knows that he would be called a racist if he gave the ‘most beautiful woman’ role to a white woman. Nolan is technically talented but a coward.”
Nolan’s casting of Zendaya as Athena, the goddess of wisdom, and rap superstar Travis Scott as a bard has also angered Musk toadies and assorted online bots. The trans actor Elliot Page was also cast, causing some hysterical right-wingers to (apparently incorrectly) suggest the actor is playing the great Greek warrior Achilles, slain by the Trojans, and who Odysseus briefly meets in the afterlife. Musk’s minions are so desperate for engagement that they have to work themselves into a lather over mere speculation.
All of this points to a clear conclusion. Elon Musk is losing the culture war; he just doesn’t know it yet. His whiny, white grievance and anti-DEI posts are becoming predictable. Boring. Viral filler. He has an enormous platform, but his messages are increasingly small-minded.
Another sign that he’s losing his grip: Musk took a break from insulting Nolan and Nyong’o to petulantly criticize the series finale of Amazon Prime’s hit superhero parody “The Boys.”
Musk’s one-man battle against “The Odyssey” is another symptom of his waning influence on the world outside the hothouse of X; his Cybertrucks aren’t sellingGrok, his AI product, is lagging behind rivalsand the man can’t decide whether Trump is his bestie.
Another sign that he’s losing his grip: Musk took a break from insulting Nolan and Nyong’o to petulantly criticize the series finale of Amazon Prime’s hit superhero parody “The Boys,” which he called “pathetic” for killing off the show’s MAGA-coded villain, Homelander, but not before he murders a parody of the billionaire. Musk admitted he hadn’t actually watched the show, though. He’s just sitting in one of his mansions angrily scrolling, and getting bent out of shape.
At least “The Boys” showrunner seems to be to having fun sparring with an increasingly humorless Musk on X.
Meanwhile, the two people Musk is targeting in his crusade against “The Odyssey” also seem to be taking his harassment in stride. Nolan hasn’t commented. But Nyong’o did chime in. “Our cast is representative of the world,” she said. “I’m not spending my time thinking of a defense. The criticism will exist whether I engage with it or not.”
Musk frequently posts bigoted opinions to X, which is his prerogative, I suppose. He owns that dumpster fire. But his current attempts to shame Nolan and suggest that the director, whose action and sci-fi movies are beloved by dudes, is indulging in nontraditional casting to win another Oscar feel transparently pitiful.
When it was first rumored that Nyong’o had been cast as Helen back in January of this year, furious users on X called it an “insult” to Homer. Musk later posted that “Chris Nolan has lost his integrity.” This underlying thesis is not only racist, but it’s also so ignorant that I wonder if Musk can tell the difference anymore between what is real and what is make-believe.
I’m not an expert in ancient history, but I’m pretty sure “The Odyssey” is fictional. There is no such thing as a man-eating Cyclops. And like all classic literature, Homer’s works are open to interpretation.
Another of the arguments against Nyong’o’s casting is that it isn’t historically accurate, never mind that both African and Middle Eastern countries border the Mediterranean. These critics seem to think the ancient Greeks really looked like ripped Scottish hunk Gerard Butler in director Zack Snyder’s cartoonish Spartan action film “300.”
You want realism? Helen of Troy’s father is Zeus, the god of thunder. Zeus, who transformed into animals and seduced mortals. What are we doing here?
Despite Musk’s musings, “The Odyssey” is already the most buzzed-about movie of the summer. The 70mm IMAX screenings are a hot ticket: opening weekend sold out within minutes of going on sale 12 months in advance. This isn’t surprising. Nolan remains one of the entertainment industry’s most dependable and respected directors of blockbusters, from 2023’s Oscar-winning historical phenomenon “Oppenheimer” to his formidable Batman trilogy to 2014’s emotional space opera “Interstellar.”
He’s also a director who has never worn his personal politics on his sleeve, although many of his movies have what could fairly be called conservative vibes. In 2012’s “The Dark Knight Rises,” for example, a billionaire puts down a populist revolution led by a cross between Darth Vader and a communist guerrilla.
Everything I know about “The Odyssey” I learned in high school. I guess I was lucky enough to have an English teacher who knew this epic was full of action and romance, so he always emphasized the good parts. But while Musk might not want to admit it, at its core, “The Odyssey” is really an anti-war story about the ultimate wife guy on an endless, dangerous road trip back home. Through his hero’s journey, Homer teaches that smarts and grit matter more than brute strength. “The Odyssey” is a 2600-year-old message passed from storyteller to storyteller about what really matters in life. It’s a message a man like Musk could learn from — if he’d only stop whining long enough to listen.
John DeVore
John DeVore is a culture writer and author of “Theatre Kids: A True Tale of Off-Off Broadway.”His writing has been published in Esquire, Vanity Fair, Marvel Comics, and many other publications.
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship9 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words



