The middle class's complicity in the perpetuation of an autocratic regime

In 2021, Bryn Rosenfeld published the book 'The autocratic middle class: How state dependency reduces the demand for democracy' in East European countries. Despite the middle class's reputation as a champion of democracy, Bryn Rosenfeld argued that in these countries, the middle class itself favoured autocracy, citing a mutually beneficial arrangement among certain service classes. 

A comparable pattern has emerged in Bangladesh over the past 15 years, where certain middle-class individuals have backed the Hasina regime, enabling it to assume autocratic leadership and maintain it for an extended period. At the same time, I will argue that the regime fell due to massive student protests, in which all political parties failed to achieve their goals.

Middle class and democracy 

The middle class can be defined by means of production, income, and consumption patterns. This includes individuals in the middle income distribution, managers, professionals, or small-business owners with home ownership as their primary wealth source. 

The role of the middle class in promoting democracy is critical. The middle class in any country is likely to be aware, cautious, and concerned about citizens' rights. Evidence shows that in countries where the middle class is strong, democracy is likely to succeed or flourish. 

The 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Survey also found that democratic values are especially strong among the middle class. For instance, a study revealed that the concurrent declines in democracy and middle-class size in Europe were contributing to the rise in extremism surrounding the financial crisis. 

However, in many countries, including Eastern Europe, the middle class is now more profit-centric, less aware, selfish, and in favour of a neo-liberal economy. In the process, they are likely to support the regime that serves the community's purpose. As a result, autocratic regimes in European countries created a middle-class beneficiary group to support their regime.

These specific groups primarily exert control over the media, civil society, government institutions, law enforcement, and other government mechanisms, thereby serving as a foundational support system for autocracy. This particular group advocates for oligarchy and has played a significant role in fostering kleptocracy in various countries.

Bangladesh's Awami League regime and autocratic middle class

The role of the middle class in Bangladesh was very crucial during and after independence. Similarly, during the 1990 uprising in Bangladesh, the middle-class came together and defeated the regime under General Ershad's leadership. During the two movements, civil servants, businesspeople, civil society members, NGOs, and private sector teachers united and fought against an autocratic ruler. Although the students were always in front, the middle class was always supportive of those movements.

In 2009, the Awami League (AL) secured its third term in power. With an overwhelming majority of 230 seats out of 300, the Awami League formed the government. The main opposition managed to secure only 30 seats. Following the initial struggle, the Sheikh Hasina regime began to assert its authority over the country. 

With an overwhelming majority in the parliament, the regime began to demonstrate its autocratic nature through various means. According to Rosenfeld, the autocratic middle class begins to manifest itself in various ways during the regime. The suppression of the main opposition by law enforcement authorities is the first step in this process. 

For example, in 2011, Dhaka Metropolitan Police Deputy Commissioner (Lalbagh Zone) Harun-or-Rashid beat up and harassed the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) chief whip in Parliament in front of the Parliament building during an opposition-sponsored general strike. Afterwards, Harun-or-Rashid received rewards and promotions. 

The regime also made several reforms, including abolishing the caretaker government system to ensure the next election. The government also began to assert control over the judiciary, the election commission, the anti-corruption commission, and several other public institutions. These institutions assisted in incarcerating BNP leaders and supporters. Therefore, the main opposition, the BNP, boycotted the 2014 election.

Political violence, bitter past experiences during the BNP regime, and the neo-liberal economy have led to a decreased interest in politics among the mass population, including the middle class and lower middle class. As a result, BNP's election boycott had little impact and gave free licence to the Awami League to rule for the next five years. 

During the 2014–2018 period, AL expanded the autocratic middle class massively, both in the public and private sectors. In Bangladesh, the autocratic middle class received many privileges from the government, including access to government contracts, rent-seeking, lobbying, and so on. 

Beginning with government officials, particularly those in the cadre service, the regime extended its benefits to NGOs, media outlets, business sectors, university teachers, civil society, and military officials. Additionally, they deliberately cultivated partisan support by endorsing the regime. Particularly, the government cadre service was well-received by the AL regime and enjoyed numerous benefits. 

For instance, since August 2020, the government has allocated an interest-free car loan to deputy secretaries and higher-level officials, along with Tk50,000 per month for car maintenance before their post-retirement leave (PRL) begins. Additionally, the government regularly facilitated government officials through prime ministerial fellowships, Bangabandhu fellowships, government tours, and training abroad. 

The regime awarded government projects and recruited like-minded civil society as consultants; media houses received government tenders for advertisements and supplies; they awarded government contracts to allied politicians like the Jubo League or former Chhatra League (various wings of AL), who were involved in business and they appointed like-minded university teachers as vice chancellors and other lucrative administrative posts. 

They also rewarded journalists with privileges and benefits. Besides, the government created a conducive environment for corruption for public officials, politicians (even root-level politicians), businesspersons, and selected beneficiary groups, as many of them have established second homes in Canada, the USA, Dubai, Singapore, and Australia, looting banks and public money. 

The irony is that in the next two elections (2018 and 2024), this particular autocratic middle class remained silent against unfair elections. Instead, bureaucrats and law enforcement agencies rigged the election in favour of the AL to maintain control and establish a totalitarian state. 

Not only that, these particular groups became the saviours of the oligarchy and helped flourish the kleptocracy in Bangladesh during the regime. Recent news shows that Salman F Rahman (an advisor to Hasina) stole $36,865 from seven banks. Janata Bank, one of Bangladesh's government-owned banks, continued to finance Beximco-owned companies even after exceeding the single borrower exposure limit with special permission from the central bank. 

According to interim government chief Muhammad Yunus, Sheikh Hasina destroyed every institution in Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina received strong support from the autocratic service class within these institutions.

Why did the regime fall?

Without a doubt, the students were on the frontlines to overthrow Hasina from the regime. She eventually fled to India on 5 August 2024. It started with the quota reform movement, which later on turned into the violent one-point 'step down Hasina' movement. This is mainly due to massive support from the mass population following the government's firm action and the brutal killing of students. 

However, the issue was not limited to the quota reform alone. The controversial Digital Security Act, extrajudicial killings, and harassment were used to suppress and muzzle people throughout the regime. Human rights were violated frequently. Even the youth were afraid to write on social media because they were being monitored by government agencies. 

Also, during the period, many youths who became first-time voters were unable to cast their vote. Most importantly, the price hike for daily necessities left the poor and lower-middle-class people in a state of misery. As a result, one group of people becomes wealthy through corruption and patronisation; on the other hand, another group becomes poorer and lives in a miserable condition. 

Therefore, the corruption perpetrated by the upper class and the autocratic middle class incited anger among the masses. When the public learned about the corruption of former Inspector General of Police and National Board of Revenue employees, who have long been regarded as saviours of the government, they became furious. 

On the other hand, India blindly supported the rigged elections because of its geopolitical interests. Bangladesh showed favour to India during this period in numerous ways. After Modi's reelection in India, Sheikh Hasina signed a number of significant treaties. These factors also made the masses angry and helped to grow anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh. 

All these factors converged while she arrogantly tried to muzzle student protests against the quota verdict. Although the autocratic middle class was supportive of her till the end, she lost her grip due to non-cooperation from the military. 

Dr Nurul Huda Sakib is a Professor at the Department of Government and Politics at Jahangirnagar University. He received his PhD from the University of Sydney, Australia. He can be reached at nhsakib@juniv.edu

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.