Collaborative authoritarianism and its unintended consequences

Why do authoritarian regimes maintain access to open U.S.-owned social media platforms like Twitter and how do pro-government supporters use them? While the literature on consultative authoritarianism explains how limited public engagement through purpose-built input institutions can be used to gauge public grievances and boost regime legitimacy, we know less about the implications of open social media applications and why the regime maintains access to them despite their subversive potential. This article argues that open platforms allow pro-government supporters to perform public opinion and police views that do not align with official state talking points, creating an impression of a consensus about what society “thinks.” Yet, they might push the government to respond to their demands that might not align with official state interests. I label this practice of enlisting supporters and segments of society for political control collaborative authoritarianism. This practice extends to purpose-built law enforcement apps, engaging broader segments of the population. Introducing the case of Twitter use in Saudi Arabia, this article draws on around 100 interviews that I conducted with patriotic and nationalist journalists, intellectuals, and Twitter influencers across Saudi Arabia between November 2021 and May 2022. The article provides novel insights into the grassroots politics of digital authoritarianism as well as the mobilization of illiberal movements beyond Saudi Arabia.