How opposition can reverse dictatorial leaders?

According to a new study by Notre Dame political scientist Laura Gamboa, the transformation from one of Venezuela’s most stable democracies to a full-fledged authoritarian regime provides important lessons for opposition movements around the world.

In countries where elections are currently being manipulated, political opponents have been imprisoned and fundamental rights have been suspended, the opposition’s recent election challenge to President Nicolas Maduro has demonstrated that resistance can be possible under severe crackdowns.

“No one expected Venezuela to vote,” Gamboa said. The analysis is published in a special issue of the Chronicles of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences. “The opposition competed despite their reduced ability to compete and despite the very small chance of victory, they won.

Gamboa’s research tracks Venezuela’s 25-year descent to authoritarianism through three different stages, beginning with the 1998 election of Hugo Chavez and subsequent rewriting of the constitution. What makes the Venezuelan case particularly useful is how oppositional strategic choices (sometimes difficult) have accelerated or slowed down democratic backslides at critical times.

Perhaps the most consequential mistakes have happened earlier. After gaining Châvez’s first power in 1999, despite maintaining key institutional power, the opposition chose a radical approach instead of working within the system.

“Using tactics such as coups, boycotts, and strikes are effective ways to protest against the government, but when used against popular, democratically elected presidents, they can backfire,” Gamboa explained.

The 2002 coup attempt and the 2003 oil strike were particularly expensive. Rather than enforce Chavez from power, these moves gave him justification to integrate control over military leaders, fire oil companies managers who opposed him, and key institutions.

“The Venezuela incident provides some lessons to a country that is just beginning to be eroded by democracy,” Gamboa emphasized. “It shows you need to use all the institutional space you have while you have them. It’s a mistake not to take advantage of those spaces.”

By 2006, Venezuela had moved to what political scientists call a “competitive authoritarian” regime. But even as the democratic universe was reduced, the opposition eventually adopted more institutional strategies and formed a coalition of the Mesa de Unidado Democrats, which won an impressive victory in the 2015 legislative election.

Maduro’s response stole the parliament of power – highlighting another cycle of dictatorship. When institutional resistance is successful, the dictator is simply forced to change the rules and re-adjust the opposition group.

The culmination of this long struggle took place dramatically in July 2024. At that time, opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez appears to have defeated Maduro despite strict restrictions. Maduro has admitted herself and declared herself the winner, but opposition leader Maria Corina Machado has announced that a tally of more than 70% of the voting stations showed Gonzalez had 3.5 million votes.

“From these successes, we can see that using an institution can have a good return,” Gamboa pointed out.

Gamboa’s analysis reveals how Venezuelan opposition has frequently shifted between patterns of election strategies and street demonstrations that undermine effectiveness. Rather than coordinating protests to support election campaigns, protests usually surged after election defeats and boycotts.

This changed in 2024 when Maduro’s apparent election fraud led to widespread demonstrations. For the first time, Venezuela’s opposition appeared to link election participation to street mobilization, but Gamboa notes that it struggles to protect supporters in poor communities facing government oppression.

“If the opposition parties choose to use both institutional and non-institutional strategies together, it will probably be stronger,” she said.

Insights from Venezuela arrive as democracies around the world face unprecedented pressures. Due to the opposition’s moves where democratic institutions are undermined, Gamboa’s research provides both warnings and reasons for hope.

“In the last 20 years, we have seen a significant decline in democracy around the world,” she said. “Democracy has been eroded by authoritarian regimes, and previously weaker dictators have taken root more deeply. Because of the opposition in both of these cases, Venezuela offers lessons and hope.”