The idea that technology itself can take on fascist characteristics may initially seem unusual. One often interprets fascism within a historical context, such as the regimes of Nazi Germany under Hitler or Italy under Mussolini. In these cases, fascism is ascribed to all-powerful dictators who maintain control through weakening democratic institutions and manipulating the systems that shape public life. However, examining the operation of Big Tech companies, AI, and algorithmic systems reveals how the tendencies of classical fascism are reproduced in subtle ways, often buried beneath the guise of technological progress. While the forms of control employed by these actors differ from those of historical fascist regimes, modern technologies have embedded techniques of ideological control into the most intimate parts of our lives, reflecting strategies similar to those used by fascist powers. As these technologies become integrated, they raise vital concerns about the resilience of democratic institutions and their capacity to resist information manipulation to preserve democratic accountability and respond to emerging security threats.
While theorists of fascism often disagree on its precise definition, the concept can be narrowed to four central characteristics: the isolation and fragmentation of society; the replacement of democratic discussion and diverse viewpoints with obedience and loyalty; the merging of government, corporate, and military power; and the narrowing of human experience through an obsession with technology, efficiency, and the suppression of critical thinking. In the context of digital technologies, these characteristics become apparent when viewed through the ideology of technosolutionism, in which technology is presented as the solution to every social problem. Within this context, technofascism describes how AI systems, digital platforms, and Big Tech companies reproduce fascist characteristics through the automation of behaviour that narrows human experience, the control of information that undermines democratic discussion, and the concentration of political and economic power that facilitates the merging of corporate and governmental authority. In doing so, these actors can erode the conditions necessary for healthy democratic governance, weakening informed public debate, accountability, and the collective resilience upon which NATO and its member states depend.
One can first examine how AI systems resemble fascist tendencies by narrowing human experience through the automation of behaviour and emotional manipulation. Algorithmic systems are trained and organized on large datasets, using statistical estimation to reproduce desired outcomes. This creates an “Algorithmic Self,” a digitally shaped identity in which data analytics and predictive algorithms increasingly replace human judgment and lived experience with automated decision-making. In this sense, technofascism prioritizes technological efficiency over humanistic values, revealing that algorithmic systems are shaped by commercial interests and underlying data biases that automate individuals, rather than neutrality. Since Big Tech companies design these systems to maximize profit rather than promote balanced public discourse, platforms often amplify emotionally charged or sensational content that captures users’ attention and generates greater engagement. While Big Tech companies create the conditions for engagement-driven content, AI systems intensify these dynamics through emotional manipulation. Large language models (LLMs), such as AI chatbots, for example, can mimic empathy, tone, and communication styles, tailoring ‘emotion’ to individuals. This personalization makes AI an indispensable tool for propaganda and political messaging, generating seemingly authoritative content that shapes human decisions and beliefs, encouraging users to follow recommendations without critical thought, contributing to cognitive inertia. By subtly guiding and constraining human behaviour through data extraction and behavioural nudging, these systems contribute to an algorithmic governance that increasingly replaces human-led authority, under the appearance of convenience and advancement. Through this mechanism, technofascism concentrates power over how individuals think, feel, and act, fostering forms of social fragmentation and behavioural control that resemble key fascist tendencies.
In addition to automating and emotionally shaping behaviour, Big Tech companies utilize algorithms to monitor users and control the information they encounter online. Through continuous collection of personal data, Big Tech companies commodify human behaviour by monitoring users and generating detailed profiles that predict their vulnerabilities to shape future engagement. Through content filtering and algorithmic amplification, these systems shape what users see and engage with, privileging certain forms of content while suppressing others, creating isolated information environments. This concentration of informational power creates challenges for democratic oversight, as Big Tech companies shape the circulation of information and formation of public opinion, while the opaque processes through which algorithms recommend and filter content make it difficult for users and democratic institutions to effectively challenge how information is distributed. As a result, technofascism combines extensive surveillance with centralized control over information flows, enabling digital platforms marketed as tools of convenience and connection to isolate individuals in fragmented information environments, replacing shared democratic discourse with controlled narratives, weakening the informed citizenry upon which collective security relies.
Finally, technofascism reflects one of fascism’s most vital defining characteristics: the merging of government, corporate, and military power. By framing technological modernity as essential to survival, technofascist actors, particularly Big Tech companies, expand their influence by intertwining themselves with state institutions. Through lobbying, public-private partnerships, and close relationships with political leaders, Big Tech companies extend control beyond the marketplace and into governmental decision-making. This concentration of power jeopardizes democratic security, creating opportunities for fear-based political messaging and agenda-setting. As tech billionaires gain greater access to political institutions, democratic accountability is increasingly undermined, particularly when regulatory decisions involve the very companies they are intended to oversee. As a result, the checks and balances central to democratic governance weaken as corporate, political, and technological power become progressively concentrated in the hands of powerful actors, undermining the democratic resilience that NATO relies upon to address emerging security challenges.
In sum, technofascism demonstrates how forms of fascist control can become normalized, woven seamlessly into everyday life through the influence of Big Tech companies, AI, and algorithmic systems. In presenting themselves as impartial tools designed to cater to users’ curated preferences, these systems create opportunities for disinformation, emotional manipulation, and political polarization, rewarding engagement over truth. As AI and algorithmic systems are ingrained in every crevice of our lives, it becomes essential to proactively recognize the emerging technological threats they pose to democratic values. While often concealed behind the language of technological progress, these systems nurture isolated information environments that erode trust in shared sources of information, intensify polarization, and weaken the common realities on which democratic life depends. Democratic institutions then become more vulnerable to manipulation and instability, while meaningful public deliberation becomes increasingly difficult to sustain. In turn, the democratic resilience necessary for societies to respond collectively to political, social, and security challenges becomes increasingly fragile.
Because these developments pose serious challenges to democratic discourse and its stability, addressing them requires a robust effort. In line with NATO’s mission to protect and promote democracy, this begins with nurturing an ethics of communication in which stronger forms of resilience are built within online and offline communities through a firm commitment to verification, pluralistic discussion, and accountability for those who knowingly spread false or misleading information. By cultivating a stronger understanding of the technofascist features embedded within our modern technologies, society can more effectively recognize and challenge the forms of power and control that continue to be reproduced. Technology is not going anywhere, but greater public awareness is a critical first step in resisting the threats these systems pose to democratic values, institutions, and the collective security on which they depend.
Photo: “A close-up of several computer servers” (2022), by Aaron McLean via Unsplash. Licensed under the Unsplash License.
Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed in articles are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the NATO Association of Canada.
