Memes and the Battle for Minds and Hearts: Why Soft Power Matters

Democracies and “Informational Aikido”

In today’s digital world, the explosion of information channels has transformed how societies communicate and perceive reality. Manuel Castells famously noted that this newfound freedom of communication creates challenges for those who try to control it, as diverse ideas and meanings flourish. But with this freedom comes vulnerability – democracies are especially prone to legitimacy crises and information attacks, which are amplified by their openness and limited ability to respond effectively and in time.

Joseph Nye described the modern challenge not as a lack of information but as an information overload. With endless streams of content, attention has become the real scarce resource. This abundance distracts people, clouds critical thinking, and makes it easier for disinformation to thrive. Autocratic regimes, adept at exploiting these weaknesses, use what could be called “informational aikido,” turning the strength of democratic openness into a weapon against it.

Democracies face the classic “freedom-security dilemma” – balancing between censorship for protection and fostering free, critical thinking. Physical resilience (like bans on harmful content) leans toward security, while cognitive resilience (teaching critical thinking) emphasizes freedom. Yet, focusing too heavily on one approach risks weakening the other, leaving societies polarized and vulnerable to manipulation.

On social media, the “rules of the game” make things worse. Platforms amplify divisive content, create echo chambers, and speed up the spread of disinformation. Populists and radicals often outshine institutional voices, dominating public discourse with loud, simplistic messages. Tools like bots, deepfakes, and algorithms target specific groups, making manipulation even more efficient. Moreover, the concentration of power in a few major platforms creates a “digital oligopoly” where internal and often opaque procedures control content, limiting freedom of speech in ways not fully understood by the public. This has resulted in cases where accounts exposing uncomfortable truths, such as those about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, are restricted, while harmful narratives gain traction.

The result? Democracies’ openness becomes their Achilles’ heel. Just as in aikido, where an opponent’s force is turned against them, malicious actors use democratic freedoms to undermine the very values they cherish. Winning the battle for attention – especially online – is now a defining challenge for democratic societies.

In this fight, tools like memes have become surprisingly powerful. Fast, emotional, and easy to share, memes have become a battlefield for influence, used by both democratic and autocratic regimes to shape public opinion and spread their agendas. The question is: can democracies adapt and turn their openness into a strength, rather than a weakness?

Meme as a Tool in the Information Warfare

Richard Dawkins introduced the term “meme” in 1976, defining it as a unit of cultural transmission – ideas, symbols, or styles passed between people. Fast forward to today, memes have evolved from cultural phenomena into potent tools of communication, particularly in the digital realm. With the rise of the internet and social media, memes have become more than jokes – they are emotional, visual, and easily shareable pieces of content that influence public opinion, unite communities, and amplify narratives.

Memes work because they are simple, viral, and emotionally charged. They combine visual and textual elements to create a powerful impact, often appealing directly to emotions like fear, support, or outrage. This emotional resonance makes them ideal for spreading political narratives, shaping public perception, and even inciting action. Memes are also incredibly adaptable, with templates that users can modify to fit any context, allowing them to spread rapidly and often anonymously.

In the context of conflict, such as the Russian-Ukrainian war, memes become tools of information warfare. They mobilize support, shape group identities, and reinforce ideologies. For democracies, memes can serve as a means of fostering solidarity and resisting propaganda. However, their simplicity can also distort complex issues, reducing them to emotionally driven content that divides rather than unites.

Memes aren’t just about humor – they are about power. By making ideas relatable and accessible, they shape perceptions on a massive scale. Thus they influence elections, revolutions, and the way we process information. Understanding their role in information warfare, particularly between democratic and autocratic regimes, is crucial for navigating the challenges of the modern information age.

Based on the above, we suggest that in the context of information abundance and the necessity to attract attention, memes can be analyzed as a tool of communication due to their viral nature, visual power, ease of creation and dissemination, emotionally charged content, and their role in establishing group identity. We further aim to explore how this instrument functions in the context of the information warfare between autocratic and democratic countries, using the Russian-Ukrainian war as a case study.

Russian Sharp Power: The Challenge for Liberal Democracies

In times of peace, liberal democracies have traditionally prioritized freedom of expression over combating information threats. But as hybrid threats redefine the concept of “war,” this approach faces growing challenges, particularly in the face of Russia’s sharp power.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 not only reshaped Europe’s political landscape but also demonstrated the critical importance of democracies being prepared to resist aggression. Ukraine’s initial successes were striking – not just on the battlefield but in the information sphere.

Russia’s information warfare, central to its hybrid strategy since 2014, employs the “Gerasimov Doctrine” blending military, political, economic, and informational tactics. The Kremlin’s “Russian World” ideology, rooted in Huntington’s civilizational theory, frames Russia as a unique civilization, using historical and religious institutions to challenge Ukraine’s sovereignty and justify aggression.

Countering these threats requires more than military efforts. Democracies must combat propaganda and perception manipulation, defending truth and democratic values. Russian disinformation exploits societal divides, adapting narratives to regional vulnerabilities, solidifying its position as a formidable opponent in the information domain.

Russia continues its relentless propaganda within the EU and NATO, using disinformation to exploit societal vulnerabilities and amplify regional fractures. Its divisive strategy, termed “sharp power,” weaponizes soft power tools like cultural ties and information but aims to destabilize rather than attract. By polarizing societies and promoting distrust in democracy, Russia undermines the cohesion of liberal democracies.

A defining feature of Russian propaganda is its focus on division rather than self-promotion. Efforts include fostering tensions via demands from Russian-speaking communities abroad and media campaigns portraying Western values as harmful. This approach destabilizes societies without direct military confrontation, making Russia a persistent threat.

Distrust is central to modern disinformation. In liberal democracies, growing societal divides and perceptions of injustice drive people toward alternative narratives, often disinformation disguised as hidden truths. This erodes trust in governments and media, complicating the balance between freedom and security. Countering sharp power requires not just combating disinformation but addressing the root causes of societal distrust to protect democratic foundations.

Distrust thrives among counterpublics – groups opposing mainstream narratives and aligning with populist or radical ideas. In Europe, these groups spread anti-EU and anti-NATO messages, bolstering autocratic regimes like Russia. In contrast, Russia’s tightly controlled media landscape ensures a unified propaganda strategy, both domestically and abroad, suppressing alternative narratives and strengthening its resilience to external influence.

For young democracies like Ukraine, the challenge is acute. As the war continues, polarization, dissatisfaction, and “war fatigue” make the public more vulnerable to Russian disinformation. Ukraine’s democratic openness, while fundamental, also provides opportunities for exploitation. Measures like media blocks and state-run broadcasts help, but they can’t entirely counteract Russia’s influence, especially within its controlled media environment.

However, Ukraine leverages its free information space to innovate in “memetic warfare”. Memes, humor, and visual content serve as powerful tools in this asymmetric battle, reaching Russian audiences despite heavy censorship. These tactics allow Ukraine to compete in the information domain.

Ultimately, rebuilding trust while preserving democratic freedoms is essential. Democracies must strike a balance to counter sharp power effectively, safeguarding their societies against manipulation while fostering resilience in the face of hybrid threats.

Data Collection and Research Methodology

This study employs qualitative methods such as discourse analysis and a critical approach to investigate how memes reflect and shape public perceptions of democratic and autocratic values. A dataset of 5,000 memes was compiled from social media platforms like Telegram, X, Vkontakte, and Reddit. Only widely shared and publicly visible memes were included, ensuring the analysis focused on content with measurable reach and impact. The memes were evenly split between two categories: 2,500 representing democratic values and 2,500 reflecting autocratic values.

Tracking the exact origins of memes or “following” them in a structured way is often unrealistic. Unlike traditional media, memes don’t have a single, traceable trajectory, they spread, mutate, and resurface unpredictable. Our approach isn’t about measuring each meme’s journey from creation to virality. Instead, we work until we reach theoretical saturation – meaning we’ve analyzed enough material to identify stable patterns and insights. Also, memes can go viral regardless of where they first appeared. A random user on an imageboard, a semi-automated bot on Twitter, or an influencer on Telegram could all contribute to the same meme gaining traction. Trying to restrict the dataset to “trackable” sources would limit the broader picture of how these narratives spread. That’s why we don’t artificially confine ourselves to specific platforms.

The categorization of memes was guided by a grounded theory approach, allowing themes to emerge organically through an iterative process. Initially, 500 memes were manually analyzed to identify recurring patterns, which were later refined into key categories. Advanced computational tools (VGG16 Neural Network and Python-Tesseract Library) enhanced the analysis.

The authors’ deep understanding of Ukrainian and Russian socio-political dynamics provides valuable context but also introduces potential biases. Nonetheless, the replicability of the study is strong, as researchers with similar expertise in social sciences and digital trends are likely to detect comparable themes and narratives.

Memes Role in Autocratic and Democratic Communication

Political leaders

In Russian propaganda, memes play a critical role in shaping the personalized category of political leadership. Central to this narrative is Vladimir Putin, portrayed as a mythological hero defending Russia’s interests and “real” democracy. These memes construct a narrative of salvation, positioning Putin as a savior battling adversaries, often depicted as the United States or other democratic nations (figures 1, 2). Visual metaphors – such as Putin as Superman or the Kremlin as a symbol of power – simplify complex ideas into emotionally charged symbols.

This personalization contrasts with democratic countries, where values are rooted in institutional frameworks and collective governance rather than individuals. While this institutional focus enhances resilience, it also results in fragmented discourses and leaders subject to public opinion fluctuations. Conversely, autocratic systems like Russia’s use central figures to unify narratives, creating clear and emotionally potent messages that resonate broadly.

However, this focus on a single leader, while effective in maintaining public engagement, can also make autocracies more fragile. Personalization ties national identity and governance to the leader’s image, leaving systems vulnerable to instability if the leader’s authority is questioned. Democracies, despite their vulnerabilities, benefit from the strength of their institutions, which are less reliant on individual figures for legitimacy.

Power relations

In authoritarian regimes, memes serve as a distortion of reality, portraying stability, peace, and strength while ignoring systemic violence and political repression. Russian propaganda leverages memes to glorify their leader, depicting Vladimir Putin as kind, strong, and a protector of national identity (“nobody messes with Russia”) (figure 3). Simultaneously, democratic leaders are caricatured as weak and flawed (figure 4, 5). This dual narrative bolsters national pride and distracts from domestic issues that could incite dissent.

By downplaying repression and violence, these memes prevent the spread of information that might challenge the regime. Internally, they maintain a facade of unity and stability; externally, they spread disinformation to discredit democratic governance, framing democracies as chaotic and ineffective while portraying autocracies as strong and stable.

This binary framing supports the broader narrative of Russia as a rising global power. The simplified, emotionally charged messaging resonates widely, reinforcing authoritarian propaganda and attacking the appeal of democratic values. By crafting this idealized contrast, authoritarian regimes solidify their image both domestically and on the global stage.

Freedom issues (draft dodging)

The problem of freedom in the Ukrainian meme space was most evident in the context of narratives about actual social issues, such as the draft dodging. In 2023-2024, these memes reflect almost the entire narrative complex of the concept of freedom. They reflect the general understanding of political freedom, for example, the meme: “And after the war, we will build Northern Korea here!” (figure 6), the problems of social inequality in the society (when certain categories of people are avoiding the draft, and “the war is only for the poor” narrative is installed), the problems of freedom to vote, and more broadly, the duties of citizens to the state (figure 7).

These memes also raise ontological right issues, such as responsibility and free will. Their impact depends on the position of the observer. For some, they reinforce the traditional values of patriotism and duty, developing a sense of collective responsibility for national defense. For others, they stimulate critical thinking about the complexities of freedom, individual rights and the role of the military and conscripts in a democratic society. Thus, these memes are a source of debate about the meaning and limits of freedom in the country, and raise questions about the balance between individual freedom and civic responsibility, highlighting the complexities of freedom in a democratic society. It helps the autocracies to sow discord and undermine trust in democratic institutions, and the lack of open debate in Ukraine, which experiences this issue, does not help the situation.

Memes that address draft dodging invoke the tension between personal autonomy and the obligations citizens owe to the state in times of crisis. In a democratic context, this adds to the above discussed dichotomy of freedom and security: democracies, by their nature, protect individual liberties, yet their survival often depends on the willingness of citizens to relinquish some of those freedoms for the common good. The memetic discourse around these issues, therefore, not only reflects public sentiments but also shapes the conceptual boundaries of political freedom.

Historical memes

In contrast to modern social issues, another group of memes that spread stereotypical visions on the struggle between democracy and autocracy are historical memes. As a rule, their main element is an image, and the textual accompaniment is often used as an ironic or post-ironic hint. Historical memes can perform various functions: provoke, tell stories, identify, recreate reality, inform, entertain, (simplify) the past and present, create viral epidemics, help, teach, evoke emotions, or manipulate.

Historical memes circulating online are also historical sources containing much information about meme consumers’ communities. When we “look” at memes, we can see what historical topics are used as arguments, what templates are popular, how a particular meme reproduces the past (ridicules, glorifies, is proud of, humiliates, etc.), what language is used (obscene vocabulary, warlike vocabulary, hate speech, established phrases), what stereotypes about the past are reproduced, and whether they are in line with the official policy of the state regarding the past. Historical memes are created based on the principle of binary opposition: “freedom-unfreedom,” “good-evil,” and “victors-defeated”. For example, figures 8-10 present memes about Stalin as the best leader in Russian history who restored order. Stalin was the main person who legitimized Russia’s modern politics.

Ukraine too has been utilizing historical memes as a tool of propaganda since February 2022, to underline the high level of resilience in the war, or to stress the role of the allies in supporting the country in defending democracy (figure 11, 12).

Historical memes significantly shape perceptions of freedom and unfreedom, leveraging simplified narratives and emotional content to influence public opinion.

For Russia, it becomes an instrument to whitewash their reputation as those who beat the Nazi, to justify the totalitarian regime (and the “strong hand” approach used in a modern period), and mock the former allies. These memes also serve to mythologize figures like Stalin, framing him as a symbol of strength and order, which justifies both past and current authoritarian governance. Ukraine parallels past struggles and victories to instill a sense of continuity and enduring strength. By linking the present conflict with past struggles for freedom and independence, these memes create a sense of continuity and resilience. This strengthens national identity and fosters solidarity, both domestically and internationally.

Therefore, we observe that memes function as linguistically and visually constructed social realities, reflecting both dominant and counter-narratives about freedom. Memes dealing with historical experiences, contemporary social issues, or power relations between nations serve as powerful tools for shaping public perceptions. They simplify complex political and social themes, embedding them within easily digestible and emotionally charged content. This manipulation of perceptions is particularly effective in political discourse, as memes function to legitimize certain political stances at the grassroots level.

Balancing Freedom and Resilience

Memes have emerged as a powerful tool in the ongoing information warfare between autocratic and democratic regimes. Their viral nature and emotional resonance allow them to shape narratives and influence public opinion in an era of information abundance. Autocratic regimes, like Russia, exploit the openness of democratic information ecosystems, using sharp power tactics to spread disinformation and undermine rivals.

Democracies face the dual challenge of safeguarding freedoms while countering manipulative tactics. Attempts to impose restrictions often backfire, eroding trust and weakening the principles of free speech. Meanwhile, autocracies maintain tightly controlled media environments, leveraging coordinated narratives to reinforce their agendas while remaining insulated from similar counter-efforts.

To address these vulnerabilities, democracies must prioritize cognitive resilience. Fostering media literacy, promoting strategic narratives aligned with democratic values, and rebuilding societal trust are critical steps. By equipping citizens with tools such as fact-checking resources, training programs on critical thinking, and educational initiatives that teach how to identify misinformation and analyze media content, democracies can mitigate disinformation and strengthen their defenses without compromising core freedoms.

In the context of the Russian-Ukrainian war, memes serve both as tools of civic engagement in Ukraine and as instruments of state propaganda in Russia. For democracies, the path forward lies in balancing short-term measures with long-term investments in informed, discerning citizens who can navigate the complexities of modern information warfare. 

Ultimately, a balanced strategy is needed – one that addresses the challenges posed by user-generated memes while upholding the freedoms that define democratic societies. By emphasizing media literacy, transparency, and trust-building, democracies can defend against information disorders without compromising their core values. By doing so, democracies can turn their vulnerabilities into strengths, ensuring resilience in the battle for truth and influence.