Subversion by Stealth: Dynamics of Democratic Backsliding

Luo, Zhaotian; Przeworski, Adam

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3469373

Cited by 24 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As we have shown, norm violators that make ambiguous provocations and can leverage democratic credentials dispose of better opportunities for portraying strong sanctions as a democratically unfair form of 'excessive retaliation', thus giving (potential) supporters a reason to excuse or even appreciate norm-eroding behaviour. This finding complements research that considers voters to be the decisive factor in the struggle against democratic backsliding (Przeworski, 2019;Svolik, 2019). Our analysis suggests that it is not simply (exogenous) changes in voters' opinions that make them less critical of norm-eroding behaviour, but also that norm violators' choice of strategy and established elites' sanctioning practices facilitate certain interpretations of norm violations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Second, most norm violators do not creep into power but already engage in norm violations during their time as political challengers (Cinar et al, 2019). Third, the transformation of party systems that is currently taking place in many advanced democracies creates an adverse power distribution for norm violators (Przeworski, 2019). A greater number of parties makes it more likely that norm violators will initially be confined to one or more challenger parties.…”

Section: Conflicts Over Norm Erosion In Advanced Democraciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Political challengers and norm erosion in advanced democracies

Hinterleitner

Sager

2022

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do politicians in advanced democracies get away with violating political norms? Although norm violators confront a powerful establishment that can penalize them, norm violations currently occur in many advanced democracies. This article analyzes the conflicts between norm‐violating challengers and established politicians and parties as norm defenders in multiparty systems to contribute to the discipline's understanding of norm erosion processes. Based on diachronic and synchronic comparisons of conflicts over norm violations in Austria and Germany, the article reveals how political challengers can already damage democratic norms from a position of institutional weakness. Norm violators that make ambiguous provocations and can leverage their previously acquired democratic credentials, can more credibly dispel attempts to stigmatize them as undemocratic. In doing so, they turn the tables on the political establishment and portray its sanctions as a form of ‘excessive retaliation’ that constitutes a norm violation in itself. The article concludes with the unsettling finding that (verbal) norm protection can facilitate norm erosion.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Conflicts Over Norm Erosion In Advanced Democraciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political challengers and norm erosion in advanced democracies

Hinterleitner

Sager

2022

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These same questions are being posed by citizens of countries including Poland, Hungary, Turkey, the Philippines, Rather, democracy comes under threat in some areas at the same time that democratic practices persist in others. The fragmentary deterioration of democracy may be the result of strategic choices by would-be autocrats exploiting polarization (Graham and Svolik 2018;Svolik 2018) or voter uncertainty (Nalepa, Vanberg, and Chiopris 2018), trying to cling to power (Helmke 2017;Luo and Przeworski 2018), or avoid accountability (Frum 2018). Either way, if we are to understand threats to democracy and recognize them when they arise, we need disaggregated measures of what we value in democracy.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Searching for Bright Lines in the Trump Presidency

Carey¹,

Helmke²,

Nyhan³

et al. 2019

Perspect. polit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Is American democracy under threat? The question is more prominent in political debate now than at any time in recent memory. However, it is also too blunt; there is widespread recognition that democracy is multifaceted and that backsliding, when it occurs, tends to be piecemeal. To address these concerns, we provide original data from surveys of political science experts and the public measuring the perceived importance and performance of U.S. democracy on a number of dimensions during the first year-and-a-half of the Trump presidency. We draw on a theory of how politicians may transgress limits on their authority and the conditions under which constraints are self-enforcing. We connect this theory to our survey data in an effort to identify potential areas of agreement—bright lines—among experts and the public about the most important democratic principles and whether they have been violated. Public and expert perceptions often differ on the importance of specific democratic principles. In addition, though our experts perceive substantial democratic erosion, particularly in areas related to checks and balances, polarization between Trump supporters and opponents undermines any social consensus recognizing these violations.

show abstract

“…De-democratisation does not have to occur as a result of a military coup or a revolution. In many cases, it is a consequence of actions by democratically elected actors (Luo and Przeworski 2019). In this perspective, the challenges to democracy are likely to arise from the political elites themselves, even from the political mainstream (see Hungary, Poland and the US), rather than the military (like in Argentina in 1976) or foreign powers (like in Iran in 1953).…”

Section: The Processual: Retrogressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Political Theory of Democratic Backsliding? Generalising the East Central European Experience

Karolewski

2020

Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter argues in favour of a general theory of democratic backsliding which should cover three dimensions: (1) the societal one (changing citizenry), (2) the institutional one (changing institutions of democratic government) and (3) the processual one (the nature of the democratic backsliding itself). Following these aspects, the chapter explores general developments of democratic backsliding, which also apply to East Central Europe. Regarding the societal dimension, it points to changes in the nature of citizenship towards spectatorship and plebiscitary understanding of democracy. Considering the institutional dimension, it focuses on two types of state capture: the party state capture and the corporate state capture. With regard to the processual dimension, the chapter argues that democratic backsliding does not imply fully fledged authoritarianism but rather represents a retrogression to semi-democracy—a potentially stable regime type, in which the dismantling of the rule of law goes hand in hand with cyclical elections preserving democratic standards.

show abstract

Subversion by Stealth: Dynamics of Democratic Backsliding

Cited by 24 publications

References 14 publications

Political challengers and norm erosion in advanced democracies

Political challengers and norm erosion in advanced democracies

Searching for Bright Lines in the Trump Presidency

Towards a Political Theory of Democratic Backsliding? Generalising the East Central European Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About