The twenty-first century has been marked by a weakening of democratic institutions in many once-robust democracies. This is not a new trend. The history of modern democracy is littered with examples of countries which adopted representative democracy or liberal republicanism, only to return to a non-democratic form of government. Democratic backsliding is when a country becomes more illiberal and undemocratic over time. This can take the form of weakening electoral systems and attenuation of the rule of law, repression or infringement of civil and political liberties, and corrupt governance that enjoys weakening accountability. Importantly, democratic backsliding is often gradual and protracted, which makes it difficult to identify. This also presents challenges for those who might wish to stop the backsliding because there are sometimes only smaller or subtle shifts that might not be cause for alarm by a critical mass of democrats within a society. While regime change from democracy to nondemocracy can happen via spectacular and sudden events such as a coup or revolution, democratic backsliding is more insidious and stymies those who might want to organize to combat it.
There are many reasons for democratic backsliding, and in this section we will explore three major explanations: institutional, cultural, and international factors.
Institutional Explanations
Certain institutions render a country more vulnerable to nondemocratic rule. Presidential systems are famously unstable (Linz, 1990). They tend to centralize power in a single individual, and there are fewer mechanisms in place to check that individual from abuse of office. Compared to a parliamentary system, where executives are appointed by the legislature and subject to no confidence votes, presidents are relatively difficult to dismiss before they complete their term of office. During this time, they may opt to abuse their power or degrade the democracy in significant ways.
Countries which lack strong institutions of accountability, such as independent judiciaries and independent anti-corruption bureaus, are also more susceptible to democratic backsliding. When courts do not check those in power, and there is only weak rule of law, then serious and flagrant abuse of public office is more likely. Significant and pervasive corruption – defined as misuse of public resources for private gain – can also degrade a democracy, both in practice and in the legitimacy of that regime. Well-resourced, robust anti-corruption bureaus or inspectors general are an important bulwark against this kind of internal decay.
Another major institution which can threaten a democracy is a politically motivated military. When a military is subject to weak or inadequate civilian oversight, it can become a politicized actor and even seize control, culminating in nondemocratic military rule. Building a professional military which is focused on its security responsibilities and ability to prevail in complex military operations, rather than be tempted by political power, is a deep ongoing challenge for many governments.
Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\):Turkish soldiers guarding the mausoleum of Turkish president Kemal Atatürk (in office 1923-38), who was a proponent of a secular Turkey shaped by a powerful military. A professional military subject to civilian oversight is a bulwark against democratic backsliding by a too-powerful military. (Source: Turkey-1658 by Dennis Jarvis viaWikipedia is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)
Cultural Explanations
Popular and elite beliefs in the appropriateness of democratic rule can shape political outcomes. When there are strong democratic norms in place, this takes on a self-perpetuating quality in which a society supports and reinforces democratic practices and institutions. Yet democratic “habits of the heart” can take long periods of time to mature and gain a taken-for-granted status in a society. Civic education can play a role in this endeavor, especially education that addresses liberal values such as liberty, fairness, representativeness, and accountability. When people in a society think critically about where authority and power should rest in their society, and believe that they are empowered to challenge nondemocratic rule, this can offer a deep societal buffer against democratic backsliding.
Charismatic, autocratic leaders can gain a national following and move a democracy toward non-democracy. Such leaders may call upon a variety of tactics to gain a mass following. Many of these strategies might appeal to cultural faultlines or vulnerabilities within a society. An aspiring autocrat might make populist appeals to in-group grievances and label an out-group as the culprit. They might appeal to nationalist ambitions or exploit ethnic divisions. They might present themselves as messengers with a holy message. They might offer promises of a return to a golden past or golden future. Such autocratic leaders take a variety of forms, but one common goal is a degrading of democratic institutions in order to consolidate power in non-democratic forms of governance.
One chilling example of this interplay between culture and political leadership can be found in the breakup of Yugoslavia during the 1990s. In the early years of the republics that formed after the collapse of communist Yugoslavia, one fiery Serb nationalist named Slobodan Milošević argued that a newly independent Serbia should reclaim territories once occupied by the Serb nation. His calls fell on fertile nationalist ground, which intersected with religious and ethnic faultlines in these Slavic territories. Milošević, who was elected president of Serbia during the 1990s, was a major political leader and instigator during a brutal civil war that ensued between former republics of Yugoslavia. He was eventually indicted for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Bosnia Herzegovina.
A country may be susceptible to democratic backsliding as a result of international factors. These can include “neighborhood effects”: if a country resides in a region where countries are trending non-democratic, or if there is a high regional concentration of non-democratic regimes, it is more likely to become a non-democracy. Conversely, a neighborhood which is pro-democracy, such as the European Union, can pull countries in the direction of embracing democracy.
International pressures for a democracy to backslide can be carried out via technological means. New information and communication technologies encourage countries to defy geographical constraints and reach into target countries to wage influence campaigns. These influence campaigns serve to undermine democratic governments around the world through the dissemination of misinformation via social media platforms and the internet. This kind of sharp power tactic is a means to destabilize democracies by sowing division within populations and undermining democratic institutions such as the free flow of information and electoral integrity.
