What is Democratic Backsliding?

For explanatory purposes, democracy will be given a general and literal definition. In a broad sense, democracy is rule through power vested in the people. This power may be applied directly, such as in a participatory or direct democracy, where constituents have more control over policy priorities. Conversely, a pluralist or an elite democracy allows little direct interaction, instead allowing those in select interest groups or those with concentrated power to influence policy directions on the public’s behalf. Deciding what model of democracy to use is less useful than discussing backsliding with a broad definition.  

The Gradual Nature 

The Sorites Paradox is a philosophical puzzle that explores how we apply vague definitions. It asks at what point something loses a property when it is changed gradually, step by step. The most famous example uses a heap of sand, asking when the heap would cease being a heap when one grain is removed at a time. Similarly, democracy as a state is subject to these changes. When a democracy backslides, political institutions and civil liberties are eroded away. Defining democracy becomes exponentially more difficult as you move beyond its fundamentals. There is an entire spectrum where democracies may sit that apply to different types and levels of government. So when a democracy is dismantled, it becomes nearly impossible to decide exactly when it no longer exists as a democracy.

Examples of Democratic Backsliding 

Checks and Balances

Checks and balances can be weakened as part of a broader process known as “executive aggrandizement,” in which leaders consolidate power and undermine democratic constraints. This is the removal of constraints placed on leaders through compromising legislative oversight and judicial independence. An example of this would be court-packing, which is when the number of seats in a court is expanded in efforts to shift the ideological composition of the court. 

Electoral integrity

Electoral fairness is affected as populist rhetoric and manipulation give opportunities to dampen electoral integrity. Measures such as voter intimidation, gerrymandering, and creating barriers to voting tamper with the outcomes. If people are too afraid to vote, if voting centers are geographically inconvenient, or if monetary or identification rules bar someone from voting, then effectively, those rules or decisions can alter the outcome of an election. This, in turn, can consolidate power for the incumbent party. 

Rule of Law

Democratic backsliding affects rule of law in that it weaponizes the legal system in favor of an incumbent leader. Deconstructing judicial independence, politicizing law enforcement, and removing legal accountability are all means of entrenching a leader’s position and ensuring that normal choke points for authoritarianism are covered up. The most influential institutional ‘choke points’ include media coverage, legislative oversight, judicial review, and opposition figures or parties. Examples of trying to undermine these institutions can include an overuse of executive orders to bypass the legislation, intimidating or directly controlling the media, and delegitimizing efforts made by opposition figures. 

Media

Independent media is often a luxury that is taken for granted until it is gone. As democratic backsliding occurs, journalists can be harassed into silence, disinformation can be leveraged to polarize audiences or mislead them, and in some cases, there will be outright censorship or media blackouts. Propaganda becomes the norm, and it will be harder to discern if reporting is done in good or bad faith.

Freedom of Speech

Similarly to how media becomes censored or weaponized, freedom of speech becomes vulnerable to attacks from the government. Curbing dissent and political opposition creates a chilling effect, meaning that public silence and support for authoritarian narratives will be prioritized, rather than the exercise of rights to free speech, expression, and assembly. 

Dissatisfaction in Institutions

A government can erode political norms and institutions through encouraging dissatisfaction among a democratic base. A common example of this is to cast aspersions about the function or intent of a judiciary. An authoritarian leader may say that a court is attacking the will of the people, which is framed as the objectives of a regime. Severe measures such as declaring martial law may be used to suspend the media and sabotage other branches of government or opposition parties. This becomes a more popular trend when regimes have successfully created a cult of personality around the executive.

Constant Vigilance

The progressive weakening of norms, institutions, and civil liberties from a functioning democracy often only become identified through piecemeal monitoring by journalists, think tanks, watchdog organizations, and an informed public. Things such as laws that weaken a free election or degrade checks and balances in government are often flagged for their effects, but it takes the consolidation of these phenomena to recognize larger efforts. 

The Role of Populism

Democratic backsliding is often associated with the rise of populist movements. A recent analysis by Chatham House highlights how young people can help counter this trend. For this purpose, populism is the segmentation of a population into rival camps. This can be done across socioeconomic, cultural, or religious factors, but it is often reliant on political ideology. As this happens, rhetoric will be used to define “out-groups” as threats to well-being in some form. As time passes, this ideology becomes more unyielding, allowing further democratic backsliding to take place. Constituents in a democracy may vote against their own interests when changes are framed for the sake of the in-group or to harm the out-group. This effectively polarizes voter bases, which can quicken the gradual nature of democratic backsliding. 

Conclusion 

What ends up happening to a government if democratic backsliding continues? In most cases, it remains a democracy, but often only in name. An illiberal democracy may hold elections, but the sanctity of those elections are not guaranteed. Protections of the rule of law are also not guaranteed, and may become habitually violated, as there is a lack of accountability. Democratic backsliding dismantles the foundation of democracy itself. Disenfranchisement, manipulation, and intimidation undermine popular governance and require constant vigilance to prevent the erosion of democratic norms.

Sources:

Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs | Democratic Backsliding 

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | U.S. Democratic Backsliding in Comparative Perspective

Chatham House | How young people can prevent democratic backsliding

International IDEA | Explainer: Democratic backsliding

National Opinion Research Center | Democratic Backsliding and Authoritarian Resurgence in Latin America

Stanford Philosophy Encyclopedia | Sorites Paradox

Editor’s Disclaimer: This article is intended for informational and analytical purposes only. It draws on established political science concepts to examine general patterns of democratic governance and democratic backsliding. The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of Presence News.

This article does not reference or evaluate any specific government, political party, or public official. Readers are encouraged to consult a range of sources and perspectives when engaging with topics related to governance and public policy.

More from Presence News:

Modern Monarchy and Political Stability

The 1953 Coup That Still Haunts U.S.–Iran Relations

Pam Bondi, Dr. Phil, LT Gov of Texas Dan Patrick and Religious Liberty Leaders Call for a Return to Founding Values