The Decline of Democracy: What's at Stake

In How Democracies Die, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt outline various demises of democratic regimes throughout history. Central to their writing is a list of key warning signs of authoritarianism; typically, before once-stable democracies deteriorate into various states of disarray, at least several of these indicators make themselves apparent. While Levitsky and Ziblatt go into great detail about what early authoritarian behavior may look like, their analysis can be divided thematically into four groups: “denial of the legitimacy of political opponents,” “toleration or encouragement of violence,” “readiness to curtail civil liberties of opponents, including media,” and “rejection of (or weak commitment to) democratic rules of the game.” These characteristics, they argue, should not be underestimated, for even the strongest of democracies can erode under the right circumstances. Throughout the Trump presidency, we have witnessed what can best be described as a seismic shift towards the very elements that Levitsky and Ziblatt warn of. In the midst of a monumental election, it is more crucial than ever to reflect on the ways in which the Trump Administration has embraced undemocratic behavior and recognize precisely what is at stake, should he be reelected for a second term. 

Over the past four years, Trump has behaved consistently in a manner reflective of fascism, and many of his actions fit the criteria of early authoritarian behavior, as outlined in How Democracies Die. For one, he has been known to attack the legitimacy of his political opponents, specifically by erroneously accusing them of criminal behavior. This pattern is exemplified by, but not limited to, encouraging chants of ‘Lock her up!’ at his rallies, in reference first to Hillary Clinton, his opponent in the 2016 presidential election, and later to Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic Governor of Michigan; vaguely accusing former President Obama of illegal activity; and most recently, labelling the Biden family as a “criminal enterprise”. These tactics mirror an explicit warning featured in How Democracies Die: in order to delegitimize political opposition, authoritarian leaders will “baselessly describe their partisan rivals as criminals.” Trump has also tacitly endorsed, and even encouraged, violence on numerous occasions, bringing us to the second category of behavior outlined by Levitsky and Ziblatt. During his 2016 campaign, he called on his supporters to “knock the hell out of” protesters that attended his rallies, promising to “pay for the legal fees” of those that would. On another occasion, he suggested that gun owners could use their firearms to prevent Hillary Clinton from nominating judges that would infringe on second amendment rights in the event of her election, a comment that many interpreted as a call for violence against the candidate and her potential judicial nominees. Furthermore, his overtly racist rhetoric has inspired a myriad of hate crimes, many of which he has declined to condemn. Analysis by ABC found at least 54 cases in which violent attacks were explicitly committed in Trump’s name. Moreover, data indicates an astronomical spike in hate crimes since the election of Trump in 2016. Again, these trends resemble the early breakdowns of other democracies throughout history. For instance, Levitsky and Ziblatt point frequently to how the rise of fascism in Italy under Mussolini was characterized by a rise in partisan violence. The third descriptor of authoritarian behavior, readiness to curtail civil liberties of media and citizens, also characterizes the Trump Administration. Throughout his presidency, Trump has dubbed the media as “the enemy of the people,” a portrayal that has been used to justify various censorship efforts. For example, he has filed multiple lawsuits against media outlets that have published opinion pieces portraying him negatively. These legal efforts represent a clear danger to the right to a free press, as protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Likewise, Trump has employed a variety of punitive tactics to stifle ongoing Black Lives Matter protests across America; federal troops have been documented unleashing tear gas onto crowds of peaceful protestors and he has threatened to remove federal funding from cities that he perceived as being too accommodating to protesters. These actions, too, indicate hostility towards freedoms permitted by the First Amendment.

Undoubtedly, then, it can be seen that certain behaviors of President Trump fit into at least the first three classifications of undemocratic behavior. As Americans cast their ballots, though, perhaps what should concern us the most is his administration’s weak commitment to democratic norms and principles, particularly in the context of elections. Over the years, Trump has alluded frequently to his desire to extend his presidency beyond the constitutional bounds of term limits. This summer, he mused the possibility of delaying the 2020 presidential election, an idea that ultimately was not pursued. And up to this point, he has suggested that he may not accept the results of the election, should he lose to Joe Biden. As we await the results of the 2020 election, it is important to recognize the possibility that we may not be afforded a smooth transition of power, as we have with every presidency in the past. It is probable that over the coming weeks, the results of the election will be contested in the Supreme Court. Although there is not much citizens can do to prevent that, we must still recognize what is at stake if the results end up in Trump’s favor.

Democracies don’t die overnight. Typically, they erode slowly, with the gradual breaching of democratic norms. While reelecting President Trump may not result in a transition to an absolute fascist state, it is plausible that a second term would be characterized by the same, if not heightened, undemocratic leanings that defined his first. Should Trump be reelected, it will be more important than ever that we recognize what undemocratic behavior looks like and vocally oppose it when it occurs. Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that electing Trump has set us on an unsteady course towards the decline of American democracy. This path, however, is not irreversible. As citizens, we must hold our elected officials accountable to protecting democracy and remain committed to condemning abuses of power when they occur. 

This article refers throughout to How Democracies Die: Levitsky, Steven, and Daniel Ziblatt. How Democracies Die. Crown, 2018.