How Democracies Die

Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt offer a compelling and deeply researched analysis of how democracies erode—not through sudden coups, but through gradual institutional decay, often at the hands of elected leaders. How Democracies Die draws on historical and global examples to show how political norms, not just written laws, are crucial for a functioning democracy.What I appreciated most about this book is its clarity. It’s not an overly academic read; the authors break down complex ideas in a way that’s accessible but still thought-provoking. The comparisons to historical cases—Chile, Venezuela, Hungary—help frame the challenges facing American democracy today.That said, I did feel at times that the book leaned a bit too much on comparisons to Trump, which, while relevant, could have been balanced with more bipartisan examples. Still, the overall message is important: democracies don’t collapse overnight, and the erosion of norms is something we should all be aware of, regardless of political affiliation.If you’re interested in political history, government, or just trying to make sense of the times we live in, this is definitely worth reading.

Wherever you look Democracy is clearly under threat. Although there are now 123 democratic countries in the world, (out of 192) ; democratic values have clearly been eroded in many counties in the last decades. This book deals with the very real danger to democracy of authoritarianism , with particular emphasis on the United States, although there are many references to other countries. We are accustomed to think of democracies dying at the hands of generals, but the authors (Levitsky and Ziblatt) point out that we need to be alert because democracies may die at the hands of elected autocrats, demagogues who pay lip service to the idea of democracy while eroding its essence, bit by bit.They explain " Because there is no single moment—no coup, declaration of martial law, or suspension of the constitution—in which the regime obviously “crosses the line” into dictatorship, nothing may set off society’s alarm bells. Those who denounce government abuse may be dismissed as exaggerating or crying wolf. Democracy’s erosion is, for many, almost imperceptible."Political parties can serve as society's gatekeepers, keeping out charismatic outsiders but fear, opportunism, or miscalculation may lead them to welcome extremists into the mainstream, imperiling democracy. Hitler, Mussolini and Chavez were all handed over power by established politicians who overlooked the warning signs. The warning signs to spot an authoritarian are: attacking the democratic rules of the game e.g by refusing to accept credible election results, denying the legitimacy of opponents, encouraging violence and curtailing the civil liberties of opponents or the media.Constitutional checks and balances and the institutional separation of powers are not enough to stop a determined elected autocrat from subverting democracy. Germany’s well-designed Weimar constitution couldn't prevent Hitler's rise to power. No institution or constitution can be made fool-proof.. Elected autocrats can undermine democracy by capturing the referees - packing and “weaponizing” the courts , the police, the tax authorities, then buying off the key media and the private sector (or threatening them into silence), and finally creating national emergencies to justify changing the rules of politics and crippling their opponents.A strong democracy relies on shared values of mutual tolerance and institutional restraint among its politicians to treat each other as legitimate contenders of power and exclude extremists. Informal democratic norms based on mutual respect are vital to enable our institutions work fairly. Without them polarization and animosity lead to "constitutional hardball" where politics becomes a form of institutional combat and extremists gain the upper hand (e,g as they did in Argentina).According to Levitt and Ziblatt, the guardrails of American democracy have been weakened by the extreme party polarization by race and culture of the 21st century, with the Republicans becoming the party of the whites and evangelical Protestants , while the Democrats have become the party of ethnic minorities and immigrants. Behind the partisan animosity lies the status anxiety of the American whites who feel that the real America they know and love is disappearing because by 2044 a majority of the US population is forecast to be non-white.Levitt and Ziblatt see America's great challenge in building a multiethnic democracy with greater/ social and economic equality.This is an excellent and enjoyable book which diagnoses the political and historical processes which have weakened democracy. The only thing lacking is an analysis of the increasing attraction of authoritarian demagogues in our complex times. In an uncertain age, many people are attracted to demagogues offering simple but "fake" solutions. This is not just a phenomenon in the US but a world-wide problem. Democracy is still in danger and contending with the covid pandemic necessitates reducing our democratic liberties.

“How Democracies Die” is a clear-eyed and level-headed assessment of the potential threat to our democracy presented by the presidency of Donald J. Trump. This book is a welcome and noticeable departure from the more typical writing about Trump as it does not indulge in simply reacting to his transgressions or waste time questioning why the president behaves the way that he does. Rather the authors competently and methodically lay out a case arguing that our constitution alone will not save our democracy or prevent a decline into authoritarianism without parties and political leaders acting in accordance with the time tested norms of political behavior that safeguard our nation from abuses of power and the decay of our institutions of democracy.The authors spend about half of the book presenting a number of interesting historical case studies illustrating worldwide political behaviors that, over time, threaten or protect democracies. Two key practices that are particularly relevant to the healthy functioning of American democracy are “mutual toleration” and “institutional forbearance.” Simply put mutual toleration describes the practice of recognizing that we all have an equal right to compete in the arena of political ideas and policies, resting on the belief that our opponents are generally “decent, patriotic, and law abiding.” Institutional forbearance is a commitment to play by the rules established in our constitution, using restraint and self control in the practice of the particular powers doled out to the branches of government in a system of checks and balances.As the authors illustrate, Donald Trump did not begin the breakdown of the exercise of these important norms. Rather they show that multiple historical social and economic factors since the 1960s have steeply increased the partisan divide in our country over the years. This in turn has made possible corrosive political practices that act against tolerance and restraint in use of power by both parties and our governing leaders. We currently find our selves mired in a cycle begun in the mid 1990s (thanks Newt) of dangerous demonization of our opponents, and a lack of compromise that has resulted in a repeated failure to provide results for citizens on important issues , and a tit-for-tat decrease in the practice of restraint in exercising circumventive measures such as an increase in the use of filibusters and executive orders. This, along with a weakening of the systems that used to vet nominees and protect against the capture of the electoral process by demagogues, made Trump’s rise to the presidency possible if not inevitable.After laying out these concepts, the authors parallel Trump’s campaign and presidential behaviors with the actions of contemporary figures like Erdogan, Chavez and Putin who have weakened their democracies and increased autocratic practices. Like these authoritarians, Trump has attacked institutions of democracy like the press and the court systems, made unproven charges of corruption against governing leaders and organizations, claiming political opponents are criminals and promising to use presidential power to punish them, attempting to purge and pack some departments, etc. While I doubt some Republicans or any fervid Trump supporters will be convinced by their argument, I found it to be both compelling and troubling.One disappointment I had in the book is that the focus is solely on the practice of parties and political leaders, to the exclusion of a discussion of the behavior of voters. This felt like a failure to not explore the part citizens play in accepting, supporting, or defeating authoritarian leaders. I am sure we have a part to play and I would have like to be dealt into the solution to this troubling world wide trend.This book will be an enjoyable and easy read for those interested in politics and history.