Inequality, Polarization, and Democratic Backsliding

 

Inequality, Polarization, and Democratic Backsliding

Susan Stokes

(Summary of “WHY ELECTED LEADERS SUBVERT DEMOCRACY” https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/986019/pdf )

The passage argues that economic inequality weakens democracy by fostering distrust, polarization, and susceptibility to authoritarian leaders. Inequality can lead people to dehumanize the poor and lose confidence in institutions such as governments, courts, media, and education systems. Evidence from the United States shows that rising inequality over decades has coincided with declining trust in these institutions. India is another example of this phenomenon.

Polarization and Rise of Autocrats

Highly unequal societies tend to become politically polarized, where group interests sharply diverge. This polarization benefits would-be autocrats, who exploit divisions to gain power. Citizens in polarized environments are more willing to tolerate attacks on democratic institutions if they fear the opposing political side more.

Political leaders themselves often drive polarization, not just reflect it. Research shows that democratic decline is linked to elite rhetoric rather than public rejection of democracy. Leaders use economic grievances—often blaming minorities or migrants—to deepen divisions.

“Trash-Talking” Democratic Institutions

In addition to polarization, leaders weaken democracy through “democratic trash-talk”—systematically portraying institutions as corrupt and ineffective. This reduces public trust and makes institutional attacks seem justified. Unlike polarizing rhetoric, this strategy avoids backlash by convincing citizens that institutions are not worth defending.

Examples from countries like Mexico and Venezuela show how such rhetoric can lead to institutional restructuring, often increasing executive control (e.g., politicizing courts or electoral systems).

Why People Believe Such Leaders

Citizens may believe misleading or false claims due to:

• Emotional manipulation (anger, fear, moral outrage)
• Psychological framing of problems as deliberate harm by others
• Strong emotional attachment to leaders

However, education and critical thinking can counter misinformation.

How Democratic Backsliding Can Be Resisted

Despite challenges, democracies retain some resilience:

1. Political Elites

• Should address inequality through pro-poor policies
• Reconnect with working-class voters
• Use institutional mechanisms (legislatures, courts) to resist authoritarian moves
• Face a dilemma: whether to use aggressive tactics (“hardball”) or maintain norms

2. Civil Society

• Media, universities, NGOs, and professional groups play a key role
• They expose abuses, mobilize citizens, and defend democratic norms
• Even under repression, civil society can slow democratic erosion

3. Courts and Legal Actors

• Courts can still check executive power, even in weakened democracies
• Lawyers and professional bodies can uphold ethical standards

4. Citizens (Voters and Protesters)

• Elections remain a crucial mechanism to remove backsliding leaders
• Public protests and voting behaviour can reverse democratic decline
• Economic failures and corruption often reduce support for such leaders

Conclusion

Democratic backsliding is serious but not inevitable. While inequality and polarization create opportunities for authoritarianism, collective action by political actors, civil society, and citizens can resist and even reverse democratic decline. Active participation is essential, as democratic rights weaken if not exercised.