Scan barcode
A review by jrc2011
How Democracies Die by Steven Levitsky
3.0
People are unique, complex and also predictable – both as individuals and in the groups and societies that they form. Humans are also very good at denial – and like to imagine that what they are doing is novel and different, or that they will avoid the same results with the same methods tried in the past. This results in predictable old sayings about history repeating and the doom/fate awaiting those who don’t study history.
Levitsky & Ziblatt’s style is the very clear – he delineates his chief goals and repeats them frequently with many supporting historical examples. The first goal is to describe the key indicators of authoritarianism, and this is clearly illustrated throughout the book. The second goal is to describe two simple qualities that have made democracy more successful in the US. The book wraps up with some high-level recommendations for what has to be done to reduce the risk of further degradation of democracy to avoid increased risk of authoritarianism.
What has made democracy in the US unique is mutual tolerance and forbearance, and a whole truckload of unwritten rules and norms in the world of politics that keeps democracy healthy, such as being truthful (or just avoiding lying) and not making unqualified claims against your ideological opponents or claiming that democracy doesn’t work (ie, “the election is rigged”).
“When American democracy has worked, it has relied upon two norms that we often take for granted — mutual tolerance and institutional forbearance. Treating rivals as legitimate contenders for power and underutilizing one’s institutional prerogatives in the spirit of fair play are not written into the American Constitution. Yet without them, our constitutional checks and balances will not operate as we expect them to.” (p212).
The authors identify “Four Key Indicators of Authoritarian Behavior” that present a risk for democracy: “We should worry when a politician 1) rejects, in words or action, the democratic rules of the game, 2) denies the legitimacy of opponents, 3) tolerates or encourages violence, or 4) indicates a willingness to curtail the civil liberties of opponents, including the media.” (p. 21).
In the summary, it is recommended that the Republican party regroup and figure out how to filter out the extremist candidates who have demonstrated that they do not support the democratic process and who fail to exhibit the qualities of forbearance and mutual toleration necessary for the long-term health of democracy in our country. The Republican party needs to broaden their base – one of the things that is missing from our contemporary political parties is tolerance within the parties for different opinions and perspectives on how things should be done. That diversity needs to be fostered for the health of our democracy.
The most important recommendation is for anti-Trump forces to unite in a coalition. Building a coalition is critical because it will teach the norms of forbearance and mutual toleration by bringing together people who may have diverse and opposing ideological views in support of specific values and goals that they all support.
No matter where you and the others stand on a controversial topic such as abortion or gun ownership, for example, you may agree on health care or minimum wage or requiring honesty from those in public office. Building coalitions can rebuild the faith in the system. “Such alliances help us build and sustain norms of mutual toleration. When we agree with our political rivals at least some of the time, we are less likely to view them as mortal enemies.” (p. 219)
Finally, the third major recommendation is to focus on creating social policies that are more universalistic rather than means-test based, to reduce inequality across the nation as a way of increasing overall support for the system.
The authors are adamant that we continue to support racial equality – we can’t balance tolerance between ideological entities on inequality.
The authors do a great job of keeping on point and repeatedly illustrating the traits of authoritarianism and the risks to democracy. There are so many tangents that we can get into that are barely hinted at in this book, such as historical imperialism of the US in supporting autocrats at the expense of democratically elected regimes.
Also missing is the broader social and cultural changes that have contributed to some of the ongoing degradation of forbearance and mutual toleration. There are plenty of other books out there about those specific topics related to class (thought they do talk about how the Civil Rights movement impacted our democratic norms) – and the rise of forms of mass media which make it possible not just to shape what and how people think, but their patterns of communication and interaction.
If you have a long “Want To Read” list – check out this short version here at The Guardian.
Levitsky & Ziblatt’s style is the very clear – he delineates his chief goals and repeats them frequently with many supporting historical examples. The first goal is to describe the key indicators of authoritarianism, and this is clearly illustrated throughout the book. The second goal is to describe two simple qualities that have made democracy more successful in the US. The book wraps up with some high-level recommendations for what has to be done to reduce the risk of further degradation of democracy to avoid increased risk of authoritarianism.
What has made democracy in the US unique is mutual tolerance and forbearance, and a whole truckload of unwritten rules and norms in the world of politics that keeps democracy healthy, such as being truthful (or just avoiding lying) and not making unqualified claims against your ideological opponents or claiming that democracy doesn’t work (ie, “the election is rigged”).
“When American democracy has worked, it has relied upon two norms that we often take for granted — mutual tolerance and institutional forbearance. Treating rivals as legitimate contenders for power and underutilizing one’s institutional prerogatives in the spirit of fair play are not written into the American Constitution. Yet without them, our constitutional checks and balances will not operate as we expect them to.” (p212).
The authors identify “Four Key Indicators of Authoritarian Behavior” that present a risk for democracy: “We should worry when a politician 1) rejects, in words or action, the democratic rules of the game, 2) denies the legitimacy of opponents, 3) tolerates or encourages violence, or 4) indicates a willingness to curtail the civil liberties of opponents, including the media.” (p. 21).
In the summary, it is recommended that the Republican party regroup and figure out how to filter out the extremist candidates who have demonstrated that they do not support the democratic process and who fail to exhibit the qualities of forbearance and mutual toleration necessary for the long-term health of democracy in our country. The Republican party needs to broaden their base – one of the things that is missing from our contemporary political parties is tolerance within the parties for different opinions and perspectives on how things should be done. That diversity needs to be fostered for the health of our democracy.
The most important recommendation is for anti-Trump forces to unite in a coalition. Building a coalition is critical because it will teach the norms of forbearance and mutual toleration by bringing together people who may have diverse and opposing ideological views in support of specific values and goals that they all support.
No matter where you and the others stand on a controversial topic such as abortion or gun ownership, for example, you may agree on health care or minimum wage or requiring honesty from those in public office. Building coalitions can rebuild the faith in the system. “Such alliances help us build and sustain norms of mutual toleration. When we agree with our political rivals at least some of the time, we are less likely to view them as mortal enemies.” (p. 219)
Finally, the third major recommendation is to focus on creating social policies that are more universalistic rather than means-test based, to reduce inequality across the nation as a way of increasing overall support for the system.
The authors are adamant that we continue to support racial equality – we can’t balance tolerance between ideological entities on inequality.
The authors do a great job of keeping on point and repeatedly illustrating the traits of authoritarianism and the risks to democracy. There are so many tangents that we can get into that are barely hinted at in this book, such as historical imperialism of the US in supporting autocrats at the expense of democratically elected regimes.
Also missing is the broader social and cultural changes that have contributed to some of the ongoing degradation of forbearance and mutual toleration. There are plenty of other books out there about those specific topics related to class (thought they do talk about how the Civil Rights movement impacted our democratic norms) – and the rise of forms of mass media which make it possible not just to shape what and how people think, but their patterns of communication and interaction.
If you have a long “Want To Read” list – check out this short version here at The Guardian.