“I would not call the United States a fully democratic regime today.”
Harvard professor Steve Levitsky did not mince words in his opening remarks on the new web-based series, The Breakdown, presented by the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation.
The series will probe the state of American democracy in real time.
Hosted by Erica Chenoweth, Frank Stanton Professor of the First Amendment at Harvard Kennedy School and Levitsky, the David Rockefeller Professor of Latin American studies and Professor of Government at Harvard University, each monthly episode will reflect on what is happening to democratic institutions both at home and abroad, break down key events, and offer “evidence-based reflections” on how move forward.
In the inaugural episode, Chenoweth and Levitsky analyzed where democracy stands in the United States today and reflected on the recent nationwide No Kings protest.
“We have very clearly descended into at least a mild form of what I would call ‘competitive authoritarianism,’” said Levitsky, whose research focuses on democratization and authoritarianism, political parties, and weak and informal institutions. Levitsky has described “competitive authoritarianism” as a hybrid form of government, in which leaders gain power through democratic institutions and then violate some of the criteria necessary for democratic regimes.
Levitsky pointed to several factors, what he called “weaponizing the state”: Over the last six months, the Trump administration has threatened the media, sued universities, purged NGOs, and demonized donors of the Democratic Party and even major foundations. He compared this aggression to that of former president of Venezuela Hugo Chavez, Viktor Orbán of Hungary, and Recep Erdoğan of Turkey.
This administration, he said, “is not hiding its authoritarianism. It is really quite open about it.” That kind of open display of authoritarianism and violent rhetoric is something you almost never see in other elected authoritarian regimes, he said.
Most concerning, he argued, was the recent rhetoric coming from the White House linking the broad opposition to this administration to terrorism. “Delegitimizing the entire opposition, linking George Soros to violence, linking mainstream Democrats and other critics of the administration to violence,” he said, “is a classic authoritarian move.”
“People were reclaiming core values and principles, those expressed in the Constitution, in the Declaration of Independence.”
“How can long-standing institutions that are so deeply entrenched and embedded be so vulnerable to basically a single person and his entourage?” asked Chenoweth.
Levitsky noted that institutions are just pieces of paper; they don’t work automatically. “If individuals don’t act to defend or deploy institutions, they won’t work,” he said.
And yet, Americans publicly voiced their opposition to this administration, said Chenoweth, noting that the webinar took place just a day after “a historic mass mobilization” in the United States, a nationwide No Kings protest.
“My team at the Crowd Counting Consortium at the Nonviolent Action Lab reported on the October 18 mobilization; it was plainly a massive turnout,” Chenoweth said.
Chenoweth noted the day was overwhelmingly peaceful, with organized protests at 2600 locations across the United States. “This was important to delegitimize a movement by the Trump administration to brand people as criminals, terrorists, and un-American who engage in their First Amendment-protected right to a peaceable assembly.”
Also important, said Chenoweth, was the use of “tactical frivolity,” infusing demonstrations with a festive spirit. “‘Glee and grievance’ is what my colleagues John Gledhill at Oxford, Chris Shay, and Allard Duursma called it in a study that was published in the Journal of Global Security Studies,” Chenoweth noted.
The study looked at nonviolent campaigns in the 20th century and whether or not they involved festive events or frivolity despite deeply autocratic conditions.
“What they found was if movements looked more like a party than a scary protest, people tend to participate, even when there are real risks from counter-protests or paramilitary forces,” said Chenoweth.
“Delegitimizing the entire opposition ... linking mainstream Democrats and other critics of the administration to violence is a classic authoritarian move.”
“The inflatable animals and costumes were a signal that the movement is more positive and fun than the movement against it,” Chenoweth explained.
The messages, chants, and signs were also important factors for a peaceful protest. “People were reclaiming core values and principles, those expressed in the Constitution, in the Declaration of Independence,” said Chenoweth. “They were doing it to clearly oppose the administration’s approach to immigration, the deployment of ICE, but it also felt like they were directly challenging the constitutionality and legality of this administration’s action.”
Chenoweth emphasized the growth of a movement that has consistently swelled since Trump was inaugurated. But it also presented a conundrum: The fact that the No Kings protest was so large and peaceful indicates free speech is alive and well in the United States. How, Chenoweth asked Levitsky, does that square with the fear of autocracy?
“The fact that we are not an outright dictatorship does not mean that we are a full democracy,” answered Levitsky. “Many Americans are thinking twice about exercising their legal rights. Ask Democratic Party donors, or major law firms in D.C., or Jim Comey or Letitia James [both recently indicted by the Trump administration],” he said. And, he said, they are fearful of violence against their opposition.
“The pardon of the January 6th insurrectionists was not only a travesty of justice, but it was also a clear message that those who engage in violence on Trump’s behalf are going to be tolerated,” Levitsky said.
During their wide-ranging conversation, Chenoweth and Levitsky also addressed questions about the lack of outrage from corporations, the concept of forbearance versus accountability, and how to move forward. “It is much harder to rebuild institutions and the rule of law, than it is to break it,” said Levitsky.
To find out more about the web series, sign up for the Ash Center newsletter or at the Nonviolent Action Lab website.
—
Photography by Neil Constantine/NurPhoto via Getty Images.