AUTHORITARIAN CHALLENGE TO DEMOCRACIES: MECHANISMS OF UNDERMINING DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS


DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2415-881x.2025.99.223-239

Ganna Malkina, Volodymyr Fedorchenko

Abstract


The article analyzes the authoritarian challenge to contemporary democracies through the lens of the resilience of democratic institutions. Drawing on classical and recent approaches to democracy, authoritarianism, and hybrid regimes, it refines the conceptual toolkit and justifies the use of the categories of democratic erosion and democratic backsliding. The article demonstrates that the authoritarian challenge has both external and internal dimensions: from deliberate interference by authoritarian states in electoral processes, the information sphere, and economic security to anti-democratic practices of electorally legitimized elites who dismantle checks and balances, undermine the rule of law, and shrink the space for civil liberties. Special attention is paid to the conditions under which democratic equilibrium can be maintained in times of crisis. The multidimensional nature of democracy’s resilience is revealed, combining institutional, structural, and agency-related dimensions and depending on the balance among the subregimes of electoral competition, citizen participation, the rule of law, and effective accountability of those in power. The article proposes an analytical framework that makes it possible to trace how the interplay between external authoritarian influences and internal anti-democratic tendencies leads to the gradual transformation of consolidated democracies into defective or hybrid regimes without the formal dismantling of democratic institutions. It concludes that the key to strengthening the resilience of democracies lies not only in improving institutional design but also in enhancing the capacity of civil society and international organizations to act as effective safeguards against authoritarian usurpation of power.

Keywords


democracy; authoritarianism; hybrid regimes; competitive authoritarianism; democratic erosion; democratic backsliding; resilience of democracy; external authoritarian influence; internal authoritarian tendencies

References


Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. Yale University Press. Retrieved from: https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300015652/polyarchy/

Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Harper & Brothers. Retrieved from: https://openlibrary.org/works/OL45807W/Capitalism_socialism_and_democracy

Schmitter, P. C., & Karl, T. L. (1991). What democracy is… and is not. Journal of Democracy, 2(3), 75-88. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1991.0033

Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from: https://archive.org/details/competitiveautho0000levi

Bermeo, N. (2016). On democratic backsliding. Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 5–19. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0012

International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. (2017). The global state of democracy: Exploring democracy’s resilience. International IDEA. Retrieved from: https://www.idea.int/publications/catalogue/global-state-democracy-exploring-democracys-resilience

Linz, J. J., & Stepan, A. (1996). Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from: https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/problems-democratic-transition-and-consolidation

Varieties of Democracy Institute. (2019). Democracy facing global challenges: Democracy report 2019. V-Dem Institute. Retrieved from: https://www.v-dem.net/documents/16/dr_2019_CoXPbb1.pdf

Merkel, W. (2004). Embedded and defective democracies. Democratization, 11(5), 33-58. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340412331304598

Sisk, T. D. (2017). Elections, electoral systems and party systems: A resource guide. International IDEA. Retrieved from: https://www.idea.int/gsod-2017/files/IDEA-GSOD-2017-RESOURCE-GUIDE-ELECTIONS.pdf

Bühlmann, M., Merkel, W., & Wessels, B. (2008). The quality of democracy: Democracy Barometer for established democracies. Hertie School Working Papers, No. 22. Berlin: Hertie School of Governance. Retrieved from: https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-hsog/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/80/file/520_hsog_wp_no._22.pdf

Humprecht, E., Esser, F., & Van Aelst, P. (2020). Resilience to online disinformation: A framework for cross-national comparative research. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), 215-229. Retrieved from: https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/107850/1/dit_com_2020_03_24_why_resilience_to_online_disinformation_varies.pdf

Dobrowolska J. (2022). A new look at Chinese disinformation: Growing convergence with Russian narratives. Media and Social Communication, 72-81. Retrieved from https://journals.ptks.pl/compress/article/view/531

Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How democracies die. New York: Crown Publishers. Retrieved from: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/562246/how-democracies-die-by-steven-levitsky-and-daniel-ziblatt/

Mounk, Y. (2018). The people vs. democracy: Why our freedom is in danger and how to save it. Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press. Retrieved from: https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674237681


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The editorial board does not always share the position of the authors. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the material presented.
All rights reserved.
© Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2026