The way democracy dies



Four years ago, in 2016, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Giblatt's book How Democracy Dies was published . Donald Trump has just been elected President of the United States. These two Harvard political scientists were so concerned about his victory that they were forced to write a three-hundred-page book. Just to point out that not only Latin America or the military-ruled countries of Africa, but also long-established democracies like the United States, democracy can die. Maybe that's why the country is moving in the same direction little by little every day.


Now, four years later, it is safe to say that democracy in the United States is still alive, though not dead. Donald Trump is not in power, but the politics of hatred and division that brought him to power have become stronger. This division has brought the country to the brink of a new civil war. But it is not the fault of Donald Trump, but of the Republican Party and its leadership, who have been supporting this politician for their own personal gain. As a result, although it is possible to sort out their sugarcane, there are doubts as to whether the death of democracy can be prevented.


How Democracy Dies by Harvard University political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Giblatt. The book was published in 2016 Photo: Collected


Levitsky and Giblat, two political scientists, recall that there was a time when the death of democracy meant a military coup or coup. In the same way that in Chile, Pakistan or Bangladesh, the members of the army have come to power by overthrowing the constitutionally elected government with domestic and foreign support. The play is still being remade in the African countries of Sudan, Burkina Faso or Mali. Tanks can be seen on the streets, army blockades on the Presidential Palace, the extinction of the regime.

But even without tanks on the streets, democracy dies when civil rights are violated, freedom of speech is usurped, and the rule of law is rejected. In this national state, everything is 'legal' on paper. For example, a timely election drama, although in preparation for the drama, strict restrictions are imposed on the opposition. Think of today's Russia or Nicaragua. According to the talks, President Putin first tried to poison his main rival Alexei Navalny! Failing that, he was imprisoned on corruption charges. Now a new charge has been leveled against him, which, if proven, would put Navalny in jail for the next 20 years. Nicaragua President Daniel Ortega is not one before the election, All his rivals put the presidential candidate in jail. He was re-elected for the fourth time last November, making his wife vice president.

All this is being done in the name of national security, whether undemocratic or restrictive. The judiciary is being manipulated with the same logic. In Poland, for example, a law has been enacted under which the government can remove any judge it wishes, and appoint him to any court of its choice. In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban has gone one step further, ignoring the constitution in the name of coronavirus control and gaining the right to run the country by personal decree. Journalists have dubbed the system 'Corona Cue'. Needless to say, on paper these countries are all democracies.


Levitsky and Giblatt are not the first to warn us of the dangers of democracy. Nearly two decades before the publication of How Democracy Die , Farid Zakaria, an Indian-American writer and journalist in Foreign Affairs magazine in 1996, warned in an article entitled "Illiberal Democracy" that establishing a government through elections does not mean democracy. Where there is no place for civil rights, the electoral system is flawed, opportunities for citizen participation in the decision-making process are limited, the right to free thought and expression is curtailed, the result of political opposition is state restraint, Zakaria called such a system illiberal.

In his 1996 article, Zakaria spoke of Bosnia, Argentina, Kazakhstan, and even Bangladesh, but did not think of the United States. Almost 20 years later, after Donald Trump was elected President of the United States in 2016, he corrected his mistake, saying that conservative democracy has now come to the United States as well.

Freedom House, a US-based think tank, thinks that democracies like Hungary and Poland are in fact a kind of 'hybrid or mixed system of governance', somewhat democratic-somewhat authoritarian. This mixed regime does not take place overnight, it requires time. Further support is needed from the institutional political administration and the support of a section of the civic group. In other words, the death of a full-fledged democratic system is not the result of secretly lowering tanks in the dark of night, but of systematic civic support.

Let us consider two examples of how this death occurred.


White supremacism of the United States and Trump

As we know, Donald Trump did not accept the results of the last election, but he thought of all possible undemocratic ways to change the results, even the use of military force. But he did not succeed. Despite his loyalty, Vice President Mike Pence listened to him and went out of his way to reject the election results. The Supreme Court, whose majority members are ideologically loyal to him, also did not listen to Trump's allegations that the election results were rigged. For this reason, many have said that the democratic system of the United States is strong, it may scratch, but it will not collapse.


Attack on Trump supporters on Capitol HillFile picture


Doubts have been raised about the accuracy of this statement. Republican leaders across the country are scrambling to get the next election results in their favor. Their goal is to curtail the voting rights of black citizens at the state level. As well as arranging the electoral boundaries in such a way that no opposition politician is elected. Another of their attempts is to recruit people in the electoral administration who are not only Republicans, but also full supporters of Donald Trump's 'false victory claim'. The Secretary of State is responsible for certifying election results at the state level. The midterm elections, to be held in November 2022, are likely to see the election of such a person as Secretary of State in about a dozen fiercely contested states known as the 'Battle Grounds'. Those who are openly trying to get elected with Trump's blessings. If they are given the responsibility, they will certify the election according to their political allegiance without caring about the result of the citizen's vote. This fear is not unfounded at all.

In a lengthy article in the Atlantic Monthly last December , U.S. journalist Burton Gelman wrote that the January 8 attack on Capitol Hill by Trump supporters was a coup attempt. There is no reason to think that even if they fail, they will fail again. Gelman claims that the next coupe has already begun. This seizure of power will be accomplished through conspiracy, not through violence. Millions of ballots will be canceled to get the election results of one's choice. The defeated candidate will be declared the winner instead of the winner. "The 2020 election was an exercise in killing democracy. That plan will be implemented in 2024."


India and Modi's separation of religions

Caste-based hatred is at the heart of the divisive politics of Donald Trump and the Republican Party in the United States. Due to the large number of foreigners and blacks, the majority of the country thinks that whites are under threat from their God-given political rights and position. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party have raised the same voice. In their eyes, only the Muslims of that country are foreigners, their allegiance to India is questionable. Therefore, they are all a threat to the national interest.


Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Congress leader Rahul GandhiReuters file photo


Opposition Congress leader Rahul Gandhi recently remarked that Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party had used religious divisions as a weapon to create a violent situation across the country. He blamed the BJP-affiliated religious volunteer group RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha for the situation. At a public meeting in Tamil Nadu, Rahul Gandhi said, "Sadly, democracy is dead in today's India."

Let us take two examples of how this religious division in India is hastening the death of democracy. Recently, at a public meeting in Haridwar, Puja Mande, a senior leader of the Hindu Mahasabha, called for the killing of Muslims in the country. "If 100 of us Hindus are ready to kill 2 million Muslims, we will win," he said. Modi did not even utter a word after hearing that. At about the same time, at a meeting of BJP supporters in a village in Chhattisgarh, they all took an oath that they would not deal with Muslims, would not shop in their shops, would not trade land with any Muslim.

How did Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru have such a situation in India? Indian intellectual Indira Jayasinghe has blamed Prime Minister Modi for this in a New York newspaper, saying that the situation will change on the day Modi, like Trump, is defeated. However, at present there is no such possibility. Religious hatred has entered everyone's mind in such a way that hatred and vengeance towards Muslims has arisen in the minds of many in the country.


The way then?

According to Levitsky and Giblatt, the two prerequisites for the success of a democratic system are tolerance and avoidance of excesses. Inherently the two conditions are identical. Recognizing the rights of the opposition is not enough to sustain democracy, it is also important to refrain from using the political power of the majority to impose one's own decisions on others. These two conditions are ignored when political polarization and division take final shape.

Both Trump and Modi have used division and hatred as political tools. Democracy will die as a result, knowing that. As a result, the idea that they will avoid that path is absurd. But both countries have vibrant democratic forces that can ensure the defeat of authoritarian politics and leadership by achieving greater solidarity among themselves. The above two professors have given examples of the success of the anti-fascist alliance in Belgium in the thirties of the last century. Or we can take inspiration from today's transformation of Chile. '

Democracy may die as a result of the failure of politicians. But if he is to be saved, not to sit in the gallery and watch the game, the people of the country must roll up their sleeves and go to the field. Look at Chile, a 35-year-old former student leader has taken on the responsibility of carrying the flag of change there as the people of the country take to the field.

Post a Comment

0 Comments