America Political 010W Writing

Name: Sihua Lin

TA’s name: Zachary Larsen

Class: POSC 010W 001

Date: 2/18/2022

Subverting Democracy

I try to write this paper in a different style. After reading the comments TA gave

me, I found that I didn't know the detail enough about my choice of quotations in the first

paper. That's also why I can't focus on one specific thing and do a deep analysis. In order

not to repeat the mistakes of the first time, I need to redefine my thesis statement. And I

will also consolidate my findings and analysis with more paragraphs. To this end, I re-

read Federalist Paper no. 10, The Constitution, How Democratic is the American

Constitution?, How Democracies Die, and found more suitable evidence and arguments

to support my new thesis statement. I'm actually making a relatively vague thesis

statement first and then gradually clarifying it as I read all the material. When I feel that I

have read enough material to support my point of view, I begin to structure my analysis

and explore paragraphs. Therefore, the final presented paper may be very different from

the first one. I felt that my first paper was written in a hurry and neglected a lot of details

and discussions, I had to spend more time considering the structure and content of the

paper.

Blatant dictatorship in the form of military rule or communism has phased out of

the world. Use of military and other violent means to seize power has become rare as

time goes by. However, despite the fact that many nations hold regular elections,

democracy is often subverted, but through different means. After the end of Cold War,

democracies have died not because of military rule, but have been made to die by the

elected government themselves. Elected leaders have from time-to-time subverted

democracy. Backsliding of democracy in the modern world starts at the ballot box and

the electoral road to democratic breakdown is deceptive. In a classic coup, as such as that

of Chile under Pinochet, democracy death is evident to all as the presidential palace is

burned, president imprisoned, killed or exiled and the constitution suspended. On the

other hand, the electoral road to subverting democracy none of these things take. As the

quote suggests, there are not tanks in the streets and constitution and other democratic

institutions remain operational and intact. It is the elected autocrats who keep a veneer of

democracy at the same time eviscerating its substance. The paper critically explains how

modern-day governments subvert democracy.

Efforts to subvert or kill democracy are “legal” in the manner that they are

approved by critical institutions such as the judiciary and the legislature. In most cases,

they are presented as efforts by the government to enhance democracy. Since there is not

suspension of the rule of law, no coup, it becomes hard for citizens to notice the slow

death of democracy by the government they elected. According to the HDD, “On the

electoral road, none of these things happen. There are no tanks in the streets.

Constitutions and other nominally democratic institutions remain in place. People still

vote. Elected autocrats maintain a veneer of democracy while eviscerating its

substance.” governments no longer use the military or violent means to kill democracy.

But instead look for avenues to silently subvert democracy without rising and alarm.

These governments also take the media hostage by controlling the freedom of the media

on what news to share with the citizens. Despite the fact America has strong democracy

foundations compared to other nations, some of the governments have practiced

democracy subversion. Extremist leaders emerge from time to time in all societies

including nations with health democracies. The United States has had its share of leaders

who tried to undermine democracy.

An imperative test for democracies is not whether leaders who subvert democracy

emerge, but whether political leaders and political parties work to prevent such leaders

from ascending to power in the first place. Extremists whose main agenda is to kill

democracy once they take power should be prevented from gaining power. However,

isolating them requires political courage. In addition, independent institutions allow

autocratic leaders to subvert democratic them rather than being constrained by the

institutions. In most cases, autocratic leaders often focus on changing the rules so that

they can suit their style of leadership. Leaders who try to subvert of kill democracy do so

for their personal gains and interest. Their primary motive is to stay in power for the

longest time possible and control all the affairs of the country. The Federalist No 10

warns about the power of factions and competing interests over the U.S. government. The

writing suggests that since people have own self-interests which do clash with those of

others, it is imperative for government to pass laws for the common good of all people

and not for a specific group. However, autocratic leaders kill democracy to pursue their

own interests without minding the common good for all citizens.

The Federalist No 10 states that “The instability, injustice, and confusion

introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which

popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and

fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious

declamations.” James Madison talks about defending the constitution. He is against

majority rule arguing that it is inherently chaotic in its form. Using majority to make a

challenging political decision may result in disaster when the voters are not necessarily

aware of the issue at hand. This can crash democracy into the wall and this has happened

in the past. A representative democracy undermines democracy as a whole since only few

people have the power vested in them to make critical decisions on behalf of others. As a

result, they may be inclined to decisions that favor their personal interests. To protect

democracy from crashing, Madison argued that the U.S needed a Democratic Republic

and not true Democracy so as to reduce the power of the majority. Madison had foreseen

that majority would have all the powers needed to make any changes to the rule of allow

and this would allow them to pursue their personal agendas without any objection.

Leaders who seek to kill democracy start by controlling or manipulating independent

institutions such as the judiciary in order to bend laws to suit their agenda. However,

Madison knew a Democratic Republic would prevent this from happening by taking

away the majority power. Breaking the government into three branches; judicial,

legislative and executive helps preserve democracy since each branch has some power

over the other which helps keep each from taking over the government.

However, autocratic leaders seek to weaken legislature and the judiciary from

exercising their powers. They start by controlling these institutions to so that they can

take over the government. However, these institutions alone are not enough to stop

autocrats from sabotaging democracy. The rule of law must be defended by organized

citizens and political parties. Most institutions that are responsible for upholding the rule

of law become political weapons under autocrats. The institutions are wielded forcefully

by leaders who control them against those who do not. Democracy does when leaders

weaponize the judiciary and control other impartial agencies, buy media and the private

sector. The paradox of subverting democracy is that assassins of democracy use the very

institution that protect democracy to subtly and legally kill democracy.

The prospects of democratic death are not remote. People with the intention to

subvert democracy work round the clock to manufacture the means. In the United States,

there have been attempts to overthrow the national elections, which technically does not

qualify as a coup. There is an attempt that the ballots cast by the voters may not decide in

2024 and many votes may be thrown away to yield the needed results. With support from

party’s national leaders, state Republicans have been linked to setting up apparatus for

election theft. Some of the state Republican operatives have reviewed the attempts by

Donald Trump to overturn 2020 election results and have identified areas of failure and

taken steps to combat those failures next time. By imposing a leader who has not been

legally elected by voters is the first step towards democracy subversion. Statutes to seize

partisan control of decisions regarding which ballots to count and the ones to discard

have been written. The U.S. may not survive efforts by multiple fronts aimed at allowing

the Republicans to overturn the results of the next presidential elections.

In the previous elections, Donald Trump tried everything possible to outright

overturn the election but he failed. The danger to democracy grows larger on daily basis

since the safeguards at the local, state and national level that prevented Donald Trump’s

plan to overturn 2020 elections are systematically dismantled to allow the plot to succeed

in the next presidential elections. The U.S came very close to have an illegitimate

president attaining power against the will of voters. Fortunately, the democratic

institutions did bend, but did not break in the end. In some cases, the firewalls to

democracy subversion were laws and institutions, and also individual people, which since

then majority have been removed. More than 66 percent of Republicans still belief that

the last presidential elections were rigged in the favor to Joe Biden. As a result, the

republicans are willing to put in place apparatus that will help their presidential candidate

cling to power. Republicans are settling on the minority rule are making notable steps to

towards achieving their agenda. Despite the Democrats holding the presidency and house

of Congress, the are unable to protect voting rights. The biggest challenge facing the U.S.

is whether it will have a functional democracy in the future or not following the attempts

by political leaders to put in place statutes that enable their presidential candidate to

ascend to power.

Most of the state laws are in the hands of Republicans and they are being

strengthened by changes to state electoral law that gives them more authority and power

to decertify election results they do not agree with. Republicans have passed provisions

that transform normal conduct into voter fraud, which will be used as the reason to

overturn free and fair elections. Potential threat to democracy as it relates to the U.S.

elections is likely to stem from the states. The U.S. law gives state governments power to

decide which electors to appoint. This can subvert democracy in a number of ways. For

instance, states decide to discount certain votes, thus swinging the overall result for the

Republicans. Also, states have the authority to determine how ballots are validated. Most

states have found ways to change their processes in ways that may grant more freedom to

state politicians to invalidate votes.

These are some of the ways in which governments or political leaders kill

democracy. They control or manipulate institutions and laws that seek to protect

democracy. The majority attempt to change laws in their favor so that they can push their

personal interests. The party with most legislators in the congress is more likely to

control all the decisions and laws made by the congress in order to create a vulnerable

system that advances their main agendas. Democracy dies when political parties start

looking for ways on how to control elections by manipulating electoral laws to given

them room to rig or to overturn election outcomes. When votes do not count but what

matters is the decisions by a few individuals in power, democracy has been subverted.

Autocratic leaders have a worldview that prioritizes control or coercion over freedom.

Impartial and independent institutions should stand firm to protect democracy at all cost.

In most cases were diplomacy is subverted, independent institutions are weaponized by

autocratic leaders to push their agenda. Citizens should be keen to notice when

democracy is subverted and to stand against any sort of impunity perpetuated to

undermine democracy.

works cited

Levitsky, S., Ziblatt, D., & Brand, C. How Democracies Die.

Madison, J. (1787). The federalist no. 10. November, 22(1787), 1787-88.