Conceptual Space for Illiberal Democracy

Abstract

For over a decade, populists have been experimenting with a new political regime - illiberal democracy. Vocal proponents, such as Hungary's PM Viktor Orbán, develop "democratic illiberalism" as an ideational model for the illiberal‐democratic regime they are building. Exploiting the normative appeal of popular sovereignty as the master legitimating frame for political authority in our age, illiberals in power try to subvert liberal democracies from within. Using their democratic mandate, they erode liberal norms and coopt liberal institutions to serve illiberal purposes. The dangers of illiberal democracy prompted many democracy scholars to deny democratic character to illiberal regimes. The concept "illiberal democracy," they argue, is not useful analytically and is incoherent. Following a critical analysis of the debates surrounding the concept of illiberal democracy, I advance three arguments in support of the conceptual viability of this regime type. The first is a conceptual argument: While there are normatively attractive conceptions of democracy, on which democracy cannot be illiberal, the democratic model currently practiced in "real existing democracies" leaves conceptual space for illiberal forms of democratic regimes. Substantiating my position against scoring definitional victories on illiberal democracy, I advance a second, political argument: Liberals risk losing the long‐term political battle for liberal democracy, as they may be portrayed as anti‐pluralist anti‐democrats, intent on excluding from the democratic arena their illiberal opponents. My third and final point is a normative argument: The central debate concerning illiberal democracy should focus on the normative appeal of its foundational ideas - the core ideational features of the competing political regimes. Political theorists can greatly contribute here by providing a clear understanding of the main ideological competitors - what they are and what makes them attractive to many - and such is precluded by purely conceptual arguments against illiberal democracy.