Crisis of democracy as separation of democracy and liberalism

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/2178-5694.2023.1.44959

Keywords:

Democratic Theory, Populism, Neoliberalism, Ideology, Crisis

Abstract

This article analyzes the crisis of contemporary democracy, focusing on the complex relationship between populism, technocracy and liberal democracy, showing that when one talks about a “crisis of democracy”, he is actually referring to the crisis of liberal democracy, or the separation between democracy and liberalism again, as it was before they merged at the end of the 19th century. It will be investigated how these phenomena interact and affect political institutions and the stability of political systems around the world. The study considers the hypothesis that the growth of populism and of technocracy poses a threat to liberal democracy, examining the degree of intensity of this tension. The methodology includes a narrative review of relevant theoretical works, the synthesis of their main points and the analysis of economic and political factors. The results indicate that the threat varies between central and peripheral countries, and in general it is still impossible to declare the end of democratic regimes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Rodrigo Escaño, Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UNIRIO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil

Master in Political Science from the Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UNIRIO), in Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; degree in Social Sciences from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), in Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.

 

References

Berman, Sheri. 2017. “The pipe dream of undemocratic liberalism”. Journal of Democracy 28 (3): 29-38. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0041.

Bobbio, Norberto. 1986. O futuro da democracia: uma defesa das regras do jogo. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e terra.

Cassimiro, Paulo Henrique Paschoeto. 2021. “Os usos do conceito de populismo no debate contemporâneo e suas implicações sobre a interpretação da democracia.” Revista Brasileira de Ciência Política (35): e242084. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-3352.2021.35.242084.

Côrtes, Pâmela de Rezende, e André Matos de Almeida Oliveira. 2021. “Os partidos políticos em formação no Brasil pós-2013 e a retórica anti-establishment político.” Opinião Pública 27: 127-53, https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-01912021271127.

Dahl, Robert. 1997. Poliarquia: Participação e Oposição. São Paulo: Editora Universidade de São Paulo.

Levitsky, Steven, e Lucan A. Way. 2002. “Elections without democracy: The rise of competitive authoritarianism.” Journal of democracy 13 (2): 51-65. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2002.0026.

Levitsky, Steven, e Ziblatt, Daniel. 2018. Como as democracias morrem. Editora Schwarcz-Companhia das Letras.

Macpherson, Crawford Brough. 1977. A democracia liberal: origens e evolução. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar editors.

Manin, Bernard, Adam Przeworski, e Susan C. Stokes. 2006. “Eleições e representação.” Lua Nova: Revista de Cultura e política 67: 105-38. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-64452006000200005.

Mounk, Yascha. 2019.O povo contra a democracia: por que nossa liberdade corre perigo e como salvá-la. Editora Companhia das Letras.

Przeworski, Adam. 2019. Crises of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108671019.

Przeworski, Adam. 2010. Democracy and the limits of self-government. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511778490.

Przeworski, Adam. 1999. Minimalist conception of democracy: a defense. In: Democracy's value. Cambridge University Press.

Published

2023-12-15

How to Cite

Escaño, R. (2023). Crisis of democracy as separation of democracy and liberalism. Conversas & Controvérsias, 10(1), e44959. https://doi.org/10.15448/2178-5694.2023.1.44959

Issue

Section

Dossier: Political Representation and Ideology