Democracy Paradox Podcast
About the Episode:

Political scientist Milan Svolik joins the Democracy Paradox to explain why voters who say they support democracy sometimes choose candidates who undermine it. Through experimental research, he shows how partisanship and polarization lead citizens to trade off democratic principles for policy preferences and partisan loyalty.

Full Transcript 

Show Notes:

In this episode of the Democracy Paradox, host Justin Kempf speaks with political scientist Milan Svolik, the Elizabeth S. & A. Varick Stout Professor of Political Science at Yale University and author of The Politics of Authoritarian Rule. Their conversation explores one of the central puzzles in contemporary democracy: why citizens who say they strongly support democracy sometimes vote for politicians who undermine it. Drawing on Svolik’s experimental research, the discussion examines how traditional survey questions often overestimate democratic commitment and why understanding voters’ real trade-offs offers a more accurate picture.

Rather than simply asking respondents how much they value democracy, Svolik’s research presents voters with realistic scenarios that force a choice between a preferred candidate who behaves undemocratically and an opposing candidate who respects democratic norms. These experiments reveal that most people do care about democracy, but they are often willing to trade it off for other priorities such as partisan loyalty, policy preferences, or perceptions of competence. Importantly, many voters recognize when a candidate’s actions are undemocratic, yet still support them when the political stakes feel high.

The conversation also explores how polarization amplifies these dilemmas. When political parties and their supporters are far apart ideologically, voters may feel that supporting the opposing party is too costly, even if their own preferred candidate undermines democratic norms. In such environments, democracy becomes vulnerable because large segments of the electorate are willing to tolerate illiberal behavior rather than cross partisan lines. Svolik explains why moderates and voters near the political center often play a crucial role in protecting democratic institutions.

Finally, Kempf and Svolik reflect on what these findings reveal about democratic backsliding today. Unlike the dramatic coups of the past, contemporary democratic erosion often occurs gradually through elected leaders who tilt the political playing field while maintaining democratic institutions in form. In this context, Svolik emphasizes the central role of voters: politicians may test democratic limits, but it is ultimately citizens who determine whether those actions are tolerated or rejected at the ballot box.

Links:

 

Listen: