Erica Frantz Says Personalist Parties are Democracy’s Latest Threat

In this episode, Justin Kempf speaks with Erica Frantz about her book The Origins of Elected Strongmen and the rise of personalist leaders in democracies. Frantz explains how leader-dominated political parties – more than populist rhetoric alone – can erode democratic institutions from within, drawing on cases from El Salvador to France. The conversation explores why voters support such leaders and what this trend means for the future of democracy worldwide.

 

Full Transcript

 

In this episode of Democracy Paradox, host Justin Kempf speaks with Erica Frantz, associate professor of political science at Michigan State University and coauthor of The Origins of Elected Strongmen. Frantz explains her concept of “personalism” – a form of leadership in which a political party becomes a vehicle fully controlled by a single leader – and argues that it provides clearer insight into democratic erosion than the more commonly used term populism. Drawing from years of research on authoritarian regimes, Frantz and her coauthors extend their analysis to democracies, suggesting that strongman leaders across regime types share institutional similarities that are often overlooked.

Frantz illustrates personalism through cases such as Nayib Bukele in El Salvador, Vladimir Putin in Russia, and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Turkey. Unlike populism, which can be ideologically ambiguous, personalism is observable in how leaders dominate party structures, control nominations, and sideline internal constraints. In democracies, this concentration of power typically unfolds gradually: leaders weaken executive checks, reshape courts, and tilt electoral rules in their favor, often without a single dramatic rupture. Frantz argues that this slow, incremental accumulation of power represents the contemporary model of democratic collapse.

A central puzzle the episode explores is why voters continue to support personalist leaders even as democratic norms erode. Frantz points to partisan dealignment, frustration with traditional parties, and the changing media environment – especially social media – which allows leaders to bypass party infrastructure and cultivate direct personal brands. Because voters rely heavily on elite cues to interpret democratic health, unified party support for a leader can normalize actions that undermine institutions. In highly polarized contexts, this dynamic makes it difficult for citizens to recognize democratic backsliding in real time.

The conversation concludes with reflections on resistance and renewal. While some countries – including Brazil and Poland – have voted personalist leaders out of office, Frantz warns that windows for democratic correction narrow as incumbents consolidate power. Strong, programmatic parties remain a critical guardrail against executive overreach, whereas hollowed-out, leader-centric parties create fertile ground for elected strongmen. Ultimately, Frantz suggests that understanding the institutional roots of personalism offers an essential early warning system for democracies seeking to defend themselves from erosion within.