Democracy Paradox Podcast
About the Episode:

In this episode, Javier Pérez Sandoval discusses his Journal of Democracy essay, coauthored with Andrés Mejía Acosta, on why populist leaders often “hollow out” the state. Moving beyond familiar debates about executive aggrandizement and democratic backsliding, Pérez Sandoval argues that democracy depends on the state’s capacity to deliver essential public goods – from health and education to security, justice, and credible elections. Drawing on examples from Mexico and Argentina, he explains how both left- and right-wing populists may weaken institutions through austerity, politicization, and institutional restructuring, often prioritizing short-term political gains over long-term democratic resilience. The conversation explores how state erosion can constrain future democratic choices, undermine public trust, and create a vicious cycle that leaves democracy structurally weakened from within.

Full Transcript

Show Notes:

In this episode of The Democracy Paradox, Javier Pérez Sandoval discusses his recent Journal of Democracy essay, coauthored with Andrés Mejía Acosta, titled “Why Populists Hollow Out Their States.” The conversation explores a growing debate within democracy scholarship: the relationship between democracy and state capacity. While strong states have historically been viewed with suspicion, Pérez Sandoval argues that effective democratic governance depends on the state’s infrastructural ability to deliver public goods and services. The episode situates this argument within broader concerns about democratic backsliding, executive aggrandizement, and institutional erosion.

Drawing primarily from Mexico, Pérez Sandoval provides concrete examples of how populist leaders can erode state capacity. He describes changes to Mexico’s health system under former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador that, under the banner of combating corruption and promoting austerity, weakened regulatory frameworks and contributed to reduced service provision. He also points to ongoing reforms affecting Mexico’s electoral management body and judicial appointments, raising concerns about how cost-cutting measures and politicization may undermine the state’s ability to guarantee free and fair elections and impartial justice.

The discussion emphasizes that hollowing out the state is not confined to one ideology. Pérez Sandoval contrasts López Obrador with Argentina’s Javier Milei, noting that both left- and right-wing populists may pursue austerity or institutional restructuring for different political reasons. In some cases, resources are redirected toward electorally visible priorities, while less visible but fundamental functions – such as security, criminal justice, and bureaucratic professionalism – are weakened. Pérez Sandoval highlights an asymmetry: building capable, trusted institutions takes decades, but eroding them can happen quickly, with long-term consequences for democratic governance.

Ultimately, the episode probes the difficult trade-offs between short-term political gains and long-term democratic health. Pérez Sandoval argues that reducing state capacity today may constrain future democratic choices, not only by diminishing expertise and institutional know-how but also by eroding public trust. He outlines a broader research agenda that asks how sustainable these cycles of erosion are, what conditions enable them, and how polarization, negative partisanship, and economic pressures make short-term decision-making more attractive. The conversation challenges listeners to reconsider the structural foundations of democracy and the often-overlooked role of the state in sustaining it.

 

Links:
Listen: