The democracy paradox: why do citizens accept democratic erosion?

Over the past decade, political scientists have observed democratic backsliding in countries once considered stable democracies, including Hungary, Poland and the United States. Yet despite these developments, public support for democracy remains consistently high. How can both be true at the same time?

"If everyone says they support democracy, why is democracy still eroding?" This paradoxical question lies at the heart of political scientist Marta Vukovic's research. Our video team met with her at the Department of Government at the University of Vienna, where she completed her PhD in May 2026 and now works as a Senior Scientist. Her research combines comparative surveys and survey experiments to examine when citizens turn away from liberal democracy, and when and why they mobilise to defend it.

Solving the democracy paradox

Why do citizens who claim to support democracy elect leaders who undermine it? For a long time, political scientists largely took citizens' support for democracy for granted. "We assumed that when people said they supported democracy, they shared a common understanding of what democracy meant and that this support was unconditional," Vukovic explains, "but we now know that neither assumption holds." 

In her dissertation, which argued that citizens are conditional guardians of democracy, Vukovic shows that citizens often have very different understandings of democracy, and that their willingness to defend democracy also depends on what democracy is being weighed against – for example, security or fighting corruption – as well as how these trade-offs are justified.

An important factor is how political leaders, the elites, justify their democratic violations. "One of the biggest 'Aha!' moments," recalls Vukovic, "has been realising just how important populism is for understanding democratic backsliding, how surprising it is that a populist understanding of democracy is widespread and often coexists with support for liberal democratic principles." 

Her research showed that when politicians claim to act in the name of "the people" against "corrupt elites", they are judged much less harshly. "Citizens may even reward populist democratic violations over liberal democratic positions," she says. "Populism can legitimise democratic erosion while still appealing to citizens who see themselves as supporters of democracy."

Altogether, concludes Vukovic, these factors help explain why democratic backsliding can occur even in societies where most citizens consider themselves pro-democratic.

When will citizens draw the line?

Building on her previous findings, Vukovic's current work investigates the conditions under which citizens mobilise to defend democracy. "I study the 'tipping points' at which citizens decide to stand up to leaders who erode democracy, and how they can be mobilised to do so," she explains. "If we want to build more resilient democracies, we first need to understand where their vulnerabilities lie. My research will seek to identify these fault lines by examining when citizens tolerate democratic violations and when they reject them."

She points to an important lesson highlighted by political scientist Milan Svolik. While studying Istanbul elections, he found that it was not the most strongly anti-autocratic citizens who were decisive in ousting the autocratic party from government. Instead, as his paper puts it, "the fate of Turkish democracy rests with a less celebrated citizen who, rather than principled and passionate about politics, is pragmatic and persuadable." "If we want democracies to endure," explains Vukovic, "we need to understand not only those who are already firmly committed to liberal democracy, but also how to persuade citizens with different democratic commitments to oppose democratic backsliding when it occurs."

Citizens matter

Unlike the military coups of the past, democratic erosion today is often driven by elected leaders gradually weakening democratic institutions from within. As these changes happen incrementally, they are much harder to recognise. 

This makes the role of citizens all the more important. "Democracy ultimately depends on citizens," says Vukovic. "If citizens cannot recognise democratic violations, or if they are willing to overlook them under certain conditions, democracy becomes much more vulnerable to elite-led erosion." For that reason, she believes that protecting democracy requires more than broad public support. "Citizens need to be much more vigilant and informed in order to preserve the liberal democratic order," she concludes.

Vukovic, a senior scientist who is now part of the new "Democracy and Human Rights Research Network", will continue this line of research at the University of Vienna's Department of Government – one of Europe's leading political science departments.