Politics & Government
Democratic Backsliding Through Executive Aggrandizement
Quick fact
The term 'executive aggrandizement' was coined by political scientists Nancy Bermeo and describes how democratically-elected leaders can erode democracy through legal and administrative means, without ever staging a coup.
Why this is interesting
You know that moment when a leader you voted for starts to feel less like a representative and more like a monarch? In many countries, this shift happens so quietly that people don't notice until the checks that keep leaders accountable have already been dismantled.
Read the full explanation
Understanding Democratic Backsliding Through Executive Aggrandizement
Think of democracy as a game of tug-of-war between three teams: the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. Each team has its own strength and must pull together to keep the game balanced. Democratic backsliding through executive aggrandizement is when one team—the executive (the president or prime minister)—starts pulling so hard that the other teams lose their footing. Instead of playing by the rules, the executive slowly changes the rules: it passes laws to limit what the parliament can do, appoints loyalists to the courts, and sidesteps the legislature by issuing more decrees. Because these steps often use existing procedures, like amendments or new legislation, they look legal and even routine. Over time, the other teams become increasingly powerless, and the leader accumulates more and more power.
A deeper explanation
This backsliding is possible because democracies rely on institutions, not just elections. Elections alone don't guarantee a healthy democracy; they also need those institutions to constrain the winner's power. Executive aggrandizement exploits this by using the democratic process itself to weaken those constraints. A leader may start by attacking a specific court decision or criticizing the press, but soon they begin restructuring the constitutional court, censoring the media, and making the civil service political. The key mechanism is a gradual shift from inclusive to exclusive rule: each step reduces the ability of opposition or other branches to hold the executive accountable. Over time, the differences between a democracy and an authoritarian regime fade as the leader's legal reach expands. This matters because it shows that democratic decline is not only about revolutions or military coups—it can be a slow, under-the-radar process that citizens may not recognize until it is too late.