How Democracies Die¶
Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How Democracies Die. Crown.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Checks and Balances
- Checks and balances presume that institutional actors, while pursuing their own interests, share fundamental commitment to the system itself, what Levitsky and Ziblatt (2018) call the "soft guardrails" of mutual toleration and institutional forbearance.
This sourceIdentifies the "soft guardrails" of mutual toleration and institutional forbearance and a recurring backsliding sequence (capturing the referees, sidelining opponents, rewriting rules), demonstrating that structural separation requires sustaining norms to function as restraint.
- Checks and balances presume that institutional actors, while pursuing their own interests, share fundamental commitment to the system itself, what Levitsky and Ziblatt (2018) call the "soft guardrails" of mutual toleration and institutional forbearance.
- Separation of Powers
- If one person or faction culturally dominates all three branches—through party discipline, patronage networks, media control, or norm erosion—structural separation becomes theater, a pattern of contemporary democratic backsliding catalogued by Levitsky and Ziblatt (2018) in their comparative study of how elected leaders dismantle separation by capturing referees, sidelining opponents, and rewriting rules.
This sourceComparative analysis of contemporary democratic backsliding; identifies a recurring sequence—capturing the referees, sidelining opponents, and rewriting rules—by which elected leaders erode separation of powers while preserving its formal architecture, demonstrating that structural separation requires sustaining norms to function as restraint.
- If one person or faction culturally dominates all three branches—through party discipline, patronage networks, media control, or norm erosion—structural separation becomes theater, a pattern of contemporary democratic backsliding catalogued by Levitsky and Ziblatt (2018) in their comparative study of how elected leaders dismantle separation by capturing referees, sidelining opponents, and rewriting rules.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:3263d70a7915 · see in the full table