Understanding Democratic Decline through a Human Rights Theory of Democracy

Understanding Democratic Decline through a Human Rights Theory of Democracy

Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat presents a human rights theory of democracy to explain the growing trend of democratic backsliding across both developing and developed countries.

In Brief

  • Political scientist Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat argues democracy erodes when governments expand political rights while neglecting social and economic rights.
  • Her research outlines a three-phase process in which rights imbalances fuel unrest and lead governments to restrict democratic freedoms.
  • Democratic backsliding is framed as a global pattern shaped by neoliberal economic policies and identity-based, populist politics.
Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on January 29, 2026.
Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on January 29, 2026.
Nora Sulots

In a CDDRL research seminar held on January 29, 2026, Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat, professor of political science at the University of Connecticut, presented her human rights theory of democracy to explain democratic backsliding. Arat’s research shows how economic and social policies have contributed to the decline of democracies worldwide since the mid-twentieth century. While democratic decline was once primarily associated with developing countries, it has now become a global concern, visible as the rise of electoral authoritarianism, hybrid regimes, illiberal democracies, and right-wing populism.

Arat’s theory upholds that democracy’s stability depends on maintaining a balance between two sets of human rights: civil and political rights and social and economic rights. Civil and political rights such as freedoms of expression, association, and assembly, as well as the rights to political participation, are critical components of democracy. Social and economic rights include the right to work, labor rights, education, healthcare, housing, food, an adequate standard of living, and social security. Arat argued that while democracies maintain relatively high levels of civil and political rights, successive governments may neglect social and economic rights, leading to the emergence of a growing gap between the two sets of rights. This imbalance leads to a legitimacy crisis. As citizens begin to question the government’s ability to respond to everyday struggles and provide basic welfare, the government or an alternative elite triggers a process that ultimately undermines democratic stability.

Arat outlined a three-phase process through which democratic decline unfolds. In the first phase, democratization begins, and civil and political rights expand rapidly, while social and economic rights remain stagnant. Although a gap exists between the two sets of rights, the expansion of political freedoms provides legitimacy to the new democratic system. In the second phase, civil and political rights stabilize while social and economic rights stagnate or decline, creating an imbalance that fuels social and political unrest. In the third phase, governments that are unwilling or unable to improve social and economic conditions respond by limiting civil and political rights, ultimately marking the decline of democracy.

Arat examined democratic decline for two major eras. During the Cold War, politics focused on class-based movements such as labor and student activism, while governments responded with authoritarian measures justified by anti-communism. Many developing countries followed uneven development models and trickle-down economics that promised rapid economic growth. However, in the post-Cold War era, the neoliberal economic paradigm, which seeks privatization, deregulation, labor flexibility, and reduced government services, spread across both developing and developed countries. Although promoted as efficient, these reforms weakened social and economic rights and increased public dissatisfaction. At the same time, political struggles and claims shifted toward identity politics.

Arat described this as a “convergence of fundamentalisms.” She referred to neoliberalism as “market fundamentalism,” which prioritizes the private sector and markets, reducing the public sector's role and resulting in declining employment, reduced social services, and growing inequality. Along with the rise of neoliberalism, religious and nationalist fundamentalisms gained strength, increasing cultural tensions around gender identity and roles, minority rights, immigration, and national identity. Furthermore, instead of addressing the social and economic rights violations caused by neoliberal policies, governments reverted to cultural politics to manage public frustration.

These cultural strategies served as a divide-and-rule approach. Political leaders frame social problems around internal and external enemies, such as minorities, immigrants, feminists, global/cosmopolitan elites, and intergovernmental organizations, redirecting anger away from economic policy failures. This populist rhetoric divides society into “victims” and “others,” while promoting strong leadership as the solution to the grievances of “authentic and legitimate” citizens. Through this process, governments are able to maintain neoliberal economic structures while simultaneously weakening civil and political rights and shrinking the democratic space.

Arat concluded that democratic decline cannot be understood without recognizing the central role of social and economic rights. While inequality is important, it would not be destabilizing by itself; the erosion of welfare systems and the government's failure to meet basic human needs create conditions of instability and loss of legitimacy. Hence, as long as neoliberal policies continue to undermine social and economic rights, democracies remain vulnerable to backsliding and authoritarianism.

Read More

Andrew Michta presented his research in a REDS Seminar co-hosted by CDDRL and TEC on January 22, 2026.
News

Will Deterrence Hold in Europe?

At a REDS seminar co-hosted by CDDRL and TEC, Andrew Michta assesses whether Europe’s security institutions are prepared for renewed great power competition.
Will Deterrence Hold in Europe?
Emil Kamalov presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on January 15, 2026.
News

Do Incentives Matter When Politics Drive Emigration?

SURF postdoctoral fellow Emil Kamalov explains why political freedoms outweigh material benefits for many Russian emigrants considering return.
Do Incentives Matter When Politics Drive Emigration?
Neil Malhotra presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on January 8, 2026.
News

When the Supreme Court Diverges from Public Opinion

The GSB's Neil Malhotra examines how ideological distance from voters shapes approval, legitimacy, and political response.
When the Supreme Court Diverges from Public Opinion