Can democracy win in 2024?

As democracies wrestle with problems they once seemed to manage, authoritarians watch with satisfaction

COMMENT | CHRIS PATTEN | The most compelling argument for liberal democracy is that it empowers citizens to choose their own leaders, effectively placing the country’s present and future in voters’ hands. The system is underpinned by an array of norms, values, and institutions designed to protect minority rights and prevent democracy from devolving into illiberal majoritarianism.

The rule of law also plays a crucial role. When I was governor of Hong Kong, my Chinese Communist counterparts could not grasp why the law should apply equally to those in power and the public alike. In authoritarian countries like China, rulers and ruling parties are considered infallible, while ordinary citizens are deemed incapable of making the right decisions about public affairs and even their own lives.

Crucially, democracies thrive on free speech and open debate. By criticising the government, media outlets can channel popular discontent and hold political leaders accountable, thereby preventing governments from disregarding citizens’ interests and aspirations.

By contrast, dictators cannot tolerate criticism. If you live in an authoritarian country and dare to criticise the government, you risk imprisonment or even death. In Hong Kong, for example, dissident and media entrepreneur Jimmy Lai, whose newspapers advocated greater democracy and championed free speech before the authorities shut them down, is locked up and likely to spend the rest of his life behind bars.

Unlike authoritarian regimes such as those in China and Russia, democratic leaders cannot rely on coercion and must persuade citizens that representative democracy is the best system. By the end of this historic election year, we will have a clearer idea of democratic parties’ ability to convince voters that the system is worth saving and, consequently, whether the twenty-first century will be shaped by democrats or aspiring dictators.

The United Kingdom’s recent general election offers a glimmer of hope. To be sure, the fact that Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour Party was able to win two-thirds of the seats in Parliament despite receiving only 33.8% of the vote may raise questions about its political mandate. But no one questions whether Labour’s overwhelming victory, which ended 14 years of increasingly unpopular Tory rule, was legitimate. Outgoing Conservative leader and former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak conceded without disputing the results and wished his successor well, as is expected in a democracy.

Given the magnitude of this political earthquake, and with the Conservatives’ overall vote share hitting its lowest level in decades, it is no surprise that much of the media attention has focused on what Tories must do to regroup and rebuild. But a more important question is whether Starmer’s government will be able to tackle the UK’s many economic problems without facing significant political backlash. It remains to be seen whether the government can stimulate growth and repair Britain’s deteriorating public services without raising taxes or incurring additional debt.

This problem is not confined to the UK. As liberal democracies grapple with lackluster economic growth, their governments are struggling to improve public services and boost household incomes. This creates fertile ground for populist politicians to gain support by promising simplistic solutions and scapegoating immigrants.

The surprising outcome of France’s snap election, in which Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally finished third behind the left-wing New Popular Front and President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Ensemble, offers grounds for cautious optimism. While the left’s shocking victory may result in political gridlock rather than a moderate coalition, it shows that French democracy may be more resilient than many previously assumed.

But the future of democratic governance may ultimately depend on the outcome of America’s upcoming presidential election. This is alarming, given that the two elderly candidates hardly reflect the best the United States has to offer. Former President Donald Trump, the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee, has made it abundantly clear that he will accept the election results only if he wins. With his potentially criminal behavior now enjoying the protection of a highly politicised Supreme Court, it is increasingly difficult to regard the U.S. as a standard-bearer for the rule of law.

Meanwhile, President Joe Biden’s disastrous performance in last month’s presidential debate has raised doubts about his mental acuity and ability to defeat Trump. While he has appointed highly capable individuals to senior positions in his administration, it remains unclear whether Biden himself can handle the world’s most demanding job.

As democracies like the U.S. and the UK wrestle with problems they once seemed to manage with ease, authoritarians – from rulers such as Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin to ideological cronies like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán – watch with quiet satisfaction. If democratic leaders want to ensure their countries resist the allure of illiberal demagogues, they must live up to their stated values and deliver accountable governance, broadly shared prosperity, and high-quality public services.

*****

Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU commissioner for external affairs, is Chancellor of the University of Oxford and the author of The Hong Kong Diaries (Allen Lane, 2022).

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2024.