Abstract
Today’s crises of democracy and the corresponding rise of autocracies are often connected to a lack of trust. This article argues first that distrust also has many legitimate places in democracies, but that, ultimately democracies do indeed require a certain basic political trust: one needs to assume that one’s fellow citizens are committed to democracy as an ongoing project of free and equal people; they need to be “reasonable” in the Rawlsian sense. That basic trust can be betrayed when particular citizens vote aspiring autocrats into office. Under such circumstances, there is a special burden on these citizens to disavow at least the policies that could further autocratization. Arguments in public discourse have very often suggested the exact opposite: liberals must show empathy with the voters of authoritarian populist parties. The article then briefly considers two other possibilities of increasing political trust: militant democracy and open voting; the former is in many ways fraught with danger, though not per se illegitimate, as a response to crises of political trust; the latter ought to be rejected outright.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Journal | Philosophy and Social Criticism |
| DOIs | |
| State | Accepted/In press - 2026 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Philosophy
- Sociology and Political Science
Keywords
- autocracy
- democracy
- militant democracy
- open voting
- political trust
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Political Trust in the New Age of Autocratization'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver