CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 221Political Conflict and GovernancePolitical Theory and DemocracyElectoral Systems and Political Participation

Pernicious polarization, autocratization and opposition strategies

Somer, Murat, McCoy, Jennifer L., Luke, Russell E.·2021·Democratization
DOI 10.1080/13510347.2020.1865316
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

“Pernicious polarization” – the division of society into mutually distrustful Us versus Them camps in which political identity becomes a social identity – fosters autocratization by incentivizing citizens and political actors alike to endorse non-democratic action. An exploratory analysis of new V-Dem data on polarization indeed shows the negative relationship between the level of political polarization and liberal democracy ratings. How can pernicious polarization be avoided or reversed once present? By drawing on an endogenous explanation of polarization, where the decisions and actions of both opposition actors and incumbents contribute to its evolution, we focus on the question of what democratic opposition actors can do to stop or reverse pernicious polarization. Based on insights from examples across the world and deductive theory-building, along with illustrative cases, we offer a typology of potential opposition goals, strategies and tools, and then analyse how these may affect polarization and in turn democratic quality at early and late stages. We identify goals as either generative or preservative, and we argue that “active-depolarizing” and “transformative-repolarizing” strategies are more promising than “passive-depolarizing” and “reciprocal polarizing” strategies to improve a country's resilience to autocratizing pressures. The specific tools employed to pursue these goals and strategies are also crucial, though the effectiveness of available institutional accountability and mobilizational tools will change as the process of polarization advances. The emerging literatıres on opposition strategies to democratize electoral autocracies and to improve the resilience of democracies should incorporate their impact on polarization as a critical intervening variable.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper argues that pernicious polarization fosters autocratization and uses V-Dem data to show polarization is negatively associated with liberal democracy, especially at sustained severe levels. It offers a typology of opposition goals and strategies, arguing that proactive transformative-repolarizing and active-depolarizing strategies are more promising than reactive reciprocal-polarizing or passive-depolarizing strategies.

Key findings

  • In linear regressions with state and year fixed effects for 1900–2019, political polarization is negatively and statistically significantly associated with V-Dem liberal democracy at the analysis year and at one-, two-, and five-year lags: coefficients −0.420, −0.415, −0.391, and −0.305, respectively (p<0.01; N=6,192 for analysis year; 119 states).
  • Periods of rapid polarization were not significantly more damaging to democratic quality than other periods of increased polarization. Sustained severe polarization was more damaging: difference coefficients were −0.640 at the analysis year and −0.654 at one-year lag (p<0.05), while elevated and heightened polarization showed no observable difference from all other cases.
  • The paper’s typology links preservative goals to reactive reciprocal polarization or passive depolarization, and generative goals to proactive transformative repolarization or active depolarization. It expects reciprocal polarization to deepen pernicious polarization, passive depolarization to suspend elite polarization, and proactive strategies to reduce/contain polarization and slow or reverse autocratization if successful.
  • Illustrative cases include South Korea’s 2014–2016 polarization spike and later democratic recovery, Turkey’s 2019 CHP active-depolarizing local campaigns, Hungary’s 2019 Budapest opposition win, and Venezuela’s 2015 opposition overreach after a super-majority win.

Methods

  • Exploratory linear regression analyses with state and year fixed effects on 1900–2019, using V-Dem political polarization normalized to 0–1 and V-Dem liberal democracy scored 0–1; closed autocracies and states with fewer than 30 observation years were excluded, and polarization was lagged at 1, 2, and 5 years.
  • Tests H1–H3: H1 increased polarization decreases liberal democracy; H2 increased rate of polarization disproportionately decreases it; H3 level of polarization disproportionately decreases it. Rapid polarization was coded as an increase of at least 10% (0.1 units) in 5 or fewer years, with two or more years of increase and no declines greater than 0.01. Elevated, Heightened, and Severe thresholds were 0.456, 0.566, and 0.722, each sustained at least five years with no declines greater than 0.01.
  • The opposition-strategy framework is built deductively and illustrated with heuristic examples from across the world; the authors state this is not a systematic comparative case analysis.

Limitations

  • The paper states the quantitative analysis is exploratory and the case examples are heuristic, selected to illustrate strategies and propositions rather than to offer systematic comparative case analysis. It also states it does not explain how and why oppositions choose one strategy over another, and that future research will examine different periods, specifically post-1975 and post-1994.
  • The paper states the V-Dem polarization measure is imperfect and suffers weaknesses like other expert-opinion-survey measures, though it is described as the most appropriate available. It also states assumptions that the effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time, and it excludes closed autocracies and states with fewer than 30 observation years.
  • Evident from the text: the quantitative findings are associational, not causal; the strategy typology and expected outcomes are not systematically tested; and the illustrative cases are selected, so they cannot establish the general effectiveness of the proposed opposition strategies.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13510347.2020.1865316

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

2 of 24 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Findingcitation
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 16

    Successful cooptation may simply strengthen the hegemonic leader, as happened multiple times in Kenya and Zimbabwe.

    “Instead, such a successful cooptation strategy may simply strengthen the hegemonic leader, as happened for example multiple times in Kenya and Zimbabwe.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [34] source

      The Incumbent strategies section (continuing on p. 253) describes Zimbabwe’s two episodes as a strategy of defanging the opposition through cooptation or power-sharing. The Institutional antecedents section says a power-sharing agreement left ZANU-PF dominant. Our copy does not substantiate the claimed repeated examples in Kenya, or explicitly say that cooptation strengthened the Zimbabwean leader. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingown data
    § Empirical Relationship between Polarization and Democratic Quality · p. 8

    Increased polarization decreases the quality of liberal democracy in a state.

    “The observed effect of polarization on liberal democracy is negative and statistically significant for each of the periods examined.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time.
  • Findingown data
    § [Table 1 about here] · p. 8

    The difference between the effect of polarization on democratic quality during periods of rapid polarization and all other cases was not statistically significant.

    “The effect on democratic quality remained negative and statistically significant for both groups, but the difference between the two was not statistically significant.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time.
  • Findingown data
    § [Table 1 about here] · p. 9

    For periods of elevated and heightened polarization, there is no observable difference between the effect of polarization within these periods and all other cases.

    “For periods of both elevated and heightened polarization, there is no observable difference between the effect of polarization within these periods, and all other cases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time.
  • Findingown data
    § [Table 1 about here] · p. 9

    The effect of polarization on democratic quality is more damaging under periods of severe polarization, for the analysis year and single year lag, than all other periods.

    “In line with our expectations, the effect of polarization on democratic quality is shown to be more damaging under periods of severe polarization, for the analysis year and single year lag, than all other periods.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time.
  • May combine two claims. 35
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 34

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 23

    The Budapest candidate ran and won on a platform of representing the people against the seat of power, a pro-Europe and green agenda, and willingness to work with the national government.

    “The Budapest candidate ran and won on a platform of representing the people against the seat of power, a pro-Europe and green agenda, and a willingness to work in a partnership with the national government.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [49] source

      The 2018 electoral victory section discusses Malaysia’s Pakatan Harapan campaign and manifesto, not a Budapest candidate. Searches for the Budapest candidate and the claimed pro-Europe, green, and national-government partnership platform found no passage addressing those points in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Empirical Relationship between Polarization and Democratic Quality · p. 8

    The effect of polarization on liberal democracy diminishes in influence the further from the analysis year, but remains substantial.

    “The effect appears to diminish in influence the further from the analysis year, but it remains substantial nonetheless.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 15

    These elite failures fragmented the Venezuelan opposition, demoralized its supporters, and strengthened Chavez's hold on power.

    “Instead, these elite failures fragmented the opposition and demoralized its supporters, while strengthening the incumbent's hold on power.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] McCoy Jennifer, 2019, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 20

    Turkish opposition parties have struggled to achieve unity around a democracy-authoritarianism cleavage and to coordinate candidate selections.

    “Finally, the Turkish opposition parties have struggled to achieve some unity around a 'democracy-authoritarianism cleavage' and by coordinating their candidate selections.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48] source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 20

    The CHP's campaigns in 2019 local elections represented a shift to active-depolarizing politics and the first electoral victory for the opposition in more than a decade, with partial exception of June 2015.

    “The opposition CHP's campaigns in 2019 local elections represented a shift to active-depolarizing politics, and the first electoral victory for the opposition in more than a decade, with the partial exception of June 2015 elections.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 20

    The CHP campaign manual 'The Book of Radical Love' focused on defusing polarization through cross-cutting axes and responding to hate with love.

    “Perhaps the most notable innovation was the CHP campaign manual called 'The Book of Radical Love'. The strategy was focused on defusing polarization through new and cross-cutting axes of politics, and responding to the politics of hate and resentment with 'love'.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [45] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 11

    The crucial decision pro-democratic oppositions need to make is not merely to choose between engaging in or avoiding polarizing politics-the former risks deepening the downward spiral and the latter risks demotivating or fragmenting opposition.

    “We argue that the crucial decision pro-democratic oppositions need to make is not merely to choose between engaging in or avoiding polarizing politics -- the former risks deepening the downward spiral and the latter risks demotivating or fragmenting opposition”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § Abstract · p. 1

    The specific tools employed to pursue these goals and strategies are crucial, though the effectiveness of available institutional accountability and mobilizational tools will change as the process of polarization advances.

    “The specific tools employed to pursue these goals and strategies are also crucial. though the effectiveness of available institutional accountability and mobilizational tools will change as the process of polarization advances.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § Introduction · p. 3

    Polarization can be facilitated by exogenous factors such as economic, institutional, and informational environments, preexisting social-political cleavages, and historical memory.

    “we acknowledge that polarization can be facilitated by exogenous factors such as economic, institutional, and informational environments, preexisting social-political cleavages, and historical memory.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Introduction · p. 3

    Opposition resilience comprises not only their ability to choose the right strategies but also to cooperate around a common strategy.

    “Hence, opposition resilience comprises not only their ability to choose the right strategies but also to cooperate around a common strategy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Opposition Dilemmas and Challenge · p. 9

    Polarization is always an intervening variable and strategies to reciprocate, avoid, reduce or transform it are choices for actors with consequences not only for polarizing dynamics but for democracy itself.

    “Polarization is thus always an intervening variable and strategies to reciprocate, avoid, reduce or transform it are choices for actors with consequences not only for the polarizing dynamics but for democracy itself.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Empirical Relationship between Polarization and Democratic Quality · p. 5

    The new V-Dem political polarization measure captures the extent to which political differences affect social relationships beyond political discussions, thereby encapsulating affective polarization that can turn pernicious.

    “Crucially, it captures 'the extent to which political differences affect social relationships beyond political discussions,' thereby encapsulating affective polarization that can turn pernicious.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Iyengar and Westwood. 'Fear and Loathing';

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Iyengar et al. 'Consequences of Affective Polarization.'

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § The Endogenous Nature of Polarization and Negative Consequences for Democracy · p. 4

    Severe polarization changes actor incentives and fosters internal transformations within both incumbent and opposition groups in an authoritarian direction.

    “Hence, severe polarization changes actor incentives and even fosters internal transformations within both the incumbent and opposition groups in an authoritarian direction.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Opposition Dilemmas and Challenge · p. 9

    Some anti-authoritarian policies, even though ethically acceptable and feasible in early stages, will not be recommendable at later stages because they are expected to reinforce polarization and thus backfire, or because they have already been disarmed by severe polarization.

    “We argue that some anti-authoritarian policies, even though ethically acceptable and feasible in early stages, will not be recommendable at later stages precisely because we expect them to reinforce polarization and thus backfire, or because they have already been disarmed by severe polarization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 24

    Innovative tools and practices can overcome the risks of transformative repolarizing strategy.

    “We posit, however, that innovative tools and practices can overcome these risks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    An opposition can overreach, as happened with the Venezuelan successful unity campaign in the 2015 National Assembly elections in which they won a super-majority.

    “An opposition can overreach, such as happened with the Venezuelan successful unity campaign in the 2015 National Assembly elections in which they won a super-majority.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 20

    In this way, oppositions can de-fang the Us vs Them wedge, reestablish balance of power with would-be autocrats, and mobilize a winning majority on a democratizing agenda.

    “In this way, oppositions can 'de-fang' the power of the Us vs Them wedge magnified by the incumbent, reestablish the balance of power with would-be autocrats on a new axis, and mobilize a winning majority of the electorate on a democratizing agenda.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Empirical Relationship between Polarization and Democratic Quality · p. 7

    The fixed effects approach is theoretically most appropriate as the paper is primarily concerned with the 'within' estimator for each country.

    “At the expense of efficiency, the fixed effects approach is theoretically most appropriate as we are primarily concerned with the 'within' estimator for each country - the effect of polarization on democratic quality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 23

    Providing a binary choice based on principles and policies can open the tent to disaffected incumbent supporters while energizing opposition supporters around a positive vision of the future.

    “in contrast, providing a binary choice based on principles and policies, such as democracy vs authoritarianism, hope vs fear, justice vs impunity can open the tent to disaffected incumbent supporters while energizing opposition supporters around a positive vision of the future.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    If leaders do not address underlying grievances and cleavages, divisions are likely to resurge at some point in the future.

    “but if leaders do not address underlying grievances and cleavages, divisions are likely to resurge at some point in the future.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 20

    For more advanced stages of polarization and autocratization, democratic oppositions may need to rebundle and redefine cleavages along a new axis of polarization based on a pro-democratic program.

    “For the more advanced stages of polarization and autocratization, the political challenge that democratic oppositions face may be to find the organizational and discursive ways to rebundle and redefine cleavages and politics along a new axis of polarization based on a pro-democratic program.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Empirical Relationship between Polarization and Democratic Quality · p. 6

    The V-Dem political polarization measure is the most appropriate available capturing polarization both longitudinally and cross-sectionally, including states from the Global South, and features large numbers of cross-checking and complementary questions.

    “While imperfect and suffering from some weaknesses like any other measures constructed using expert opinion surveys, this measure is the most appropriate available capturing polarization both longitudinally and cross-sectionally, including states from the Global South, and can be commended for featuring large numbers of cross-checking and complementary questions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 18

    Proactive counter-polarization strategies seek to change the axis of polarization and thus affect democratic outcomes.

    “In line with their generative goals, proactive counter-polarization strategies seek to change the axis of polarization and thus also affect democratic outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationcitation
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 24

    Refusing to vilify supporters of the polarizing incumbent, and countering the narrative rather than responding to personal insults or amplifying specific lies and disinformation, can help defuse the Us vs. Them binary fueled by deliberate provocation and disinformation.

    “Refusing to vilify supporters of the polarizing incumbent, and countering the narrative rather than responding to personal insults or amplifying specific lies and disinformation can also help to defuse the Us vs. Them binary fueled by deliberate provocation and disinformation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [52] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 23

    Mobilizing against the incumbent by vilifying the incumbent and their supporters based on their values, attitudes and identities may make people feel excluded based on socioeconomic or cultural background.

    “Mobilizing against the incumbent by vilifying the incumbent and their supporters based on their values, attitudes and identities may make people feel excluded based on socioeconomic or cultural background”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 18

    Passive depolarizing politics risks failing to mobilize the opposition's own base enough to defeat the incumbent in elections, and may be seen as too soft and legitimizing the incumbent's divisive behavior.

    “The risk of passive depolarizing politics that aims to avoid polarization is that it may fail to mobilize the opposition's own base enough to defeat the incumbent in elections, and it demoralization, or apathy. Withdrawal from engagement, including election boycotts, is also may be seen as too soft and legitimizing the incumbent's divisive and antidemocratic behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 17

    Successful extra-constitutional ousters of polarizing elected leaders may lead to outright democratic collapse, as in Thailand 2014 and Egypt 2013, which may depolarize society short-term but at the cost of killing democracy.

    “Alternatively, successful extra-constitutional ousters of polarizing elected leaders may lead to outright democratic collapse, as happened when the military intervened to remove polarizing incumbents in Thailand in 2014 or Egypt in 2013, which may serve to depolarize society in the short-term, but at the cost of killing democracy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 18

    The depolarization variety of proactive strategy seeks to dismantle reinforcing cleavages from Us vs. Them polarization and construct cross-cutting ties more amenable to pluralist democracy.

    “The depolarization variety seeks to dismantle the reinforcing cleavages resulting from the simplified politics of Us vs. Them polarization, and actively seeks through social and political action to construct cross-cutting ties more amenable to pluralist democracy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 24

    If a transformative repolarizing strategy proves successful, supporters of the losing incumbent could feel excluded and become alienated or engage in obstructionist politics.

    “or that supporters of the losing incumbent feel excluded and become alienated or engage in obstructionist politics.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 18

    A proactive strategy can only succeed if supported by appropriate practices.

    “Once again, a proactive strategy can only succeed if supported by appropriate practices.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 17

    Reactive polarizing politics, even to prevent democratic erosion, risks deepening polarization and moving to a pernicious equilibrium.

    “Reactive polarizing politics, even to prevent democratic erosion, risks deepening polarization and moving to a pernicious equilibrium.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 17

    At a minimum, pernicious polarization generates government paralysis and dysfunction.

    “At a minimum, pernicious polarization generates government paralysis and dysfunction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    If active depolarization is successful in the early stages of polarization, it may contain polarization at tolerable levels and even return a country to the cross-cutting ties of pluralism.

    “If active depolarization is successful in the early stages of polarization, it may contain polarization at tolerable levels and even return a country to the cross-cutting ties of a pluralism”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 24

    Creating new alliances between social movement and civic resistance, and political parties and campaigns, can reinforce a transformative campaign by providing a visionary platform of real change.

    “Creating new alliances between social movement and civic resistance, and political parties and campaigns can reinforce a transformative campaign by providing a visionary platform of real change.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    In the 2019 Istanbul and Budapest mayoral opposition upsets, the incumbent recognized the victory of the opposition but then prevented them from carrying out their innovative strategies, blocking the democratizing moment.

    “Alternatively, the incumbent may recognize the victory of the opposition as happened in the 2019 Istanbul and Budapest mayoral opposition upsets, but then prevent them from carrying out their innovative strategies, blocking the democratizing moment.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [54]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § Empirical Relationship between Polarization and Democratic Quality · p. 6

    A spike of polarization can often happen around election years, and is more likely to include cases of temporary polarization with neutral or potentially positive effects on democracy.

    “A spike of polarization, tested by H2 can often happen around election years, and is more likely to include cases of temporary polarization with neutral or potentially positive effects on democracy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    Maduro reacted by suppressing the Assembly's authority through Supreme Court rulings, eventually usurping its authority almost completely as well as suppressing the legal-institutional mechanism of a recall referendum, moving Venezuela to authoritarianism.

    “Maduro reacted by suppressing the Assembly's authority through Supreme Court rulings, eventually usurping its authority almost completely as well as suppressing the legal-institutional mechanism of a recall referendum, moving the country to authoritarianism.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 12

    Actors pursuing a preservative goal can be expected to choose reactive counter-polarization strategies, while those pursuing a generative goal can be expected to choose proactive counter-polarization strategies.

    “The actors pursuing a preservative goal can be expected to choose reactive counter-polarization strategies, while those pursuing a generative goal can be expected to choose proactive counter-polarization strategies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Oppositions to polarizing and autocratizing incumbents seek to gain power.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Oppositions have different goals about using that power.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 16

    Such power-sharing strategies are unlikely to depolarize society or politics in the long run if the junior partner feels marginalized, democratizing agreements are not implemented, or supporters feel sold out.

    “Such strategies are unlikely to depolarize either society or politics in the long run, however, if the junior partner feels marginalized, democratizing agreements are not implemented or their supporters feel sold out.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 23

    If a transformative repolarizing strategy demonizes the Other, the logic of polarization will kick in again, including perceptions of the Other as an existential threat and enemy to be eliminated, tempting both sides to violate democratic norms to gain or retain power.

    “Otherwise the logic of polarization will kick in again, including perceptions of the 'Other' as an existential threat and enemy to be eliminated, tempting both sides to violate democratic norms to gain or retain power.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    Active depolarizing politics may be seen as too soft and legitimizing the incumbent's divisive and antidemocratic behavior.

    “and it may be seen as too soft and legitimizing the incumbent's divisive and antidemocratic behavior.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 17

    Manichean discourse strengthens tribalism and affective polarization, making the two camps more rigid with less communication and fluid movement.

    “This Manichean discourse strengthens tribalism and affective polarization and the simplification of politics makes the two camps more rigid, with less communication and even less fluid movement between them.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 15

    In advanced autocratization, incumbents use loyal institutions to burnish pseudo-democratic credentials, while oppositions distrust such institutions and must be creative in devising anti-authoritarian strategies.

    “The polarized perceptions of these institutions are thus the reverse of the context of still-independent institutions; now, autocratizing incumbents use loyal institutions to burnish their pseudo-democratic credentials in the eyes of their supporters and the world, while oppositions distrust such institutions and must be creative in devising their anti-authoritarian strategies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Choices of Polarization Strategies and Tools · p. 17

    Reciprocal counter-polarization responses can backfire by mobilizing opposition supporters but also causing incumbent supporters to close ranks.

    “Reciprocal counter-polarization responses in particular can backfire: they may mobilize the opposition's supporters but also cause the incumbent's supporters to close ranks to defend 'Ours against Theirs.'”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 20

    Democratic oppositions may sometimes have to respond through polarizing politics of their own, but need a different axis based on a programme with democratizing consequences.

    “That is, democratic oppositions may sometimes have to respond through polarizing politics of their own, but they need to find a different axis of polarization based on a programme that can have democratizing consequences.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 23

    In Hungary, a similar movement toward active depolarization strategies in the 2019 mayoral elections may suggest a pattern of local-level success and a learning process.

    “In Hungary, a similar movement toward active depolarization strategies in the 2019 mayoral elections in Hungary may suggest a pattern of local level success and a learning process at work.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 18

    The polarizing variety of proactive strategy seeks to change the axis of polarization away from the Manichean line toward a more flexible and programmatic axis, such as democratic or social justice principles.

    “The polarizing variety seeks to change the axis of polarization away from the Manichean line emphasized by the polarizing incumbent and toward one that is more flexible and programmatic, such as those based on democratic or social justice principles.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § Empirical Relationship between Polarization and Democratic Quality · p. 7

    The effects of polarization may be delayed or otherwise manifest primarily around election years.

    “the effects of polarization may be delayed or otherwise manifest primarily around election years.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 24

    If a transformative repolarizing strategy proves successful, the winning coalition could be tempted to resort to the 'revanchist' and Manichean divisive discourse of pernicious polarization.

    “A related risk is that if a transformative repolarizing strategy proves successful, the winning coalition could be tempted to resort to the 'revanchist' and Manichean divisive discourse of pernicious polarization”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    If active depolarization fails to energize the opposition base, it will strengthen the polarizing incumbent's hand and demoralize the opposition, leaving the polarization dynamic with one pole and likely resulting in further autocratization.

    “Such a failure will strengthen the polarizing incumbent's hand and demoralize the opposition, leaving the polarization dynamic with one 'pole' and likely resulting in further autocratization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Proactive Counter-Polarization Strategies · p. 25

    When active depolarization is successful at later stages of polarization and autocratization, it is likely to be first at the local or legislative level.

    “When active depolarization is successful at later stages of polarization and autocratization, it is likely to be first at the local or legislative level.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusions · p. 26

    Agency and learning matter, and the willful strategic decisions and actions by both incumbents and oppositions will together shape the unfolding of the polarization process and its effect on a democracy.

    “Because we view polarization as an endogenous factor, we argue that agency and learning matter, and the willful strategic decisions and actions by both incumbents and oppositions will together shape the unfolding of the polarization process and its effect on a democracy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Polarization is an endogenous factor.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusions · p. 27

    Reactive counter-polarization strategies, often associated with preservative ideological-programmatic goals to restore the status quo ante, are most likely to deepen and entrench pernicious polarization, and in turn, to damage democratic quality.

    “we posit that reactive counter-polarization strategies, often associated with preservative ideological-programmatic goals to restore the status quo ante , are most likely to deepen and entrench pernicious polarization, and in turn, to damage democratic quality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusions · p. 27

    Transformative repolarization and active depolarization, contingent on contextual factors, are the most promising and democratizing strategies for opposition forces.

    “We thus view transformative repolarization and active depolarization, contingent on contextual factors, as the most promising and democratizing strategies for opposition forces.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § Conclusions · p. 27

    In the 2019 municipal elections in Istanbul and Budapest, even seemingly unassailable incumbents conceded when faced with well-organized oppositions and decisive defeat.

    “Examples such as the 2019 municipal elections in Istanbul and Budapest suggest that even seemingly unassailable incumbents concede when faced with well-organized oppositions and decisive defeat.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusions · p. 27

    If elite cooperation is done on an unequal basis or fails to address underlying grievances, the outcome could strengthen the autocratizing incumbent or simply suspend polarization until it resurges in the future.

    “but if that cooperation is done on an unequal basis or fails to address underlying grievances, the outcome could actually strengthen the autocratizing incumbent or simply suspend polarization until it resurges in the future.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
56 of 56

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time.

    “We assume that the effect of polarization is consistent across groups and across time.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Oppositions to polarizing and autocratizing incumbents seek to gain power.

    “We start by assuming that oppositions to polarizing and autocratizing incumbents seek to gain power”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Oppositions have different goals about using that power.

    “but that they do so with different goals about using that power”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Polarization is an endogenous factor.

    “Because we view polarization as an endogenous factor”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Polarizing politics is a common strategy of intentionally autocratizing actors.

    “Particularly because polarizing politics is a common strategy of intentionally autocratizing actors”
5 of 5

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Bandeira Luiza, 2019, Disinformation in Democracies: Strengthening Digital Resilience in Latin America
  2. Bates Robert H., 1998, Analytic Narratives
  3. Huntington Samuel P., 1991, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Later 20th Century
  4. Khadiagala Gilbert M., 2019, Democracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political Polarization, 38
  5. Laebens, Melis G., and Anna Lührmann. "What Stops Democratic Erosion? The Role of Institutions of Accountability." Paper presented at “Berlin Democracy Conference,” Berlin. https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/64508/1/gupea_2077_64508_1.pdf, 2019.
  6. Pantoulas Dimitris, 2019, Revista de Ciencias Políticas, 32, 391
  7. Selçuk Orçun, 2020, Democratization, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Somer, M., McCoy, J. L., & Luke, R. E.
Affiliations
  • Koç University (TR)
  • Georgia State University (US)
Corresponding author
McCoy, Jennifer L.
ORCID
Venue
Democratization
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2021-01-12
Volume
28
Issue
5
Pages
929-948
ISSN
  • 1351-0347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-890X
DOI
10.1080/13510347.2020.1865316
OpenAlex
W3120050906
Cited by
220
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 68 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 10
FWCI
50.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Democratization (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Collections portal (Koç University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Keywords
autocratization, democratic opposition, opposition strategy, political polarization, liberal democracy, institutional accountability, mobilization, electoral autocracy, democratic resilience, political identity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-13.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-13.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review