Interested in outside the box academic ideas on how exism movements can lead to the death of normal liberal democracy from within in the quest for permanent access to power?
Perhaps you should read this DRAFT paper
Rethinking democracy 107: Placing the post 2016 liberal democracy landscape under independent rule of law variability system to indicate when to expect peaceful transfer of powers and when not when parties lose elections(UNPUBLISHED).
https://www.academia.edu/126028295/Rethinking_democracy_107_Placing_the_post_2016_liberal_democracy_landscape_under_independent_rule_of_law_variability_system_to_indicate_when_to_expect_peaceful_transfer_of_powers_and_when_not_when_parties_lose_elections_UNPUBLISHED
Exit movements can weaken liberal democracy from within by promoting political fragmentation, undermining national unity, and eroding trust in institutions. Secessionist or autonomy-driven movements may destabilize governance, while economic and digital exits (such as capital flight or online separatism) can reduce state authority. Additionally, some exit movements, while initially democratic, may pave the way for authoritarian rule in newly independent regions. Over time, these trends can weaken democratic institutions, increase polarization, and lead to the decline of liberal democracy.
Arta, when you have time take a look at the paper shared, you may find it interesting as it is a new way of seeing what you seem to understand.
Thanks for sharing the thought-provoking question and draft paper. The idea you present is powerful — exism movements (those aiming to permanently hold power) can erode liberal democracy from within, not by overthrowing it, but by weakening institutions, undermining the rule of law, and blocking peaceful transfers of power.
Your concept of “rule of law variability” is spot on — it helps us understand when democracies are likely to collapse even if elections still happen. These movements often:
- Control courts and watchdogs,
- Rewrite laws in their favor,
- Treat opponents as threats, not competitors.
This creates a system where democracy becomes just a label — elections exist, but real power never changes hands.
Building on your idea, I suggest a model like a “Transfer Risk Index” to measure how likely a peaceful power shift is. That could be a practical tool to predict and prevent democratic backsliding.
In short, your paper is timely and insightful — it rightly shows that the death of democracy today often comes silently from within, not through force but through legal manipulation.
Happy to collaborate further if you wish! @Lucio Muñoz
Subham, thank you for taking the time to comment. Your comment shows you really got the implications of my writings right on. I suggest to take the time to read the 9 articles already out there and if possible read them in order from rethinking 101 to rethinking 109 as each articles builds on previous ones so as to cover systematically the competition landscape before BREXIT 2016 and after, and doing it from different angles.... Notice that the position of any system in the picture gives you necessary and sufficient conditions for each system to come to exist and persist so if they are present or absent YOU CAN PREDICT.... Notice that by expressing the structure of each system in terms of present-absence effective targeted chaos and independent rule of law system allows you to predict by following the merging rules I share who will have access of power and when, under an independent rule of law system, under a perceived captured legal system and under a fully captured legal system. Also if you look at the situation backwards, you can see what needs to happen for paradigm flipbacks and for making more difficult, if not impossible, specific paradigm shifts...
Thank you for taking the time to comment, if we keep thinking the way traditional democracy thinkers think normal liberal democracy will become a rarity as they simply up to this moment have missed the boat....Taking the competition normal liberal democracy vrs TEMPORARY AUTHORITARIANISM as a competition between democratic continuity vrs democratic erosion....where when normal democratic outcomes stay in power THEY LEAVE THE LAWS THE SAME INSTEAD OF STRENTHENING THEM as they think temporary authoritarianism is looking for a fair competition, when they should expect temporary authoritarianism when in power to take active steps to control the legal system and all independent systems while maximizing effective targeted chaos...An exism market is driven by an irresponsible perfect maximizer....so the extreme actions to be expected are rational actions from the point of view of the exism movement....
Feel free to pick up any point in my papers and you can give it your own spin!
Again, thank you for commenting.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Filing