ABSTRACT
Severe “Us” vs. “Them” polarization gives rise to illiberalism when intentionally illiberal or autocratic political leaders use polarizing strategies to divide the electorate and generate loyalty despite their illiberal actions, and when liberal political actors turn to polarizing strategies for their own electoral ambitions and become transformed by its logic. The resulting distrust, dislike, and mutual perceptions of existential threat of the two political camps incentivizes voters to tolerate or even endorse illiberalism to enhance their “sides” political position. The type of political party, party system, or electoral system do not by themselves predict the rise of polarization and concomitant illiberalism; instead, historical context, party resources and mobilization capacity influence the decisions of political leaders and movements to employ or not polarizing strategies that harm democracy. Illiberals privilege vertical accountability over horizontal accountability, and thus often rely on electoral mobilization. The winner-take-all logic produced by institutional rules in disproportionate majoritarian electoral systems, when combined with the psychological elements of the “Us” vs. “Them” discourse employed in severely polarized polities, provides perverse incentives for de-democratization. But if an illiberal incumbent’s majority is at risk, they may turn to polarizing strategies and electoral engineering to lock in their own voters while dissuading or suppressing the ability of opposition voters to participate.
