Which Party Is More Undemocratic?

It depends on how one defines “democracy.”

Democrats and “Never Trump” Republicans have been warning that Donald Trump is a “danger to democracy” since he ran for president in 2016. But despite years of this message—including in the most recent presidential campaign—it’s clearly been unpersuasive to many Americans.

A key reason for this is the perception among some Americans that Democrats and other Trump critics behave in undemocratic ways themselves. For example, some consider the party’s vocal support for abolishing (or at least neutering) the Electoral College as a threat to the Founders’ vision of checks and balances to prevent a “tyranny of the majority.” Many conservatives similarly believe that liberals’ rhetoric on issues like race and identity aims to unfairly delegitimize and silence defensible, rational views. They consider this not just insulting but also in opposition to the left’s professed support for democratic ideals.

Democrats might believe that these concerns simply misunderstand what democracy is, or they may concede that some of those objections have merit but still believe those critics are naive about what the real threats to democracy are. But Americans’ differing views about what is democratic or undemocratic are at least in part influenced by the ambiguity of the word “democracy.” Democracy can be many things to many people, which is why Democrats and Republicans are often at loggerheads over it—and why partisans tend to think their opponents are more undemocratic than they are (more on that in a bit).

If Democrats want to convince their fellow Americans that Trump poses a threat to democracy, they must first think seriously about how other people conceive of democracy—and why some of them might think the Democrats are throwing stones from a glass house.

Different views of democracy

The ambiguity of democracy can lead us to misunderstand each other, which in turn risks raising inter-group contempt. People on both sides of our political chasm might find themselves thinking, “Why can’t these idiots see the obvious threats to America’s democratic principles that I see?”

Let’s consider a few different ways people can interpret democracy:

• Democracy as a system of government. Here, the focus is on mechanisms like elections and representation in government. In this framing, efforts to suppress votes or undermine election results are clearly undemocratic. But depending on one’s perspective, a democratic system of government can be viewed as either enacting a righteous and just will of the people or as enabling a tyranny of the majority under which minority rights are disrespected. Understood this way, it’s clear how our feelings about the outcomes of a democratic system of government can influence our views of that system’s fairness and legitimacy.

• Democracy as an ideal. A focus on democratic ideals emphasizes values like equality, justice, and the protection of minority rights and views. It’s more conceptual and less tied to governmental or election procedures. Many liberals see conservative stances—on abortion, immigration, and transgender issues—as violating democratic ideals. But conservatives can have similar feelings toward liberals, even if they don’t often use the same language. For example, they think it’s undemocratic when their views are regularly labeled as hateful and treated as outside acceptable political discourse. Note that a democratic system of government inevitably leads to policies that one group or another will view as conceptually undemocratic.

• Democracy as something our Constitution does well. Some people believe the U.S. Constitution—with its checks and balances, the Electoral College, and the delegation of some power to states—is a strong, practical implementation of democratic ideals. In this view, the Founders designed a system embodying these ideals while avoiding the tyranny of the majority that a direct democracy might produce. People with these views might consider attempts to drastically alter America’s original rules to be an assault on the Constitution—and on the democratic ideals it embodies.

Many disagreements about what is or isn’t democratic are rooted in these different conceptions of democracy. For example, when Trump supporters argue that Trump is pursuing the policies he was elected by the American people to implement—so, by definition, his acts must be democratic—they’re thinking about the idea of democracy as a system of government. At the same time, many liberals view some of Trump’s actions as violating democratic ideals. It’s therefore easy to see how people can talk past each other in this simple way.

Another area of confusion comes from America having a representative democracy—not a pure, direct democracy. A nation as large as the U.S. obviously can’t have national votes on every decision it makes, so we elect people to make them for us. This leads to all sorts of interpretations about what is truly democratic (including a common refrain from some conservatives that the U.S. isn’t actually a democracy at all but a republic). Once a president is elected, is it democratic for them to pursue their goals, even if some aren’t supported by the majority of the country? Some people would say it is, “We elected him to act on our behalf.” Others would object: “Some of his actions are things that most Americans don’t want.” And what if a president is elected without winning the popular vote—or winning only a plurality of it, which means a majority of voters chose a different candidate?

It’s worth pointing out an irony here: while Americans have become somewhat more polarized over how to define democracy, that doesn’t necessarily mean they are polarized about the underlying ideas of it. In fact, surveys show that large majorities of both Republicans and Democrats express support for democratic values. And while Democrats might believe Republicans don’t care about democracy or share their fear about the threats to it, this couldn’t be further from the truth: recent evidence shows that a majority of Republicans (56 percent) also believe the U.S. faces serious threats to the future of its democracy. It may be useful for Democrats and other Trump critics to reflect on all this.

Suffice it to say, our different interpretations of democracy aren’t just intellectual disagreements; they also serve to drive deeper wedges between Democrats and Republicans.

How Republicans view Democrats’ undemocratic behaviors

There are a handful of reasons why Republicans may have become polarized over issues of democracy. One is because of Democrats’ messaging about “saving” it— rhetoric that seems to imply that the country needs to be saved from their opponents. The perception that these pleas are self-serving creates a natural reaction among Republicans to downplay or even mock them. In tribal conflicts, people often see their opponents’ concerns as silly and unimportant—and even guided by bad faith.¹

Another reason is that Republicans often view Democrats’ own behavior as undemocratic. For example, Democrats often contend that Trump’s use of the levers of government to aggressively enforce his agenda poses a direct threat to American democracy. But Republicans see this as nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black. They argue that when liberals have previously had control of government, they expanded the power of the presidency and wielded that power in unfair and aggressive ways, so now Trump is just continuing what they started. Similarly, some think that Democrats have used unelected government agencies and bureaucrats—the so-called “deep state”—to implement policies that most Americans don’t actually support.

From this perspective, many Trump supporters view his attempt to shift the balance of power as correcting an unfair system and implementing the people’s will—in other words, as democratic actions. This is why some Trump supporters who believe in democratic principles are okay with aggressive and even norm-violating actions that others see as blatantly undemocratic and unconstitutional.²

Looking at the Electoral College arguments again, many on the left consider it an undemocratic institution and wish to abolish it in favor of a popular vote, but Republicans tend to see the Electoral College as a key feature of our representative democracy. They see efforts to abolish it as a threat to the country’s democratic ideals, not a defense of them. Electoral College defenders can be bothered by highly certain and contemptuous framings employed by Democrats, and many believe that Democrats aren’t pursuing an end to the institution because it would be more democratic but because it’s politically convenient. They suspect Democrats would think differently if they were the ones who had benefited from it in recent years rather than Republicans.

Another way some on the right believe Democrats behave undemocratically is by unfairly labeling conservative-associated views as bigoted, intolerant, and outside the bounds of acceptable discourse. This includes conservative support for stronger border policies, criticisms of anti-racism activism and DEI programming, and concerns about threats to free speech. Conservatives can see liberals as attempting to shut down conversation and exclude legitimate viewpoints from the public square for the sake of scoring political points. Democracy defenders on the left should recognize there are many valid points in these frustrations.³

Many conservatives also believe that Trump himself is often unfairly demonized. They view much of the outrage directed at him as overstated and hysterical. Even some anti-Trump people have perceived a certain amount of biased, worst-case interpretations of many things Trump has said and done. All this contributes to a Republican narrative where they are the victimized underdogs. They see Trump as someone fighting back against an undemocratic system that seeks to suppress legitimate opposition.

A further manifestation of this same frustration is the view that the 2020 election was illegitimate. Many Trump supporters who were willing to say to pollsters that the election was “rigged” were not necessarily convinced of the “Big Lie”; rather, they possessed a range of views on the matter. Some were venting distrust toward their opponents, a common occurrence in a polarized population. A feeling or belief that “they rigged it” can relate to a perception that the mainstream media and other parts of a liberal establishment had unfairly used every strategy they could to prevent Trump from winning.

Trump opponents should seek to grapple with these frustrations—to try to imagine what it would feel like to have their views so often labeled as deeply immoral, illegitimate, contemptible, and unworthy of engagement, especially when coming from all the major institutions of society—academia, the bulk of mainstream news, celebrities, and the entertainment media. Doing this might help Trump critics better understand Republicans’ frustrations and why they perceive so much undemocratic behavior from their opponents.

Ilana Redstone, author of The Certainty Trap, argues that when the left fails to consider how it has alienated many Americans, it undercuts its own message about defending democracy. As she puts it, “Critics of Trump, especially on the left, tend to think they’re defending democracy by calling out the damage he’s done and continues to do to its institutions and norms. And yet, when they do so without simultaneously acknowledging how the left created and sustained a culture where non-progressive views are reflexively viewed as racist or bigoted, they’re accelerating the very democratic decline they strive to fight against.”

---

At the end of the day, the test of Trump’s commitment to democracy and the Constitution may come down to whether he respects the rule of law. If he routinely ignores court orders and tries to bypass constitutional checks, that’s a red line—a more objective boundary—for harmful actions than subjective debates over what is or isn’t democratic. But if Democrats want to be effective advocates for democracy and the rule of law—especially long after Trump is gone—they need to start by listening, not just to their allies but to their critics, too.

I see persuasive activism as aligned with the goal of reducing toxic polarization. Conflict leads many of us to feel that we can’t be empathetic to our enemies—that doing so “helps the bad guys” and may even be traitorous to our side. But empathy and effective activism are not at odds. Caring about our opponents’ concerns will lead us to speak more persuasively and to better understand where they are coming from, which can help dilute the dangerously divisive political narratives we tell ourselves about others. Improving how we engage with one another will inevitably improve the things we fight about.

Democrats should not see an attempt to understand others’ views as tantamount to surrendering their values.⁴ It’s about understanding their fellow citizens’ perceptions, because in politics, perception often is reality. And in a polarized society, being aware of those perceptions—even if you disagree with them—is the first step toward changing them.

Zachary Elwood is the author of How Contempt Destroys Democracy and the host of the psychology podcast People Who Read People.

1. In the other direction, The Liberal Patriot’s Ruy Teixeira has referred to this dynamic among liberals as the “Fox News Fallacy.”

2. Fear and anger can make us into “democracy hypocrites.”

3. For example, see Musa Al-Gharbi's paper, “Race and the Race for the White House,” about academic bias against conservatives.

4. Want to hear a Republican express their frustrations with undemocratic behaviors they see on the Democrat side? Listen to a talk I had with Elizabeth Doll, who works with the organization Braver Angels.