Democracies worldwide are facing a third wave of autocratization, in which a new model tactic has emerged to end democracies. During previous waves coup d’état have been the main reason why democracies breakdown. However, they do still occur during the third wave of autocratization, but previous research has focused on theoretically develop the reasons for why coups occur through focusing on the military and specific regions. In addition, various definitions exist regarding coup d’état, and as a result, its definition has become fragmented, which has had real-life implications. The Capitol Insurrection that occurred in the United States on January 6th, 2021, introduced an unprecedented attack on one of the world’s most prominent and noticeable democracies, intending to overturn the 2020 Presidential Election. The Capitol Insurrection has been defined as a domestic terrorist attack and, thus, not an attempted takeover. Therefore, this thesis aims to analyze the concept of coup d´état to develop the understanding of takeover attempts in democracies. In addition, it aspires to theoretically develop the concept of takeovers in democracies through applying a multiple-case design consisting of three cases that have been defined as coups and three cases that follow the new tactic used in the third wave of autocratization. The thesis summarizes the previous definitions and explanations regarding takeovers and applies that to analyze how and what characterized the six cases. In addition, the findings of the six cases are compared to the previous definitions to analyze what speaks for and against a broadened definition of a takeover. The analysis of this thesis finds and argues for that there is a need to redefine the model tactic during the third wave of autocratization to a type of takeover performed by the chief executive and political elites, in other words, performed by the government for government.

No description available.

The study examines to what extent Levitsky & Ziblatt’s theory of democratic backsliding, as a universal three-step sequential process of democratic deterioration, can explain the novel phenomena of Covid-19 autocratization, in the context of Poland. Via said aim, the research serves as an explorative investigation into the strategies and methods used to invoke democratic backsliding amidst the Covid-19 pandemic. The theory’s external validity is assessed by analyzing the most blatant and far-reaching policies of Polish Covid-19 autocratization, targeting the presidential election, health personnel, and civil servants. To structure said analysis Vedung’s goal-attainment evaluation model is utilized. Results conclude that the theory lacks significant explanatory power. While the targets of democratic deterioration remained relevant, theoretical conformity only occurred for one of the analyzed policies, while the rest revealed tactics of democratic deterioration not theoretically applicable. Moreover, substantial parts of the theory remained irrelevant, and the theory’s sequential aspect did not apply. Consequently, the study proposes a revised version of the theoretical framework, encompassing strategies of democratic deterioration specific to the examined context and that disregards the sequential aspect. The likely explanation for the lack of theoretical conformity is attributed to the structural component; the theory suggests democratic backsliding as a gradual and strategic process, whereas Covid-19 autocratization occurred more chaotically and opportunistically, instigating autocratization whenever and wherever possible. The opportunistic structure also elucidates the novel and imaginative strategies through which autocratization was invoked, capitalizing on the alternative prospects of democratic deterioration presented by the crisis.

The unexpected COVID-19 pandemic demanded a strong and firm state response in order to curb the unprecedented, multilevel crisis caused by the spread of SARS-CoV-2. The arrival of the virus in the EU in early 2020, including the terrible Italian first-wave outbreak, incited the primacy of health and life over any other right or freedom. Although understandable, this scenario raised concerns over the possibility of instrumentalization of the pandemic by the populist governments, given the affinity between the rise of populism discourse and practices in the event, or narrative, of crisis. With consideration of the conditions of the rule of law in the European Union, the quasi-autocracies of Poland and Hungary become interesting research objects. The present work describes these countries' measures and analyses their legality and compliance to the rule of law, together with considerations to the impact of said measures upon these countries' democratic institutions. Furthermore, the same operation will be performed for the Italian scenario, which leads to a comparison to be made between the three countries' pandemic managements, and, ultimately, a comparison between the Central-Eastern European populism and Western European populism. Due to the novelty of the subject, there is a lack of work on the...

The political uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa in 2011 created a new political order in the region. This research is aimed at examining how political trust has developed from 2011- 2022 in Tunisia and Egypt. It also aims to understand which variables affect political trust and whether the two countries differ. The purpose of this study is to contribute to the field by using the most recent data up until 2022. The research has been conducted with a comparative quantitative method, using Arab Barometer survey data. The results of the study results align with previous scholars’ results, the political trust declined in both countries after the Arab Spring but the most recent results from Tunisia show that the trust is slightly recovering. The results also indicate that the institutional theories of political trust are the more relevant theories when it comes to explaining political trust in the studied countries.

The effect of regime type on conflict onset is a well-studied phenomenon, and various studies have found that variance in regime type, and within regime types, affects conflict onset. For instance, militarization in autocracies seems to be linked with increased risk of initiating conflict. However, even in the studies that disaggregate types of autocracies, the categorizations are relatively shallow. This thesis aims to create a definition of military dictatorships which captures their complexity more fully, to determine whether militarization truly does increase the risk of conflict onset. Military dictatorships are here defined as a state that achieves and maintains power through threat or actual use of force, is outwardly or effectively controlled by military officers, and places high value on maintaining a powerful armed force to protect constitutional and territorial integrity. The method used is a logistic regression, where the independent variable is military dictatorship, and the dependent variable is directed dyads. The results show that when a state is a military dictatorship, the log odds of it initiating conflict is 0.73; military dictatorships are indeed more likely to initiate conflict than autocracies in general.

Ever since its inception, the EU’s main goal has always been to spread its values of democracy and freedom. The EU’s success in spreading these values has been great until recently when some of the member states have gone through an autocratization. The clearest case of this is Hungary, which can no longer be seen as a democracy, due to its autocratization. Seeing as the EU has certain demands in democracy for countries that want to join the EU, it is strange that they let Hungary continue to be a part of the EU.  This paper will examine what the EU has done to hinder Hungary’s autocratization through its normative power. The results show that the EU has penalised Hungary in terms of sanctions and an article-7 procedure. Though, the EU is far away from throwing Hungary out of the EU, mostly because it is near impossible for the EU to exclude Hungary from the EU. The only way that Hungary can leave the EU is by their own choice.

Denna uppsats analyserar den svenska debatten kring att demokratin i Sverige är hotad under 2023. Uppsatsen syftar till att se vilka svenska aktörer som driver debatten i några av Sveriges mest lästa tidningar, samt analysera deras argument för att förstå vilken autokratiseringstyp, om någon, de hävdar att Sverige skulle befinna sig i. Vidare diskuteras även vilka utmaningar den mest framträdande autokratiseringstypen skulle skapa i Sverige. Detta görs genom en kvalitativ textanalys på tio utvalda debattartiklar, krönikor och ledare publicerade under 2023 i de utvalda tidningarna. Argumenten lyfts fram och analyseras sedan tillsammans med de fyra senast observerade autokratiseringstyperna. Analysen av argumenten visar att de flesta aktörer som påstår att demokratin är hotad har politisk vinning med undantag för några få. De hävdar att Sverige befinner sig i autokratiseringstyperna “hot och hat” samt “eliterna har makten”. Utmaningarna som tydligast identifieras kopplas till ”hot och hat” och innebär utmaningar för den lokala och regionala demokratin i Sverige med fokus på konsekvenserna av begräsningar av yttrandefriheten. Autokratiseringstyperna är endast observationer av processer i olika länder och det finns ingen forskning som pekar på vad som är ett exakt startskott för en demokratisk regression. Det finns heller ingen utländsk forskning på att den svenska demokratin skulle vara hotad. Därför går det inte att konstatera att Sverige faktiskt befinner sig i en pågående autokratiseringsprocess. / This essay analyzes the Swedish debate surrounding the perceived threat to democracy in Sweden during 2023. The aim of the essay is to identify the actors driving the debate in some of Sweden's most widely read newspapers, and to analyze their arguments in order to understand which type of autocratization, if any, they claim Sweden to be experiencing. Furthermore, the essay discusses the challenges that the most prominent type of autocratization would pose in Sweden. This is done through a qualitative textual analysis of ten selected opinion articles, columns, and editorials published in the selected newspapers during 2023. The arguments are highlighted and then analyzed alongside the four most recently observed types of autocratization. The analysis of the arguments reveals that most actors claiming democracy is threatened have political motives, with a few exceptions. They argue that Sweden is experiencing the autocratization types of "threat and hatred" and "the elites have power." The challenges most clearly identified are linked to "threat and hatred" and entail challenges for local and regional democracy in Sweden with a foucs on the consequences of restrictions on freedom of expression. The autocratization types are merely observations of autocratization processes in different countries, and there is no research indicating what constitutes an exact trigger for democratic regression. There is also no foreign research suggesting that Swedish democracy is under threat. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that Sweden is actually undergoing an autocratization process.