No description available.

The aim of this paper is to study the course of events that led up to the 2021 legislation which allows Russian president Vladimir Putin to continue his presidential term until 2036. Based on the theoretic framework of historic institutionalism, the paper uses path dependence as the tool of analysis for the study. Using said tool, the paper aims to contribute to contemporary research on autocratization and provide new explanatory factors on what autocratization processes might look like. As such, the overall aim of the paper is to, with the aid of historical institutionalism and path dependence, explain the how’s and why’s in the autocratization process in Russia. By combining said analytic tool with a textual analysis methodology, the study finds distinct signs of path dependence during the time period studied.

This is a qualitative comparative case study, with two cases in focus Poland and Hungary. The purpose of this study is to compare two similar cases of negative democratic trends and to view similarities and differences. The research questions are; what democratic challenges do Poland and Hungary face in relation to the five arenas of the theory, civil society, political society, the rule of law, the state apparatus and the economic arena? What are the similarities and differences between the two countries? The theory used is Linz & Stepans democratization theory that uses five different arenas in order to analyze a state. The findings in the study is that there are many similarities in how the two states started their autocratization processes. The differences being that Hungary has come further in many of the arenas and are therefore more authoritarian. They also differ in the conditions the two different ruling parties had in order to start the autocratization process.

The objective of this essay is to examine which democratization factors that have contributed to the success of the democratization process in Costa Rica but not in Venezuela between 2000 and 2010. The theoretical framework is based on Juan Linz and Alfred Stepans five interactive arenas for a consolidated democracy. The methodology of this essay is composed of a comparative case study, which includes a most similar systems-design method. The choice of Costa Rica and Venezuela is based on their similarities in both history, culture, language and geographical location, but which have nevertheless led to such different successes in democratization between the years 2000-2010. The results show that all the five arenas have been contributing factors, while actors have played a major role in the countries various democratic developments. Costa Rica meets the requirements for all the selected democratization factors while Venezuela does not fully meet the requirements for any of them.

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.