“For the first time in this century, among countries with over a million inhabitants, there are now fewer democracies than undemocratic regimes.” This sobering phrase is from Oxford University historian Timothy Garton Ash in an essay on “The Future of Liberalism”. This observation reflects what Larry Diamond of Stanford University calls the “democratic recession”. The election of Joe Biden as President of the United States is a relief. But this story is not yet over.
To understand what is going on, you have to link politics to economics. Branko Milanovic, specialist in inequalities, did so in Capitalism alone, published last year. Capitalism has triumphed, he argues. He is right: the market economy is indeed triumphant. But, he adds, capitalist economies go with two distinct political systems in major economies: the “liberal” model of the United States and its allies, which preoccupies MM. Garton Ash and Diamond, and the Chinese “political” model.
Mr Milanovic rightly maintains that liberal democracy is a good in itself and also allows peaceful self-correction. The people want freedom, and the American voters got rid of Donald Trump. The Chinese cannot do the same with Prime Minister Xi Jinping. The “political capitalism” argument is instrumental: it works. The rise of China has indeed been extraordinary. Many have noticed it too. A recent study by the Pew Research Center shows that many more Europeans now think China is the main economy than the United States think, although the Japanese and South Koreans disagree.
Mr. Milanovic’s dichotomy is useful but simplistic. A third political version of capitalism exists: demagogic authoritarian capitalism. It may be the result of collapsed communism, as in today’s Russia, or a weakened democracy, as in Brazil or Turkey. Demagogic authoritarian capitalism is a hybrid. As in the Chinese system of bureaucratic authoritarian capitalism, the ruler is above the law and democratically irresponsible – the elections are a sham. But power is personal and not institutionalized. It’s a corrupt gangster policy. It is based on the personal loyalty of sycophants and buddies. Often the core consists of family members, who are considered the most trustworthy of all. This is the political system that Mr. Trump wanted to install in the United States.
Such leaders are like wasp larvae that eat the spider from within. They manage to win an election and then erode the institutional and political ramparts against an undefined personal regime. Mr. Trump has all the relevant characteristics: truth is what he says it is; a fair election is the one he wins; and a good public servant is one who is loyal. He wants to be an autocrat. It’s different from saying he wants to rule. Nero was also not very interested in ruling. But he was definitely tyrannical.
The events in the United States have shown two crucial things. First, major American institutions, including the courts, have resisted his efforts to overturn the elections. Second, much of the Republican Party encouraged its lie that the election had been rigged. It underscored another reality of the past four years: Republican leaders have shown absolute obedience to their leader, almost to the last cry.
It is not a coincidence. It is the logical outcome of the political and economic strategy of the “plutopopulist”. Mr. Trump is a natural result of the strategic goal of the donor class – tax cuts and deregulation. To achieve this, they must convince a large part of the population to vote against their economic interests by focusing on culture and identity. This strategy has worked and will continue to work: Mr. Trump may be gone; Trumpism did not. Not entirely different patterns can be seen in Brexit Britain. The concentration of the academic left on its form of identity politics plays into the hands of its right-wing counterpart.
Mr. Biden is a decent man. What he wants to do nationally and internationally makes sense. But he will face an opposition determined to make him fail. Indeed, defeating the government is at the heart of right-wing politics – it and stoking grassroots rage. You have to be blind not to see where it leads. Donors would not be the first rich and powerful to believe, mistakenly, that they can control the demagogic demons they helped create.
As the Pew Inquiry shows, the reality of Mr. Trump’s United States has eroded the world’s confidence in his competence and decency. Mr. Biden will have a hard time regaining that trust, not because people don’t believe in him, but because they don’t believe in his country. And, with the future of the United States as a liberal democracy still uncertain, the cause remains in grave trouble around the world.
Liberal democracy has one big advantage: its main opponent. As Harvard’s Samantha Power notes, China’s approval rating in Gallup polls is a median of 32% among more than 130 countries. He hasn’t moved much for 10 years. People respect China, but don’t like it. China also faces the challenge of sustaining economic dynamism without a credible rule of law.
None of the current dominant systems are working well. Capitalism is innovative, but creates enormous social, political and environmental challenges. Liberal democracy is corroded, even at its core. But the authoritarian policies that challenge it are much worse. The inexplicable reign of gangsters or brutal bureaucrats is deeply depressing, even if the latter are far less incompetent. Those of us who continue to believe in freedom and democracy hope that Mr. Trump was the warning we all needed. But I doubt it. There is no one so blind as selfish rich people who will not see.
Follow Martin Wolf with myFT and on Twitter