Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

We no longer have a shared view of ‘democracy.’ Should we abandon it?

Hand erasing the word "democracy"
Westend61/Getty Images

Singer is communications lead at Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement.

The term "democracy" has become a focal point in American politics, with Democrats and Republicans viewing it through different lenses. A term that once united Americans now has the potential to divide them … or lose them.


“They talk about democracy, I’m a threat to democracy. They’re the threat to democracy,” former President Donald Trump said during the debate with Vice President Kamala Harris. One recent study found that members of both parties believe their opponents are highly likely to subvert democratic norms. Other polls show that the state of democracy trails far behind other issues considered most important by voters in 2024.

For leaders and organizations engaged in American politics and civic life, understanding the nuanced perceptions of "democracy" is crucial. We can no longer assume a shared understanding or interpretation of this fundamental concept, nor that touting it is going to inspire everyday people. New data from PACE's Civic Language Perceptions Project offers valuable insights for those still hoping to effectively use the term “democracy.”

CLPP’s findings reveal that 70 percent of American voters hold a “positive” view of the term democracy, suggesting it still has general appeal. However, its appeal isn't uniform across the political spectrum. Liberals and Democrats tend to view the term more favorably than conservatives and Republicans.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Bar graphic showing views of "democracy" and "republic" by political ideology

PACE also found that the conversation around "democracy" and "republic" continues to evolve across the political spectrum, with very conservative respondents preferring republic to democracy by 14 points while very liberal respondents prefer democracy to republic by a whopping 45 points.

These dynamics arose in the spring at the state Republican convention in Washington, where delegates approved a resolution urging members to refrain from using the term "democracy."

The resolution states: “We encourage Republicans to substitute the words ‘republic’ and ‘republicanism’ where previously they have used the word ‘democracy.” Every time the word ‘democracy’ is used favorably it serves to promote the principles of the Democratic Party, the principles of which we ardently oppose.”

It might surprise some that a relatively low percentage (17 percent) of CLPP participants selected democracy as their most positive term when given a choice of seven options, while over a quarter (27 percent) chose democracy as their most negative term. This suggests that while “democracy” is generally viewed favorably, it may not be the most compelling or motivating concept for many Americans. This dovetails with the observations of political analysts who note that the term is increasingly being trivialized among the general public, particularly among young voters. Many of these voters are skeptical about whether America genuinely operates as a functioning democracy.

The term "democracy" may evolve further during and after the upcoming elections. As political tensions rise, it is possible that partisan interpretations of the word will become more entrenched. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean that leaders and organizations should abandon the term altogether. Despite diminishing confidence among both political parties that “democracy” will inspire voters, CLPP findings suggest that civic leaders should keep an open mind about the term. For example, CLPP found that the term is perceived more positively in 2023 (61 percent net positivity) than in 2021 (53 percent net positivity), with young people, independents and Black Americans seeing the most gains in positivity. The term also continues to be perceived more favorably by older Americans.

The challenge for civic leaders lies in reimagining how to use and define democracy to be more inclusive. CLPP found that liberals and conservatives emphasize different themes in their definitions of democracy, with liberals emphasizing the role of government as a tool for social justice and equality whereas conservatives highlighted the limits of government and the importance of individual liberty. Yet, there may be opportunities to promote shared values, such as fair elections, rejecting dictatorship and reducing political polarization, that resonate across political divides.

One might also cite a shared history of bipartisan support, spanning decades. In his Westminster Address, President Ronald Raegan said, “Democracy is not a fragile flower; still, it needs cultivating. If the rest of this century is to witness the gradual growth of freedom and democratic ideals, we must take actions to assist the campaign for democracy.” In his November 2022 remarks on standing up for democracy, President Joe Biden said, “From the very beginning, nothing has been guaranteed about democracy in America. Every generation has had to defend it, protect it, preserve it, choose it. … We must choose that path again.” Both emphasize that democracy is worth whatever effort and vigilance is required to protect and nurture it.

The way Americans think about "democracy" is evolving. While many still have a positive view of the term, it is essential that leaders rethink when, how and with whom they use the term, cognizant that it has the potential to unite as well as divide people across the political spectrum.

Read More

Older adult male in crowd of fans yawns and checks the time on his watch
Lighthouse Films/Getty Images

We should aim to be boring, at least when it comes to politics

Frazier is an assistant professor at the Crump College of Law at St. Thomas University and a Tarbell fellow.

American politics is anything but boring. That’s not a good thing. A stable, even dull political order is a worthy goal. Just as the Founders ditched a political order that seemed to create, rather than solve, crises, we should look for ways to reduce chaos, turmoil and incompetence.

Keep ReadingShow less
‘There is a diffused climate of threats and intimidation’: A conversation with Daniel Stid
Daniel Stid

‘There is a diffused climate of threats and intimidation’: A conversation with Daniel Stid

Berman is a distinguished fellow of practice at The Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, co-editor of Vital City, and co-author of "Gradual: The Case for Incremental Change in a Radical Age." This is the ninth in a series of interviews titled "The Polarization Project."

The problem of polarization has been on Daniel Stid’s mind for a while.

Trained as a political scientist, Stid has spent time working in government (as a staffer for former Rep. Dick Armey), business (at Boston Consulting Group) and the nonprofit sector (at the Bridgespan Group). But Stid is perhaps best known for founding and leading the Hewlett Foundation’s U.S. democracy program. From 2013 to 2022, Stid helped give away $180 million in grants to combat polarization and shore up American democracy. Since leaving Hewlett, he has created a new organization, Lyceum Labs, and launched a blog, The Art of Association, where he writes frequently about civil society and American politics.

Keep ReadingShow less
Suzette Brooks Masters
Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation

‘Democracy is something we have to fight for’: A conversation with Suzette Brooks Masters

Berman is a distinguished fellow of practice at The Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, co-editor of Vital City, and co-author of "Gradual: The Case for Incremental Change in a Radical Age." This is the seventh in a series of interviews titled "The Polarization Project."

Is polarization in the United States laying the groundwork for political violence? That is not a simple question to answer.

Affective polarization — the tendency of partisans to hate those who hold opposing political views — does seem to be growing in the United States. But as a recent report from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace makes clear, “many European countries show affective polarization at about the same level as that of the United States, but their democracies are not suffering as much, suggesting that something about the US political system, media, campaigns, or social fabric is allowing Americans’ level of emotional polarization to be particularly harmful to US democracy.”

Suzette Brooks Masters is someone whose job it is to think about threats to American democracy. The leader of the Better Futures Project at the Democracy Funders Network, Masters recently spent months studying innovations in resilient democracy from around the world. The resulting report, “Imagining Better Futures for American Democracy,” argues that one way to help protect American democracy from “authoritarian disruption” is to engage in a process of “reimagining our governance model for the future.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
US Capitol surrounded by digital code

Some members of Congress use social media to disparage the system they’re part of.

traffic_analyzer/Getty Images

Members of Congress undermine the country – and their own legitimacy – with antidemocratic rhetoric

Miller is a visiting assistant professor of political science at the University of Richmond.

Blame was cast far and wide after the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump. Obviously, the shooter was to blame, but depending on your perspective, you also blamed Democrats, Republicans or both for the highly charged partisan rhetoric that has heated up American political life and, for at least some people, made violence seem like an option.

While the event was shocking, the underlying mood has been building for quite a while. The political times Americans are living through are increasingly described as a “crisis of democracy.” Much has been written about growing polarization, reduced public trust in small-d democratic institutions and long-standing principles of behavior often thought of as “democratic norms,” and increasing levels of public support for autocratic ideas and leaders.

Keep ReadingShow less