A new regime divide? Affective polarization and attitudes towards democratic backsliding

Affective polarization has emerged as a key explanation for citizens' tolerance towards democratic backsliding. However, we argue that democratic violations by governments in power may themselves contribute to deepening democratic backsliding: for citizens who prioritize democratic values, (supporters of) a governing party that violates democratic norms may become unacceptable. Thus, affective polarization not only represents an explanation for democratic backsliding, but may also be its consequence. Studying the case of Hungary, a central example of democratic backsliding within Europe, we address two questions: first, to what extent are citizens’ evaluations of partisan groups determined by ideological divisions or by respective parties’ government participation? Second, do divergent party evaluations signal a divide over democracy itself? To assess the latter, we analyze whether voters who value liberal aspects of democracy evaluate the governing Fidesz party more negatively. Empirically, we collect original data, combining individual-level party evaluations and measures of affective polarization with a conjoint experiment that measures trade-offs around democratic violations. We use the outcomes of this conjoint, as well as a series of attitudinal questions on different aspects of democracy, as predictors of party evaluations. Our results support our expectation of a regime divide. Moreover, they indicate that citizens who value liberal aspects of democracy evaluate the governing right-wing Fidesz party significantly more negatively. However, this is not the case for either the radical-right Jobbik party or other opposition parties. Our findings contribute to a dynamic understanding of affective polarization, as well as to broader debates on democratic backsliding.