The rise of Authoritarian Populism and the future of Indian Democracy

Over the past two decades, India has witnessed a steady erosion of its democratic exceptionalism. What was once celebrated as the world’s largest and most resilient democracy now shows visible signs of retreat from normative democratic practices. Majoritarian populism has gained unprecedented credence, manifesting in intolerance toward immigrants and minorities, curtailment of freedom of speech and press, and the shrinking role of the judiciary and civil society. To theorize this unexpected trend of democratic decline, it is crucial to move beyond the conventional focus on the hegemonic role of political parties and charismatic individuals. In India, authoritarian populism operates not merely through leaders or parties but as a broader process of institutional and ideational capture. The regime has strategically deployed ostensibly democratic institutions to consolidate power, thereby maintaining hegemony under the guise of democratic legitimacy. This process involves a deliberate reconfiguration of democratic-looking mechanisms—executives, legislatures, and judiciaries—alongside non-state actors such as media and religious organizations. These institutions, often acting in tandem, sustain the dominance of ruling powers while hollowing out democratic substance. In effect, India’s democratic authoritarianism is characterized by the paradoxical use of democratic forms to undermine democratic norms. Thus, the Indian case compels us to rethink theories of democratic decline. It illustrates how authoritarian populism does not necessarily dismantle institutions outright but rather repurposes them as instruments of control, blurring the line between democracy and authoritarianism. The future of Indian democracy, therefore, hinges on whether civil society, judiciary, and countervailing institutions can resist this capture and reclaim the normative foundations of democratic life.