It can be difficult to grasp authoritarianism because it rarely arrives all at once.
Instead, it often emerges through a series of actions that may seem disconnected on the surface: attacks on scientists who tell inconvenient truths, efforts to restrict voting access, attempts to punish nonprofit organizations, political interference in government decisionmaking, or rhetoric that encourages us to see fellow Americans as enemies rather than neighbors.
When viewed individually, these incidents can appear narrow, technical, or temporary. But when viewed together, they reveal something larger: a challenge to the democratic principles that allow people, communities, and science to thrive.
Authoritarian movements often rely on disinformation, historical revisionism, and attacks on independent sources of evidence because informed citizens are better equipped to recognize abuses of power and hold leaders accountable. When facts become negotiable and history is rewritten to serve political objectives, it becomes harder for communities to understand what is happening now, learn from the past, and make informed decisions about the future.
Over the last year, I’ve written about how authoritarian movements attack facts, suppress dissent, target vulnerable communities, and undermine democratic institutions. These developments show a pattern that threatens the foundations of an inclusive, participatory democracy. As I argued in What Authoritarian Regimes Do and later in Divide and Destroy, authoritarianism advances by weakening the institutions and democratic norms that allow people to participate fully in public life and hold leaders accountable for their actions.
At a moment when Americans are deeply divided on many public policy questions, we must recognize and champion the shared democratic principles that continue to inspire across the political spectrum, even when they feel less present—as they have at times throughout my career, and particularly in the past year, as I’ve worked on these issues, I have had the opportunity to connect with different constituencies, industries, faith traditions, communities, and political perspectives. And it is clear that while we disagree on many important issues – from different views on climate policy, taxation, healthcare, immigration, education, and more – we nevertheless agree that democracy itself is worth protecting. In a healthy democracy, that diversity of viewpoints is not a weakness, it is a strength.
It is also important to acknowledge that democracy in the United States has not always worked equally well for everyone. Throughout our history, many communities have been excluded from full participation, denied representation, or faced barriers to exercising their rights. Defending democracy should not mean preserving those inequities. It should mean strengthening democratic institutions so they become more inclusive, representative, and responsive to all people. A commitment to democracy requires both protecting what is valuable and recognizing and improving what has too often fallen short.
As concerns about the health of American democracy grow, now is the time for folks from different political traditions, industries, communities, and issue areas to come together around a minimum set of commitments essential to democratic self-government. These are not a political platform, nor do they require us to agree on every issue facing the country. Instead, they establish a common foundation and minimum points of unity that allow democratic disagreement to continue.
Without the rule of law, free and fair elections, a free civil society, and a commitment to resolving conflict peacefully, our ability to address any issue becomes compromised. These four principles are foundational to a functional and healthy democracy. The loss of any one of these means the functional loss of our democracy as we know it.
Commitment to the Rule of Law
The rule of law is one of democracy’s most important protections because it ensures that power remains accountable. It means that no person, political party, or institution is above, or beneath, the law. Constitutional rights apply to everyone. People are entitled to due process, equal treatment, and protection from arbitrary government action. Public officials are accountable when they abuse their authority, and institutions such as courts, Congress, state governments, inspectors general, journalists, watchdog organizations, and the public can continue to serve as checks to prevent the abuse of power.
For those of us who care about science and evidence-based policymaking, the rule of law has practical consequences. Scientific integrity depends on institutions that operate according to established laws, standards, and procedures rather than political loyalty. Public health protections, environmental safeguards, and scientific research programs all rely on transparent processes that constrain politicized decisionmaking.
When leaders attempt to weaken oversight, disregard legal limits, replace expertise with loyalty, or ignore evidence that conflicts with political objectives, they are not merely changing policy. They are weakening the systems that allow government to remain accountable to the people it serves. They are eroding trust that allows us to work together.
The rule of law is not a left, center or right principle. It is a democratic principle. Regardless of our political views, we all benefit from a system in which rights are protected, laws are applied fairly, and those entrusted with public authority remain accountable for how they use it.
Commitment to Free, Safe, and Fair Elections
Democracy depends on the ability of voters to choose their leaders and hold them accountable. Every eligible voter should be able to participate freely, safely, and without intimidation. Elections should be administered fairly, and election results should be respected.
These commitments may sound basic, but they are foundational, and they must be fought for. Elections are one of the most direct means by which people exercise power in a democracy. They are how communities communicate priorities, evaluate leaders’ performance, and influence the direction of public policy.
The Center for Science and Democracy has long emphasized that a healthy democracy reflects the will of the people and creates opportunities for broad participation and fair representation. Our research in election science has helped identify evidence-based approaches to increasing voter access, improving election administration, strengthening public confidence, and ensuring that people have meaningful opportunities to participate in democratic life.
Yet many communities continue to face barriers to participation. Restrictive voting laws, threats to election workers, attacks on the legitimacy of election outcomes, and extreme partisan gerrymandering all undermine democratic accountability. These barriers often fall disproportionately on communities that have historically faced exclusion from political power.
At a time of heightened political polarization, it is especially important to reaffirm a simple principle: political power comes from the people. Protecting free, safe, and fair elections protects every other democratic right.
Commitment to a Free Civil Society
Democracy is sustained not only through elections and government institutions but through the countless organizations and communities that make up civil society. Scientists, journalists, faith communities, educators, businesses, labor organizations, artists, nonprofits, advocacy groups, and local civic organizations all help create a society in which people can participate, organize, solve problems collectively, and hold leaders accountable.
These institutions provide independent sources of information, expertise, and community leadership. They create opportunities for people to engage beyond the ballot box and help ensure that public decisions are informed by a broad range of experiences and perspectives.
Throughout history, authoritarian movements have sought to weaken civil society because independent organizations create alternative centers of power and accountability. Efforts to intimidate critics, suppress dissent, attack universities, politicize research, undermine journalism, or pressure organizations to conform to a government’s political ideology are often aimed at limiting the public’s ability to organize and challenge those in power. As I wrote earlier this year, democracy depends on people’s ability to access reliable information and make informed decisions about public affairs. A shared commitment to independent facts and knowledge is essential for democratic decisionmaking and public accountability.
This is one reason UCS has spent so much time documenting attacks on science. When scientists are silenced, data are removed from public access, research is politicized, or independent expertise is sidelined, the consequences extend beyond science itself. These actions weaken independent sources of facts and make it harder for the public to evaluate government decisions and hold leaders accountable.
A free civil society is not an obstacle to democracy. It is one of democracy’s greatest strengths.
Commitment to Resolving Conflict Peacefully
Democracy does not eliminate conflict. It provides a framework for managing conflict peacefully.
People will always disagree about political priorities, public policies, and the future of the country. Those disagreements are not evidence that democracy is failing. In many respects, they are evidence that democracy is working. Citizens have the right to advocate for their beliefs, challenge government actions, protest injustice, and organize for change.
What democracy cannot survive is the replacement of political competition with intimidation, coercion, or violence.
Free speech is essential to democratic life, but so is a commitment to rejecting political violence and rhetoric that encourages violence against perceived opponents. Democratic societies depend on our willingness to regard one another as fellow citizens even when we strongly disagree.
One of the recurring themes in my writing on authoritarianism has been the danger of efforts to divide society into “us” and “them”. Throughout history, authoritarian movements have used fear, scapegoating, dehumanization, and disinformation to isolate vulnerable communities and consolidate power. These tactics weaken public trust, fracture communities, and make accountability more difficult.
Political opponents are not enemies. They are fellow participants in a shared democratic project. Preserving that understanding is essential if democracy is to endure.
We Must Unite Around Democracy, Not Agreement on Policy
Democracy is not a spectator sport, nor is it an individual endeavor. It is a collective exercise in self-government that depends on people working together across differences to solve problems, hold leaders accountable, and shape the future of their communities. The ability to cooperate despite disagreements is one of democracy’s greatest strengths and one reason movements and coalitions remain so important during periods of democratic stress. The significance of pro-democracy movements is not that everybody agrees on everything. The significance is that we do not.
It’s important to recognize that we can embrace the foundational tenets of democracy even as we disagree about many public policy questions. Some of us will advocate different solutions to the same problems. Others will continue to compete vigorously in the marketplace of ideas or argue for different priorities. None of that changes when we all unite behind these core principles of a healthy democracy. These principles therefore represent a floor, not a ceiling. They are minimum commitments that allow all of us with different interests and perspectives to work together in defense of democracy without requiring anyone to abandon their values or priorities.
For UCS, these commitments reinforce something we have long understood: science and democracy rise and fall together. Democracy creates the conditions that allow evidence to be gathered, debated, challenged, and applied in service of the public good. Science helps people understand complex problems, evaluate competing claims, and hold decisionmakers accountable. Both depend on transparency, participation, and freedom from political coercion.
From Principles to Action
A commitment to principles matters only if people act on it and history demonstrates that democratic institutions are not protected by individuals acting alone. They are defended through collective action. Communities organizing together, people showing up for one another, coalitions working across differences, and movements demanding accountability have repeatedly helped democracies withstand authoritarian pressure. This illustrates a simple lesson: concern is not enough. Defending democracy requires collective action.
We all have a role to play in protecting the democratic values that make science, accountability, and public participation possible. That work can take many forms, but some of the most important actions include:
- Defend facts, evidence, and independent science. Speak up when facts are distorted, research is politicized, or scientific expertise is sidelined. Reliable information is essential for both science and democracy.
- Protect free, safe, and fair elections. Support efforts that expand participation, protect voters from intimidation, and ensure that election results are respected. Democracy works only when everyone has a meaningful opportunity to participate.
- Stand with communities and institutions under attack. Civil society remains strongest when people support journalists, educators, scientists, nonprofit organizations, faith communities, and others who are speaking out in defense of democratic values.
- Reject efforts to divide us through fear and scapegoating. Authoritarian movements often seek to turn neighbors against one another. Building solidarity across communities is one of the most powerful ways to resist those tactics.
- Take action when opportunities arise. Whether that means contacting elected officials, participating in community meetings, joining a local organization, attending a public event, providing mutual aid for others, or supporting UCS campaigns, democracy depends on people who choose to engage rather than look away.
The future of our democracy will not be determined by a single election, a single court decision, or a single political figure. It will be shaped by whether people continue to defend the institutions, rights, freedoms, and democratic norms that make self-government possible. As I argued in Scientists Must Act, one of the greatest dangers in authoritarian moments is the belief that ordinary people have no power to influence events. History suggests otherwise. Democratic institutions are strongest when people show up to defend them. We are the ones we have been waiting for.
*CoPilot AI was used in the writing of this piece.