Militarized elections and citizens’ support for democratic rights: evidence from India

Across the world, many citizens go to the polls amidst armed threats from both state and non-state actors. How do militarized elections affect citizens’ willingness to accept restrictions on democratic rights? We argue that when forming opinions about appropriate limits to state powers, citizens navigate competing threats from state and non-state actors. The display of state coercive force should make citizens more protective of civil and political rights. Yet, if it occurs in the context of threat posed by non-state actors, citizens may become more likely to accept that rights are restricted. We embed a vignette experiment with a selective information prime in a 2019 post-election survey of 1,080 Indian citizens across two states affected by armed insurgency. We find that being primed on a heavy state-military presence makes citizens more reluctant to accept restrictions on civil and political rights, but the effect is only found among politically marginalized groups. In the presence of violent non-state threats, however, citizens become more likely to support policies that curtail democratic rights.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Democratization
Published
2024-11-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2024.2421831
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Political Conflict and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.13

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Militarized elections and citizens’ support for democratic rights: evidence from India

Hanne Fjelde, Annekatrin Deglow
1 citations
Democratization
Political Conflict and Governance
1.13
article

Militarized elections and citizens’ support for democratic rights: evidence from India

Hanne Fjelde, Annekatrin Deglow
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Across the world, many citizens go to the polls amidst armed threats from both state and non-state actors. How do militarized elections affect citizens’ willingness to accept restrictions on democratic rights? We argue that when forming opinions about appropriate limits to state powers, citizens navigate competing threats from state and non-state actors. The display of state coercive force should make citizens more protective of civil and political rights. Yet, if it occurs in the context of threat posed by non-state actors, citizens may become more likely to accept that rights are restricted. We embed a vignette experiment with a selective information prime in a 2019 post-election survey of 1,080 Indian citizens across two states affected by armed insurgency. We find that being primed on a heavy state-military presence makes citizens more reluctant to accept restrictions on civil and political rights, but the effect is only found among politically marginalized groups. In the presence of violent non-state threats, however, citizens become more likely to support policies that curtail democratic rights.

DemocratizationVol. 32(4)
Uppsala University (SE)
Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien, Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Political Conflict and Governance
1.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Militarized elections and citizens’ support for democratic rights: evidence from India — Hanne Fjelde, Annekatrin Deglow · Democratization (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS