Political Trust in the New Age of Autocratization

Today’s crises of democracy and the corresponding rise of autocracies are often connected to a lack of trust. This article argues first that distrust also has many legitimate places in democracies, but that, ultimately democracies do indeed require a certain basic political trust: one needs to assume that one’s fellow citizens are committed to democracy as an ongoing project of free and equal people; they need to be “reasonable” in the Rawlsian sense. That basic trust can be betrayed when particular citizens vote aspiring autocrats into office. Under such circumstances, there is a special burden on these citizens to disavow at least the policies that could further autocratization. Arguments in public discourse have very often suggested the exact opposite: liberals must show empathy with the voters of authoritarian populist parties. The article then briefly considers two other possibilities of increasing political trust: militant democracy and open voting; the former is in many ways fraught with danger, though not per se illegitimate, as a response to crises of political trust; the latter ought to be rejected outright.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy & Social Criticism
Published
2026-03-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537261434866
Primary Topic
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Political Trust in the New Age of Autocratization

Jan‐Werner Müller
Philosophy & Social Criticism
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
article

Political Trust in the New Age of Autocratization

Jan‐Werner Müller
article en

Abstract

Today’s crises of democracy and the corresponding rise of autocracies are often connected to a lack of trust. This article argues first that distrust also has many legitimate places in democracies, but that, ultimately democracies do indeed require a certain basic political trust: one needs to assume that one’s fellow citizens are committed to democracy as an ongoing project of free and equal people; they need to be “reasonable” in the Rawlsian sense. That basic trust can be betrayed when particular citizens vote aspiring autocrats into office. Under such circumstances, there is a special burden on these citizens to disavow at least the policies that could further autocratization. Arguments in public discourse have very often suggested the exact opposite: liberals must show empathy with the voters of authoritarian populist parties. The article then briefly considers two other possibilities of increasing political trust: militant democracy and open voting; the former is in many ways fraught with danger, though not per se illegitimate, as a response to crises of political trust; the latter ought to be rejected outright.

Philosophy & Social Criticism
Princeton University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions, Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
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.