'Semi-loyal politicians': Harvard professors detail 'four decisive' ways GOP 'fatally weakened' democracy

Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, professors of government at Harvard University and authors of How Democracies Die, on Friday detailed “four decisive moments” where Republican leaders favored authoritarianism over democracy, comparing the modern-day GOP to “the French right of the 1930s.”

In an essay published in the New York Times, Levitsky and Ziblatt recalled Spanish political scientist Juan Linz, who examined the two ways “mainstream politicians” proceed when navigating “the emergence of a popular authoritarian threat in their own ideological camp.”

For Linz, according to Levitsky and Ziblatt, politicians could either “act as loyal democrats, prioritizing democracy over their short-term ambitions,” or become “what Linz called semi-loyal democrats.”

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

“… When we look closely at the histories of democratic breakdowns, from Europe in the interwar period to Argentina, Brazil and Chile in the 1960s and 1970s to Venezuela in the early 2000s, we see a clear pattern: Semi-loyal politicians play a pivotal role in enabling authoritarians,” Levitsky and Ziblatt wrote.

Noting the similarities between France in the 1930s and the United States in the 2020s, the professors urged readers to “consider the example of France” — and detailed one historical event that bears striking resemblance to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol Building.

Per Levitsky and Ziblatt:

On Feb. 6, 1934, in the center of Paris, thousands of disaffected and angry men — veterans and members of right-wing militia groups — gathered near the national Parliament as its members were inside preparing to vote for a new government. They threw chairs, metal grates and rocks and used poles with razor blades on one end to try breach the doors of Parliament. Members of Parliament, frightened for their lives, had to sneak out of the building. Seventeen people were killed, and thousands were injured. Although the rioters failed to seize the Parliament building, they achieved one of their objectives: The centrist prime minister resigned the next day and was replaced by a right-leaning prime minister.

“Key members of France’s main conservative party, the Republican Federation, many of whom were inside the Parliament building that day, sympathized publicly with the rioters,” the authors noted. “Some praised the insurrectionists as heroes and patriots. Others dismissed the importance of the attack, denying that there had been an organized plot to overthrow the government.”

READ MORE: 'You can't get rid of them’: Republican laments 'kinsfolk' in the 'far-right wing' of the party

“The semi-loyalty of leading conservative politicians fatally weakened the immune system of French democracy,” the professors later added. “The Nazis, of course, finished it off.”

Describing the events of Jan. 6, 2021, Levitsky and Ziblatt argued former President Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election “wasn’t just a potential criminal offense. It also violated the cardinal rule of democracy: Politicians must accept the results of elections, win or lose.”

Levitsky and Ziblatt noted that the “leading candidates” at the first Republican primary debate agreed to support Trump as the Republican nominee even if he’s “convicted in a court of law.” Describing that support for Trump as “a small act of political cowardice aimed at avoiding the wrath of the base,” Levitsky and Ziblatt tore into the “ banal acquiescence” on display by Republican leaders.

“Democracy’s assassins always have accomplices among mainstream politicians in the halls of power,” they wrote. “The greatest threat to our democracy comes not from demagogues like Trump or even from extremist followers like those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, but rather from the ordinary politicians, many of them inside the Capitol that day, who protect and enable him.”

READ MORE: US military leader and experts accuse Tuberville of 'aiding and abetting communist regimes'

“It is semi-loyalists’ very respectability that makes them so dangerous,” they added. “… It is this subtle enabling of extremist forces that can fatally weaken democracies.”

The professors then laid out “ four decisive moments” where “Republican leaders have enabled authoritarianism” since the 2020 election:

1. “Rather than adhering to the cardinal rule of accepting election results after Joe Biden won in November, many Republican leaders either questioned the results or remained silent, refusing to publicly recognize Mr. Biden’s victory.”

2. “After Mr. Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives for the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, Senate Republicans overwhelmingly voted to acquit him, even though many conceded that, in Senator Mitch McConnell’s words, the president was ‘practically and morally responsible’ for the attack.”

3. “Republican leaders could have worked with Democrats to create an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 uprising.”

4. “With remarkably few exceptions, Republican leaders say they will still support Mr. Trump even if he is convicted of plotting to overturn an election.”

Just like France in the 1930s, the professors warned, “if Republican leaders continue to endorse Trump, they will normalize him yet again.”

“American voters must hold them to account,” they added.

READ MORE: Convicted Peter Navarro and Trump’s 'broader culture of lawlessness'

Read the full essay at the New York Times.