Topic 1 — Understanding the Landscape of Illiberal Threats
Illiberalism is not only a political position or ideology. It is a dynamic pattern of behaviors, narratives, and institutional tactics that collectively erode liberal-democratic norms while maintaining the appearance of legitimacy. It operates simultaneously at the level of ideas, discourse, policies, and institutional practices, making it a multidimensional phenomenon. To counter illiberalism effectively, it is essential to diagnose which mechanisms are active in a given context and design tailored responses that address both the symptoms and the underlying drivers.
Research from the AuthLib project identifies a set of common elements across European contexts:
- Narrative attacks on pluralism and democratic institutions: Illiberal actors frequently delegitimize courts, oversight bodies, media, and other public institutions, framing them as inefficient, corrupt, or biased. They also target socially or politically marginalized groups, including migrants, minorities, and civil society actors, portraying them as threats to national cohesion or moral order or framing socially conservative groups such as frequent church-goers or traditionalist voters as ‘silent majorities’ under threat.
- In Poland, the ruling Law and Justice Party systematically undermined the constitutional court and public media by portraying them as biased “elites” out of touch with ordinary citizens. This narrative was used to justify controversial “reforms” that weakened judicial independence and concentrated power in the executive. This does not imply that all PiS voters or supporters endorse illiberal practices as electoral support often merely reflects heterogeneous motivations, including social policy preferences or distrust of former elites.
- Policy agendas framed around “order,” “security,” and “traditional values”: Even when operating within democratic systems, illiberal actors promote policy platforms that prioritize conformity, social control, and cultural homogeneity over individual rights, equality, and constitutional protections. These agendas are presented as necessary to restore societal stability or protect the “real people” from perceived threats.
- Hungary’s public policy under Viktor Orbán has repeatedly framed migration as an existential threat requiring “sovereign” control, despite low migration levels. Laws restricting asylum and civic freedoms were justified as “protecting traditional values.”
- Emotional mobilization: Illiberalism thrives on the strategic use of fear, resentment, and moral panic. Through rhetoric that emphasizes existential threats or societal decay, illiberal actors bypass rational deliberation and exploit psychological vulnerabilities to gain support and silence opposition.
- During the Brexit referendum campaign in the United Kingdom, a strong emotional narrative centered on fears about immigration and loss of sovereignty played a decisive role. Emotional appeals were prioritized over balanced information, deepening social divisions. While fear-based appeals were prominent in the Leave campaign, the Remain campaign was also widely labelled ‘Project Fear.’ This illustrates how emotional framing operated on both sides of the referendum.
- Transnational networks and mutual legitimation: Illiberal forces increasingly coordinate across borders, sharing messaging, policy playbooks, and symbolic support. This transnational diffusion amplifies their legitimacy, normalizes illiberal governance models, and provides a roadmap for replicating strategies in different democratic contexts.
- The Visegrád Group (V4), particularly Hungary and Poland, have collaborated on anti-migration and sovereignty narratives, supporting each other in EU forums and sharing communication strategies.
- Some populist movements in Western Europe have looked to the U.S. conservative media ecosystem for messaging models that combine moral panic with distrust of institutions.
Understanding these mechanisms is critical because each one requires different forms of democratic response: legal and institutional safeguards can protect courts and oversight bodies, civic engagement and deliberation can counteract narrative attacks and emotional manipulation, education and cultural initiatives can strengthen societal resilience, and international cooperation can disrupt transnational networks of illiberal influence.
As you can see, illiberal movements thrive on:
- Fear
- Perceived loss of identity
- Desire for simplicity
- Nostalgia
- Anger at inequality
- Distrust of institutions
- Perceived threat of “the others”
Strategies addressing these emotions through targeted policies, dialogue, community engagement, and narrative framing are more effective than purely factual communication. The exact strategies and mechanisms will be presented in the section below.
Reading materials:
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/10797
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21599165.2024.2420967 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21599165.2024.2420967