Book Review

Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point. By Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt. (New York: Crown, 2023.)  

Reviewed by Rachel Maxfield, University of Virginia

In recent years, scholars, activists, and everyday citizens have become increasingly concerned with the quality of democracies around the world. Harvard professors of government Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt addressed this issue in their 2018 publication, How Democracies Die, in which they placed American democratic backsliding in a comparative context of democratic breakdowns. In their new book, Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point, Levitsky and Ziblatt consider America even more in depth as a case of potential democratic demise—unless its leaders and citizens take necessary action.  

America’s founders and critics feared a governmental tyranny of the majority, in which minority voices would remain subjected to the democratic rule of the predominant population. Now, Levitsky and Ziblatt consider the alternative threat of minority rule in American democracy, despite centuries of democratic stability upheld by institutional structures. This book focuses on events in American history and constitutional structures that have led to a dubious moment in American politics where partisan minorities can maintain considerable power despite contrasting majority opinions—and even majority votes. In the last several decades, partisan animosity has led to legislative gridlock. Institutional structures that were initially implemented by the writers of the Constitution to promote coalition building, such as the Electoral College, now lead to significant numbers of the American population unrepresented in election after election. Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that unless American citizens and politicians examine and raise issue with these threats and propose momentous constitutional changes, a functional, multiracial democracy in America will remain illusory. These include small-scale changes like abolishing the filibuster to large-scale changes like replacing America’s majoritarian electoral system with a proportional representation electoral system. Gripping storytelling and factual evidence provide context for readers to understand the history of American democratization and the potential of constitutional changes to protect democracy in the U.S. and elsewhere.  

The book is divided into eight chapters, each building upon the former to paint a picture of the threat of minority rule, a situation in which a minority group represented by a political party has greater power than the majority opinion or vote. In the first half of the book, Levitsky and Ziblatt explain the history of America’s democracy and establish the context of its current political threat. The authors argue how smooth democratic transitions occur when political parties believe victory is feasible in the future and that a transition of power will not lead to catastrophe. When the fear of losing feels personally or politically threatening, or the current political environment suggests permanent and ongoing losses, politicians are more likely to engage in authoritarian behavior. Loyal democrats are willing to ostracize antidemocratic extremists even from their own party, rejecting antidemocratic behavior and willingly creating coalitions with other parties in support of democracy. In contrast, semi-loyal democrats may also enforce laws that protect democracy—but only selectively, when it is more likely to benefit their person or their party. This is how Levitsky and Ziblatt characterize the Republican party: one that tolerates antidemocratic extremism and fails to meet basic democratic principles like accepting electoral outcomes. Unwillingness to accept defeat after elections or resort to violent reactions threatens not only the stability of American democracy, but the understanding of democracy in the international community.   

In the latter four chapters of the book, Levitsky and Ziblatt highlight counter-majoritarian constitutional structures, such as the Electoral College and equal state representation in the Senate. Since the realignment of the Democratic and Republican parties in the 1960s, the Democratic party became recognized as the party of civil rights and the Republican party as the conservative party. With each party appealing to their respective electorates—the Democratic party to minority groups and the Republican party to its largely White, evangelical base—identity politics and partisanship have risen to extraordinary levels. Now, efforts to subvert majoritarian rule have allowed partisan dominance in the Republican party without representation of the majority vote. Levitsky and Ziblatt conclude by considering other countries’ successful constitutional amendments and proposing that the U.S. follows suit. Ultimately, the authors suggest that change will require acknowledgement among American citizens that this founding document is both imperfect and should be modifiable.  

In their important contribution to current conversation on democracy, Levitsky and Ziblatt implore readers to consider how historical issues at the time of the drafting of America’s constitution continue to shape current government structures—despite a radically different America today. For example, Levitsky and Ziblatt highlight how deep schisms over the issue of enslavement between northern and southern states resulted not only in the institution enslavement but establishing enslaved people as only three-fifths of a count within the population in the constitution. The founders considered that reaching a constitutional consensus would have been impossible between northern and southern states without making this kind of concession. These examples show the historical context in which the Constitution was written and emphasize how social and political development should naturally lead to constitutional amendments over time. Readers encounter a compelling argument that the original document which defined American democracy in 1787 may not be what is most effective to protect a vastly different democracy today.  

Despite their objective aim, Levitsky and Ziblatt openly condemn the Republican party in America and several of its members for taking political advantage of legally permissible but blatantly antidemocratic actions. Even in retelling historical moments, Levitsky and Ziblatt use both implicit and explicit partisan language. For example, in recounting the Young Patriot riots in France on the 6th of February in 1934, Levitsky and Ziblatt emphasize “February 6” and the event as an “insurrection.” Though the comparison is more implied than stated, the language makes it nearly impossible for readers not to compare this event with the insurrection on the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021. The blame and use of triggering party cues may cause readers who identify strongly with the GOP to find it difficult to accept the book’s contributions.   

Although it is their aim to explain how the Republican party has succeeded in maintaining power while evading democratic regulations, Levitsky and Ziblatt could have highlighted how the constitution allows for any political party with a minority vote to power-grab. Demonstrating how threats to democratic representation will remain without constitutional changes—despite which party attempts to remain in power—may invite bipartisan support of this book and its impact on American politics and generalize this analysis to authoritarian behavior of political parties on an international scale. 

Along with a less partisan approach to explaining democratic threats, they would benefit from expanding upon the precarious balance of power needed for authoritarian leaders to maintain power. Capitalizing on their specialization as comparative political scientists, Levitsky and Ziblatt might have demonstrated that, according to long-standing research in authoritarianism and game theory, politicians in the Republican party have merely followed anticipated, strategic decision-making to control political power.  

Scholars of history and political science, practitioners, and advocates of democracy will appreciate the book’s comprehensive analysis on how some counter-majoritarian efforts have unintentionally permitted minority rule in America and hindered the prospect of a genuine multiracial democracy. Clearly structured and polished in narration, Tyranny of the Minority would also be appropriate for university students, or anyone interested in the current political climate. With a concluding charge to increase public discussion and activism over constitutional changes, this scholarly book is both friendly to and intended for wide audiences who care about democracy in America and elsewhere.  

Rachel Maxfield is a PhD student in the Politics department at the University of Virginia, studying comparative politics and political methodology. She studies Native American politics and authoritarianism, with an interest in understanding how power affects marginalized people groups and how the decisions of political elites exacerbate issues of inequality. Rachel examines this from a comparative perspective across autocratic and democratic regimes.