How do democratic backsliding indicators for the U.S. compare to other countries historically labeled fascist?
Executive summary
Measured by leading comparative indices and academic studies, the United States shows a clear and recent trajectory of democratic backsliding—sharp declines on multiple indicators since 2016 that, by some measures, have moved the country into the category of “electoral authoritarianism” or “backsliding democracy,” yet this decline differs in form and severity from the classic, violent fascist regimes of the 20th century [1] [2] [3].
1. What the indices actually register: electoral erosion, institutional aggrandizement, civil liberties declines
Quantitative tools used by scholars track electoral processes, political participation, civil liberties and checks on executive power, and most show the United States slipping: V‑Dem’s indices register significant declines in U.S. democracy from 2016–2020 and, under its current director, have classified the country as “electoral authoritarian” since 2025 [1], while other measures and expert reports similarly label the U.S. a “backsliding democracy” based on events around 2020–2021 including January 6 and subsequent institutional stresses [1] [2] [4].
2. How the U.S. compares to historical fascist cases in mechanism and scope
Classic fascist regimes of the 1920s–40s consolidated power through mass mobilization, radical one‑party rule, aggressive state violence and territorial expansion—features scholars link to “waves” of autocracy driven by great‑power dynamics [5]. By contrast, contemporary U.S. backsliding documented by Carnegie and others has been characterized so far by executive aggrandizement, attacks on independent media, politicized law enforcement and legal norms, and efforts to subvert electoral rules rather than wholesale abolition of elections or open conquest; scholars emphasize the U.S. has not devolved to the levels of organized political violence and repression seen in many textbook fascist cases [3] [2].
3. Subnational dynamics matter: states as laboratories of autocratization
A distinctive pattern in the U.S. is that many democratic erosions have been incubated at the state level—gerrymandering, voter‑access restrictions, felon disenfranchisement and administrative changes captured in Grumbach’s and others’ state‑level indices—making American backsliding more piecemeal and institutional than the rapid, centralized coups that marked historical fascisms [6] [7] [8].
4. Speed, reversibility and the “veneer” problem: elections, legitimation, and comparative risk
Several analysts caution that modern autocratisers often retain elections to cloak illegitimacy—a strategy observed in some 21st‑century backsliders and explicitly warned about by scholars linking populist aggrandizement to “electoral authoritarianism” [9]. This is salient for the U.S.: many indices and commentators note that elections remain an avenue for reversal even as other institutions corrode [2] [3]. That combination—formal electoral continuity plus substantive institutional capture—makes the U.S. comparable to contemporary hybrid backsliders (e.g., Hungary, Turkey, Brazil) in process, though not yet equal to the coercive extremity of historical fascisms [3] [4].
5. Disagreement, limits of measurement, and stakes for comparisons
Experts and indices do not speak with one voice: some tools place the U.S. at the cusp of autocracy or “electoral authoritarianism” [1], while other scholars urge careful terminology and warn against prematurely branding the U.S. fascist even as they identify fascistic elements like minority stigmatization and charismatic leadership [9]. Comparative work faces methodological limits—V‑Dem’s long historical series is rare but cross‑century comparison raises challenges, and subnational U.S. dynamics complicate neat country‑level analogies [1] [6]. The balanced conclusion across sources is firm: the U.S. is experiencing serious, measurable democratic erosion that mirrors the institutional strategies of modern autocratisers, but it has not yet replicated the mass violence, one‑party totalitarianism, or imperial aggression that defined historical fascist regimes [3] [5].