When Democracy Erodes from Within

Have you noticed how politics has turned into a team sport? People do not just support political parties or politicians. They stick with them, like football fans. It doesn’t seem to matter whether governments perform spectacularly or fail disastrously. What matters is whether “your side” wins. This isn’t just anecdotal. It’s a growing problem in democracies across Europe and the world—and one with real, measurable consequences.

Using data from the European Social Survey, World Bank Governance Indicators, and the V-Dem database, we tracked social and political polarisation and democratic accountability from 2000 to 2020 in 28 European democracies. Our analysis was conducted on 202 country-year observations. The conclusion is unequivocal: higher polarisation predicts weaker democratic accountability even when accounting for differences in how widespread and intense partisanship is. The pattern holds whether we compare countries over time, or track changes within countries. This dual focus is crucial in exploring how polarisation impacts democratic accountability across different contexts.

Countries like Belgium, Finnland, or Germany show that democracies can remain responsive and accountable even when politics is turbulent.

Individual-level studies about polarisation had already shown that people with strong partisan identities rationalise failure and magnify the faults of the opponent. In polarised environments, whether ideological (left vs. right) or partisan (us vs. them), the debate becomes emotionalised, which makes reconsidering one’s political views feel like betrayal. This emotional attachment means citizens are less likely to switch sides, or punish their politicians for wrongdoings or poor performance.

Our study, published in the journal West European Politics, brings in new macro-level evidence about the damaging effects of polarisation. Even if individual voters want to act rationally, they operate within a polarised informational environment: partisan media, toxic discourse, filtered information, and institutions that reward political conflict over cooperation.

In this environment, the democratic relationship between citizens and politicians falters. Wrongdoings by politicians are often selectively reported, confined within partisan bubbles, or reframed in ways that deny responsibility and shift blame, preventing citizens from accessing reliable information. Moreover, the erosion of accountability also means that parliaments, courts, and watchdog institutions lose their strength.

As a consequence, corruption may grow unchecked. Public trust fades and citizens’ needs—especially those of minority groups—are pushed aside. And political divisions deepen further, making compromise nearly impossible.

To make this concrete, consider two very different countries in our data, Hungary and Norway, respectively. Hungary, especially during the last two decades, has become one of Europe’s most partisan-polarised democracy. Political discourse is dominated by us-vs-them rhetoric. Media pluralism has shrunk, and public debate is often framed in moral absolutes. Instead of just disagreeing, this divided landscape pushes citizens to despise opponents.

Our data shows that this rise in partisan polarisation coincided with a severe drop in democratic accountability. Since 2010, Hungary has experienced a marked weakening of institutional checks, media independence, and citizens’ ability to effectively monitor and constrain political elites.

In contrast, Norway has maintained relatively low levels of political polarisation over the past 20 years. While some ideological differences certainly exist, political discourse remains more civil, and electoral competition is based more on policy than identity. Norway scores much higher in terms of democratic accountability in our research.

Moving from Hungary-level polarisation to Norway-level polarisation is associated with a large, measurable gain in democratic accountability, too. These are not irreversible trends. Countries like Belgium, Finnland, or Germany show that democracies can remain responsive and accountable even when politics is turbulent.

The MORES project, from which this research was carried out, is exploring how emotions shape political engagement. The project research assumes that moral emotions like pride, anger, or contempt help explain the rise of political polarisation. This is not to say politics should be driven solely by reason. As the project claims, moral emotions help drive civic engagement. They can even push us to care about justice, solidarity, and fairness, as well as responsibility, order, and respect for tradition.

But when the debate is overemotionalised and exploited by charismatic leaders who stir up resentment rather than solve policy problems, the result is tribalism. These emotional entrepreneurs tell voters what they want to hear, demonise opponents, and discourage scrutiny by tapping into citizens’ unmet needs.

How to meet this challenge? First, citizens need greater awareness of how politicians exploit moral emotions to divide society. Importantly, polarisation is not only about citizens’ feelings; it is structural. It reshapes institutions, media, and participation in ways that systematically weaken accountability. Through the MORES project, researchers across Europe are developing tools to build emotional resilience—the type designed to recognise and counter political manipulation. These resources are not about changing partisan loyalties. They aim to empower citizens to distinguish between legitimate persuasion and emotional tactics meant to polarise. This, in turn, strengthens their ability to hold politicians accountable—even when they are loyal to them.

Meet the Authors

Veronika Patkós is a political scientist whose work focuses on comparative politics, voting behaviour, and political polarisation. Her research explores how partisanship and ideological divides shape democratic accountability across Europe. Patkós is a senior research fellow at the ELTE Centre for Social Sciences, an assistant professor at ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, and a participant in the MORES research project.

Bendegúz Plesz is a political scientist and early career researcher specialising in electoral behaviour and democratic theory. His work explores how political identities shape voting patterns and democratic representation. Plesz is a junior research fellow at the ELTE Centre for Social Sciences, a PhD candidate and lecturer at ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, and a participant in the MORES research project.

Download Information

Patkós, V., & Plesz, B. (2025). Does political polarisation undermine democratic accountability? Evidence from 28 European democracies. West European Politics, 1–33. Download this open-access MORES publication here.

Join the Conversation

Gain exclusive scientific insights from MORES. Sign up to our newsletter today.

Send Questions

Comments about the blog post? Contact us at [email protected].