Social Networks and the Backsliding of Democracy

Abstract

Since the 2000s, numerous countries, including both liberal and electoral democracies, have experienced a decline in democracy, which in some instances has led to the collapse of democratic systems. This decline is characterized by several evolutionary dynamics: an increase in political polarization, growing control by rulers over their political parties and government branches (especially parliament), and legislative changes that weaken or even dismantle the legal and constitutional foundations of liberal democracy (S. Haggard, R. Kaufman, 2021). Georgia can also be categorized as a country experiencing democratic deterioration (V-Dem, 2025). Similar to the Third Wave of democratization, this trend of democratic backsliding is global in nature; thus, some factors contributing to it are shared across borders and transcend individual countries. Several theoretical perspectives can help us understand the backsliding of democracy. According to Huntington, democratization occurs in waves— each rise is followed by a setback or retreat (Huntington, 1991). Thus, the current developments are not unprecedented. As in previous waves, not all countries will maintain the gains achieved during the Third Wave of democratization. A contemporary interpretation of Carl Polanyi's work also emphasizes the wave-like nature of social dynamics: the rise of market liberalism triggers counter-movements, including fascism and communism, which oppose the values and institutions of prior eras (Polanyi, 2000; Burawoy, 2020). The earlier Marxist paradigm offers a different causal perspective on this process. The Third Wave of democratization aligns historically with the information revolution, the creation of new technologies, and the emergence of new social communication structures. New technologies, particularly the Internet, significantly impact both economic and political processes, disrupting previously established institutions, including democracy, and paving the way for the emergence of new systems. The effects of television and, later, the Internet on political systems have been the focus of considerable research (Habermas, 1991; Keane, 2013). In particular, scholars question the extent to which television contributed to the crisis of representative democracy and how social networks induced polarization and populism. This paper examines the impact of social networks (specifically, Facebook) on the process of democratic decline (polarization, concentration of power, authoritarian collapse) within the Georgian context. According to Castells (2024), “Social media do not create political and ideological polarization; the roots of such polarization lie within societal conflicts. However, they exacerbate and broaden this polarization by using the digital public sphere as an amplifier for uncivil ideological confrontations.” Political messages that circulate in self-communication spaces tend to be more effective and popular when they are based on common sense rather than rational thought. Waisbord (2019) notes, “Social media offer unlimited opportunities for political discourse that are unbound by the standards of decency and respect traditionally upheld by quality or elite news media.” Various counter-rational political ideologies and communication strategies emerge within this space. The spread of self-communication gives rise to a new media economy, which facilitates new methods and channels of political influence, including personalized “echo chambers” and the fragmentation of civic public space into radicalized extremes. Using Georgia as a case study, this paper will explore various forms of polarization: preference polarization (pluralistic competition), agenda polarization (populism), and the stigmatization and dehumanization of social groups (leading to authoritarian collapse). Each type of polarization is accompanied by specific discursive ethics, both among political actors and within civil society. Analyzing the Georgian example reveals that the structural transformation of political communication strongly affects the political system. As society's potential for protest mobilization increases, the system's ability to maintain constitutional order diminishes. In a context of radicalized confrontation, violence may become a rational means to maintain or seize power. The constitutional order, which previously played a crucial role in stabilizing political institutions during the era of liberal democracy, is now facing a legitimacy crisis.