Brazil’s democracy, as of recent years, has faced significant erosion as a result of former president Jair Bolsonaro’s actions as a semi-loyalist who frequently rejected political norms, two of which Levitsky and Ziblatt argue to be threats to democracy in How Democracies Die (2018). One being mutual toleration, which is the idea that political rivals must see each other as equal and accept the other as legitimate in a democracy, even if a politician disagrees with their ideas, the other being institutional forbearance, which may be defined as restraining from applying a legal right. Bolsonaro frequently challenged the democratic “rules of the game,” adhering to them only when they served his political interests, ultimately using his power to weaken democracy. 

Bolsonaro’s refusal to accept the results of the January 2023 election, which was the victory of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, was a rejection of mutual toleration. He often spread misinformation and disinformation through the media, saying that Lula was corrupt and he did not respect him, and was allegedly involved in a plan to assassinate him, as well as Vice President Geraldo Alckmin and Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. 

Moreover, Bolsonaro made claims that the voting system was deceitful, and his skepticism of the Supreme Court and electoral system led to his attempt to overturn the election results, a rejection of institutional forbearance. As a result, this, in addition to his alleged involvement in the attack on three political leaders, eventually led to his conviction in September of 2025. The combination of these has led to significant polarization and political unrest. 

The attack on Brazil’s presidential palace, Congress, and the Supreme Court in 2023, following Lula’s inauguration, encouraged by Bolsonaro and carried through by his allies, who opposed Lula, specifically supports Levitsky and Ziblatt’s idea that the erosion of norms by elites can pose threats to democracy, and that polarization legitimizes the weakening of those political norms. This highly anti-democratic incident also serves as an example of a negative form of political participation, and supports the fact that polarization hurts democracy, and in this case leads to a distrust in the government by the people as a result of corruption, more specifically, questioning the accuracy of the election.

Lula was faced with the task of restoring the state of democracy, with a goal of “fixing the damage that Bolsonaro caused to Brazil’s global image,” although Bolsonaro’s supporters continued to make it difficult for him to execute his plans. Despite Brazil recovering from the attack in the capital, showing successful efforts to restore democracy, such as the implementation of tax reforms, the legitimazation of Lulaa’s victory by the government despite Bolsonaro’s attempts to overthrow it, which may have helped slowly regain people’s trust, and ultimately, the arrest of the former president, Brazil still struggles as a highly polarized democracy, which may put its future at risk. The weakening of democratic norms still continues to be a risk, as Levitsky and Ziblatt claim that democratic erosion is something that happens over a long period of time as these norms continue to be dismissed.