Both the United States under President Trump and Brazil under Jair Bolsonaro experienced a period of anti-democratic rhetoric. That led to the decline of significant indicators of stable democratic regimes. Among these indicators are election intimidation, attacks on the judiciary, and the restriction of academic freedoms.
Election Interference
To start off, both countries had a significant increase of governmental intimidation during elections, as evidenced in the Varieties of Democracy index. During the lead up to the 2020 U.S elections there was some increase in election intimidation under President Trumps administration. Including an attempt by Trumps supports to storm the capital in aims to get electors to change their votes and overturn the results of the 2020 election. This is also evidenced by the reduction in the V-Dem score for governmental intimidation during elections. The United States saw a drop of almost a whole point on a 4-point scale. This was a historic and unprecedented drop in the history of tracking this metric on V-Dem. We also see a similar shift in Brazil under Bolsonaro. In which Brazil saw a drop of almost 1.5 points on the scale indicating an increase of governmental intimidation. Bolsonaro similar to trump also took extreme measures to secure election including using the federal police to stop busses used to get citizens to polling stations. This kind of voter intimidation is severely detrimental for a democracy. Where it can lead to reducing trust in the democratic process thus weaking vertical accountability. Making way for authoritarian figures like Bolsonaro and Trump to consolidate power, off the back of eroding democratic systems.
Attacks on the Judiciary
Additionally, another more severe example of Trump and Bolsonaro attacking democratic institutions is the attack in the judicial branch that both seem to love so very much. The judicial branch serves as on of the core protections from an executive exceeding their authority. It is extremely evident that President Trump has no regard for the judicial branch beyond putting his supporters on the bench. His administration is no stranger to defying court orders. And even President Trump himself has made his distaste for the judicial branch know on numerous occasions through posts on social media. This is also shown in the V-dem score of governmental attacks on the judiciary, where the United States experienced a hundred year low under President Trump during the 2020 elections. This blatant disregard for the Judicial Branch is also evident in Brazil under Bolsonaro. Where they had an even further dip in their V-dem score almost reaching a zero on the scale meaning attack on the judicial branch were happening almost every day. However, I think that Bolsonaro had even more of a hatred for the Judicial branch than Trump does. Given that he was willing to stage a coup to dismantle the judicial branch during the aftermath of his loss in the 2022 elections. Clearly there is a pattern of wannabe authoritarians making the judicial branch one of their primary targets on their list of how to take over a country’s democracy.
Overall, both Bolsonaro and Trump have used many of the same tactics from the authoritarian playbook. And were both successful in eroding major democratic institutions like faith in elections and the judicial branch. Both of which can destabilize democracies and lead to these authoritarian figures gaining even more power. However, all is not lost for democracy. Even though many of the same tactics were used in Brazil they managed to get Bolsonaro out of office and ban him from elections for the next decade. Also since his departure the V-dem scores mentioned above have gone back up to better levels. Both Brazil and the United States have rigorous democratic institutions that I believe can withstand the onslaught that Trump has sent their way. Just like Brazil kicked Bolsonaro out through an election so too can the US during the 2028 elections.
This comparison does an excellent job of identifying analogous patterns of democratic decline, particularly when you employ V-Dem metrics to objectively base the research. One method to strengthen the argument is to clearly tie these incidents to Nancy Bermeo’s concept of executive aggrandizement. Rather than dramatic breakdowns, both the United States under Donald Trump and Brazil under Jair Bolsonaro demonstrate persistent institutional weakening-particularly through pressure on elections and the judiciary-that is legally legitimate but undermines democratic principles.
Your discussion of electoral intimidation is also relevant to larger questions about vertical accountability. As we’ve seen in class, when individuals lose faith in elections as free and fair, it allows leaders to contest unfavorable results. This dynamic is particularly visible in the aftermath of both the 2020 US election and Brazil’s 2022 election, which culminated in incidents such as the January 6 US Capitol attack and the 2023 Brazilian Congress attack. These incidents demonstrate how hyperbole about “stolen elections” can translate into genuine threats to democratic order.
One intriguing comparison you begin to explore-but could expand on-is why democratic resilience differs between the two circumstances. Following the election, Brazil’s institutions, particularly its electoral authorities and courts, eventually restrained Bolsonaro, but institutional opposition in the United States was more fractured and relied on decentralized players (state officials, courts, and civil society). This begs a more general course question: what institutional configurations make democracies more resistant to erosion?
I really liked your comparison between the U.S. and Brazil. The similarities between Trump and Bolsonaro are pretty clear. Both attacked their elections, questioned the results, and went after the courts when they did not get their way.
I also thought your point about the courts was really important. Courts are supposed to stop leaders from having too much power. When leaders start ignoring or attacking the courts, democracy becomes a lot weaker.
I liked that you ended on a hopeful note too. Brazil shows that democracy can fight back. But it only works when voters, courts, and other leaders actually defend it.