Delegative democracy beyond Latin America

An analytical framework for the contemporary far-right in comparative perspective

Abstract

Liberal democracy faces a global crisis of legitimacy characterized by the erosion of institutional checks and the rise of autocratic projects. Despite the extensive literature on this subject, there remains a gap in understanding how theoretical frameworks developed in the Global South can explain phenomena in established democracies. This article addresses this gap by analyzing the "exportability" of Guillermo O'Donnell’s concept of delegative democracy. The central research question is: to what extent does the delegative logic explain the power concentration mechanisms of the contemporary far right? Using a qualitative analysis methodology and a "most different cases" research design (Brazil, Argentina, the United States, and Spain), the article argues that these movements employ a populist logic to transform electoral legitimacy into a delegative mandate that dismantles checks and balances. The main findings indicate that while the delegative drive is transversal, its institutional success depends on the resilience of judicial systems and systemic rules (presidentialism versus parliamentarism). The study concludes that O'Donnell's framework, in dialogue with the democratic erosion theories of Levitsky and Ziblatt, offers superior analytical sophistication for mapping the risks of global autocratization.

Keywords: Populism; Far-right; O'Donnell; Autocratization; Comparison.