IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v12y2024a8582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anything but Representative Democracy: Explaining Conspiracy Believers’ Support for Direct Democracy and Technocracy

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Küppers

    (Department of Political Science, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Germany)

Abstract

Conspiracy theories gained considerable attention during the Covid-19 pandemic. Although studies have extensively explored their (mostly) negative impacts on various political and social aspects, like participation, health-related behavior, and violence, their influence on support for democracy remains relatively unexplored. The few existing studies offer conflicting findings, prompting my focus to shift from assessing generic support for democracy to examining preferences for alternative decision-making models. To address some limitations of prior research on alternative models of decision-making, I combine a trade-off item with a ranking methodology: respondents were prompted to indicate their first and second preferences for different democratic and non-democratic models over representative democracy. The study is based on data from a representative survey in Germany (July/August 2022; N = 2,536). My findings confirm that the belief in conspiracy theories is positively associated with a preference for direct democratic decision-making. However, conspiracy believers also favor expert-based decision-making over elected politicians—but direct democracy would be their primary choice. Although the evidence for a preference for autocracy over representative democracy is associated with a higher degree of uncertainty, it does suggest that conspiracy believers tend to favor “anything but” representative democracy. These findings contribute to the broader discourse on the impact of conspiracy beliefs on democratic systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Küppers, 2024. "Anything but Representative Democracy: Explaining Conspiracy Believers’ Support for Direct Democracy and Technocracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 12.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v12:y:2024:a:8582
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.8582
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/8582
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.8582?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexander Yendell & David Herbert, 2022. "Religion, Conspiracy Thinking, and the Rejection of Democracy: Evidence From the UK," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(4), pages 229-242.
    2. Nicholas Allen & Sarah Birch, 2015. "Process Preferences and British Public Opinion: Citizens' Judgements about Government in an Era of Anti-politics," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63(2), pages 390-411, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tea Golob & Maruša Gorišek & Matej Makarovič, 2023. "Authoritarian and Populist Challenges to Democracy Correspond to a Lack of Economic, Social, and Cultural Capitals," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-12, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v12:y:2024:a:8582. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.