t24.com.tr
Global Democracy Decline: Autocracies Outnumber Democracies
The V-Dem Institute's 2025 report shows autocracies surpassing democracies globally for the first time this century; 72% of the world's population lives in non-full democracies, including Turkey, which is classified as an 'elective autocracy' due to increasingly controlled elections and suppression of opposition.
- What is the most significant global implication of the V-Dem Institute's finding that autocracies now outnumber democracies?
- The V-Dem Institute's 2025 report reveals a concerning trend: autocracies now outnumber democracies for the first time since the beginning of the 21st century. 72% of the global population lives under non-full democracies, including Turkey, which is categorized as an 'elective autocracy' alongside countries like India, Indonesia, and Pakistan.
- How has the Turkish government's actions regarding the 2023 elections and the treatment of opposition figures contributed to the 'elective autocracy' designation?
- This classification stems from the observation that elections in these nations, including Turkey, are increasingly manipulated to favor the ruling power, rendering them largely symbolic. This is evidenced by events such as the 2017 referendum's acceptance of unstamped ballots and the 2019 Istanbul mayoral re-election. The recent crackdown on dissent further reinforces this assessment.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of the observed trend towards authoritarianism in Turkey, considering the public's response and potential government actions?
- The ongoing suppression of opposition, including the arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu, highlights a potential escalation towards a more authoritarian regime. Proposed changes granting the Information and Communication Technologies Authority greater powers to censor online content raise serious concerns about freedom of expression and the fairness of future elections. The public's reaction, however, suggests potential resistance to further crackdowns.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the narrative largely from the perspective of the opposition, highlighting their grievances and the perceived injustices committed by the ruling party. While it mentions actions taken by the government, the emphasis leans heavily toward portraying the government's actions negatively. The headline, if there was one (not provided), would significantly influence this framing. The introductory paragraphs would also likely set the tone and the prioritization of information presented could reveal bias. While presenting the opposition's view is important, a more balanced approach incorporating government perspectives on these issues would enhance objectivity.
Language Bias
The language used is largely descriptive and factual, but certain phrases could be considered loaded. For example, describing the government's actions as "baskıcı bir iktidar" (oppressive power) and the government's aim as "ülkeyi felakete sürükleyen" (driving the country to disaster) presents a negative connotation. More neutral alternatives could be used, such as "the government" or "the ruling party" instead of loaded terms. The repeated use of terms like "kuşatma" (siege) and "baskı" (pressure) also contributes to a negative portrayal of the government's actions. While these terms reflect the opposition's viewpoint, including alternative descriptions of these events would maintain more neutral language.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the political situation in Turkey, particularly the actions of the ruling party and the opposition's response. However, it omits analysis of international perspectives on Turkey's democratic backsliding. While acknowledging space constraints is reasonable, including a brief mention of international reactions (e.g., from the EU or other international organizations) would provide a more complete picture. The lack of economic data beyond mentioning economic hardship is also a notable omission. Providing specific economic indicators would strengthen the analysis.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat dichotomous view of the political landscape, portraying a clear struggle between the ruling party and the opposition. While this is a significant aspect of the situation, the analysis could benefit from acknowledging the existence of other political actors and nuances within Turkish society. The framing of the situation as a simple eitheor choice between the current system and a potential future under the opposition overlooks the complexities of Turkish politics.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights a decline in democracy globally, with autocracies outnumbering democracies for the first time since the beginning of the 21st century. It details the erosion of democratic processes in Turkey, including suppression of opposition, manipulation of elections, and restrictions on media freedom. These actions directly undermine the rule of law, democratic institutions, and the ability of citizens to participate meaningfully in political processes. The reported crackdown on dissent, including arrests and detentions of political opponents, further exemplifies the deterioration of peace and justice. The proposed new regulations granting the Information and Communication Technologies Authority broad powers to block websites further restricts freedom of expression and access to information, essential components of strong institutions.