An ‘Abductive’ Approach to Theorization of Militant Democracy: The Case of Post-authoritarian Democracies

Many argue that historical experiences of authoritarianism help explain variation in democratic states’ responses to extremism. The influence of Weimar instability and Nazi dictatorship on Germany’s ‘militant democracy’ is the paradigmatic example. A problem with such arguments is that experiences of authoritarianism may also be mobilized in rejection of militant responses to extremism. The relevance of historical experiences for explaining responses to anti-system actors may thus depend on how the past is ‘remembered’ and ‘mobilised’ for political ends. In the paper, we compare Spanish and Polish strategies against extremism. These states experienced periods of authoritarianism, but nevertheless avoided militant styles of ‘democratic defence’ thereafter. We pay particular attention to discourses justifying strategic choices and the role of historical memory therein, as well as political resources (institutional, ideological or otherwise) of speakers articulating different positions. Our focus on discourse also permits an analysis of the role of ethical and normative issues in public debate, including the process of shaping conceptions of democracy, legitimacy, liberty and human rights in both countries. Working ‘abductively’, we draw on theoretical insights of literatures on ‘historical memory’, ‘democratization’ and ‘securitization’, in light of analysis of ‘critical cases’ in which historical experiences of authoritarianism have avoided the militant responses to extremism.