How to mitigate support for illiberal procedures The role of procedural justice and citizens’ conceptions of democracy

Recent studies show that many voters are willing to support candidates who advocate illiberal procedures under certain conditions. Accordingly, many citizens trade off the protection of democratic norms in elections against partisan and policy interests. These studies, however, do not take into account that people might support politicians who advocate illiberal practices out of conviction, nor how to mitigate these illiberal tendencies. To address this gap, we use a novel survey experiment that examines the relevance of (a) citizens’ populist attitudes and conceptions of democracy in explaining support for politicians who advocate illiberalism as well as of (b) procedural justice in defending democracy. We argue that citizens’ support for politicians who seek to undermine democratic principles is motivated by a polity congruence between voters’ and politicians’ populist beliefs and conceptions of democracy. In addition, we examine whether individuals’ experience with procedural justice affects the likelihood of supporting politicians who advocate illiberal procedures. In our experimental design, respondents are first exposed to an intervention with varying levels of procedural justice. Respondents are then presented with several vignettes of politicians using democratic or illiberal procedures to implement their policy proposals in local politics. Our study thus contributes to a better understanding of people's motivations for supporting illiberal procedures and how these tendencies can be mitigated.