In their new book, The Assault on the State: How the Global Attack on Modern Government Endangers our Future (Polity Press), political scientists Jeffrey Kopstein, UC Irvine, and Stephen Hanson, William & Mary, argue for the defense of modern government against forces intent on its destruction. Below, the coauthors outline critical factors and actors contributing to the erosion of democratic institutions, the need for effective strategies that may reverse this slide, and what the future holds if current trends are left unchecked.

Q: What inspired your work on "The Assault on the State," and how did the idea for this book originate?

A: Our sense that our state institutions are under attack and that without them our air would be poisonous, our votes uncounted, and our markets dysfunctional. Across the world, in countries as diverse as Hungary, Israel, the UK and of course the U.S., attacks on the modern state and its workforce are intensifying. They are morphing into power grabs by self-aggrandizing politicians who attempt to seize control of the state for themselves and their cronies. What replaces the modern state once it is fatally undermined is not the free market and the flowering of personal liberty. Instead, the death of government agencies under the rule of law inevitably leads to the only realistic alternative: the rule of men.

Q: In your research, were you able to pinpoint a single, most significant factor contributing to the erosion of modern government institutions? Elaborate.

A: Three factors really: libertarian beliefs that we could get along without a state altogether, Christian nationalism that hates the secular state as a vehicle of attack on “traditional” values and redistribution to ethnic and racial minorities, and those who believe that our government would work better if we gave unlimited power to the executive with no restraints from experts and bureaucratic professionals. Although these three critiques of the “administrative state” (or as the more conspiracy minded among them sometimes term it the “deep state”) do not agree with each other, each finds something they like in the new personalistic strong men such as Trump, Orbán, Netanyahu, Modi, Bolsonaro, and Putin.

Q: Can you give us some examples that you explore as illustrations of attacks on the state? What do they have in common?

A: The one everyone remembers well is the attack on public health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. All of us watched President Trump sideline his own professionals and issue wild and unsound advice. But this is only the tip of the iceberg: attacks on climate science and the EPA are well known. Less known are attacks on food science, financial regulatory agencies, the judiciary, intelligence agencies, and the military. These attacks have occurred on not only in the U.S. but also all over the world where personalistic rulers come to power. The result is decaying infrastructure and inattention to problems that could threaten not only our democracy but the survival of the species. Increasingly our leaders pull the levers of power but what if these levers aren’t attached to anything? The modern, impersonal state is a gigantic achievement in human affairs, but a new brand of rulers—both democratic and undemocratic—has questioned its value. The dangers of state erosion imperil every aspect of our lives. We outline a strategy that can reverse this destructive trend before humanity is plunged back into the pathological personalistic politics of premodern times.

Q: What are some of the practical strategies you propose for reversing this slide, and how can they be implemented in today's political climate?

A: First, we believe that the problem has to be correctly identified. It is not merely an assault on democracy but perhaps something graver: an attack on modern governance itself. The politically active public needs to be fully cognizant of the key warning signs that indicate the erosion of modern state governance: the promotion of the ruler’s family and cronies to politically powerful positions, direct attacks on the staff of state agencies and the independence of judiciaries, and the denigration of professional expertise as a criterion for political promotion in favor of loyalty tests. Second, we should fortify and honor the modern state rather than attack it. Although much of our book describes the assault on the state from the right, saving the state will also require resisting the siren calls of the left. These include recommendations ranging from the radical democratic inclusion of ordinary citizens into everyday state administration to the rejection of meritocracy as a principle of recruitment into educational, cultural, and bureaucratic institutions. Such well-intentioned cures will be ineffective and quite possibly worse than the disease itself. Third, there needs to be an urgent drive to recruit the next generation of young people to commit themselves to lives of government service, lest the worsening attrition of professional expertise in our state agencies will pass the tipping point. Fourth, our foreign policy must also meet the challenge. We need to recognize that the assault on the modern state is being explicitly encouraged by personalistic strong men who would love nothing more than to dismantle the global liberal order.

Q: How do you envision the future if this current trend continues unchecked, and what are the potential consequences for global democracy and stability?

A: One way of thinking about this is Russia’s war on Ukraine. It is much more than a landgrab. It constitutes an attempt to create a bloc of like-minded strongmen leaders on the European landmass. What Putin wants more than anything is a world of Putins. Beyond Europe, the growing challenge of a Chinese regime that itself increasingly displays personalistic features can only be met by an international coalition capable of defending the legal framework that undergirds individual rights and free markets. The future of humanity depends, more profoundly than ever, on an alliance of law-based states committed to a world governed by shared rules, rather than a view of international politics as relations among “big men.”

Much ink has been spilled on the threat of democratic erosion, and we share that concern. But defending the modern state is vital for preserving democracy. From protecting civil rights to simply counting the votes, it’s hard to imagine a stable democratic future without the machinery of modern government. In its absence, elected representatives of the people may pull the formal levers of power—but these levers are increasingly unlikely to be attached to anything. The world has survived past periods of democratic crisis, but in a time of mounting social and environmental threats, it is unlikely to survive a return of the rule of men.

----

Stephen E. Hanson is the Lettie Pate Evans Professor of Government at William & Mary. He is the author of numerous scholarly books and articles on Russian, post-communist, and European politics in comparative perspective.

Jeffrey S. Kopstein is Dean's Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Irvine. He has written widely on democracy and dictatorship, political violence, and comparative politics.