As an emergent political imaginary, illiberalism’s definition has itself become a site of contestation. To make sense of its rise, scholars have offered heterogenous definitions. We list some of these below as an introduction to the diverse perspectives informing the study of illiberalism today.
Marlene Laruelle
“I define illiberalism based on two components: (1) a critique of liberalism, either as a philosophy or a practice, in combination with a prior experience of liberalism before backlashing against it, and (2) the promotion of an alternative political project based on five criteria:
- a belief in the primacy of executive power and majoritarianism over and against institutional checks and balances and minority rights,
- a defense of the sovereignty of the nation-state over and against supranational institutions and international law,
- a call for a realist and transactional foreign policy in a multipolar world based on a civilizationalist interpretation
- advocating for the cultural homogeneity of the nation over and against multiculturalism, and
- demands for respect for and preservation of traditional hierarchies and values over and against those of left-progressivism.
To capture both the complexity and diversity of illiberal experiences, this definition relies on three major assumptions: (1) it does not see illiberalism as the polar opposite of liberalism, but as a part of a continuum as one gradually moves away from liberal norms; (2) it posits that illiberalism is not external to liberalism but a byproduct of it. This means that, depending on the context, the supply side of illiberal politics can rely on some forms of liberalism, especially on economic liberalism and neoliberalism, and can claim descent from within liberalism’s genealogy, for instance stating it is the authentic form of liberalism as opposed to a depraved progressivist or woke ideology; (3) it argues that illiberalism is context- sensitive: it takes different forms depending on time and space, adapts itself to national political cultures, and can be expressed either in moderate or radical ways.”
See: Marlene Laruelle. “Introduction: Illiberalism Studies as a Field.” in The Oxford Handbook of Illiberalism, edited by Marlene Laruelle. Oxford University Press, 2024, 1-40; “Illiberalism: a conceptual introduction,” East European Politics 38, no. 2 (2022): 303-327; “Liberalism’s Prefixes Issue: Ill-, anti-, a-, non-, post-,” in Matthijs Lok et al, Antiliberal Internationalism in the Twentieth Century. Beyond Left and Right? (London: Routledge), 25-34.
Julian G. Waller
“Illiberalism is a modern ideological or ideational family defined by a self understood opposition to and reaction against the experience of cultural, economic, and political liberalism, with pronounced tendencies toward the distrust of checking or minoritarian political institutions formed by apolitical experts, and focused on promoting a variety of collective, hierarchical, majoritarian, national level, and/or culturally integrative approaches to contemporary political society in a substantive manner as a positive project” (“Authoritarianism and Illiberalism,” Oxford Handbook of Illiberalism, 2024, p. 61).
See earlier variations in: “Distinctions With a Difference: Illiberalism and Authoritarianism in Scholarly Study,” Political Studies Review, 22:2, 2024 p. 372, and “Elites and Institutions in the Russian Thermidor: Regime Instrumentalism, Entrepreneurial Signaling, and Inherent Illiberalism,” Journal of Illiberalism Studies 1, no. 1 (2021): 4.
Zsolt Enyedi
“I argue for a definition of illiberalism centered on power concentration, a partisan state, and a closed society, in response to the three principles that govern liberal democracies: limited power, a neutral state, and an open society. (…) illiberalism is best understood as an umbrella concept, that leaves room for distinct sub‐types. Some types proposed in this article (e.g., the authoritarian, traditionalist, religious fundamentalist, libertarian, and nativist‐nationalist types) are more commonly found on the right, while others (e.g., the populist, paternalist, and materialist technocratic types) are open to both leftist and rightist interpretations.”
Zsolt Enyedi, “Concept and Varieties of Illiberalism,” Politics and Governance, vol. 12 (2024): 1-2 and 13.
Jasper Theodor Kauth and Desmond King
“We argue that what is commonly referred to as ‘illiberalism’ can be separated into two phenomena marked by distinct logics. We suggest that illiberalism represents either an opposition to procedural democratic norms—as disruptive illiberalism—or constitutes part of an ideological struggle—termed ideological illiberalism. Disruptive illiberalism can be found in the disguised anti-democratic attacks of autocrats in the making. On the other hand, ideological illiberalism, in the form of unequal allocation of rights and duties, is a part of ideological clashes within outwardly “liberal” democracies.”
Jasper Theodor Kauth and Desmond King, “Illiberalism” European Journal of Sociology 61, no. 3 (2020): 367.
András Sajó, Renáta Uitz, and Stephen Holmes
“Illiberalism refers to a set of social, political, cultural, legal, and mental phenomena associated with the waning of individual liberty (personal freedom) as an everyday experience. Illiberalism is not an ideology or a regime type. The rise of illiberalism is not always violent. At times it is not even unpleasant. Nor is it synonymous with totalitarianism or autocracy. It is compatible with the political rituals of a competitive democracy. It results from political, social, and economic practices that unduly concentrate powers in the executive branch, or from the limitations on social diversity or political pluralism (i.e. in the name of higher values such as Christianity, Hindutva, Islam, the common good, or peace and harmony). Some of the values and practices associated with illiberalism have a long historical pedigree, others are more recent. Indeed, various forms of illiberalism predate liberalism: human history is dominated by illiberal practices and liberalism emerged as a systematic attack on prevalent illiberal forms of social organization and thinking. The rise of illiberalism is a social fact – troubling for some, welcome to many.”
