On June 10, 2000, London inaugurated the Millennium Footbridge, an innovative pedestrian bridge across the River Thames, designed with suspension cables to appear like a ribbon of steel. However, the bridge exhibited alarming side-to-side wobbling as crowds began to walk across it.
Engineers discovered that while the bridge was intended to accommodate random pedestrian movements that would cancel each other out, synchronized steps in large crowds caused extreme oscillations. As a result, the city closed the bridge just two days after its opening for necessary renovations.
The concept of unstable structures resonates with current discussions regarding democracy and its potential destabilization. A recent exploration into the game theory of democracy highlights the balance required to maintain democratic systems and the conditions that may lead to their collapse.
In Hungary, an anomaly in the constitution allowed Prime Minister Viktor Orban to secure a supermajority in parliament, facilitating amendments that bolstered his grip on power and undermined liberal democracy by transforming the judiciary and media into extensions of his authority.
Similarly, in Venezuela, a pivotal decision by the supreme court under Hugo Chávez significantly weakened democratic structures. Chávez was permitted to hold a referendum on constitutional changes that contravened legal protocols, enabling him to seize control of key institutions during his 14-year rule, a legacy that continues with his successor, Nicolás Maduro.
In the United States, Vice President Kamala Harris emphasized that democracy was at stake during electoral campaigns, particularly concerning the potential return of former President Donald Trump. While the U.S. is unlikely to face a collapse akin to those in Hungary or Venezuela, concerns about different forms of destabilization persist.
The U.S. political system is structured to operate with diverse, independent institutions that ideally balance each other's power. Historically, these institutions functioned distinctly, with crosscutting pressures necessitating broad coalitions for governance.
However, significant legislative changes, such as the 1965 Voting Rights Act, have contributed to political realignment, leading to increased national polarization between the two major parties. This shift has resulted in partisan pressures aligning political institutions more closely, reminiscent of crowds on the Millennium Bridge.
Political parties at the state level have increasingly mirrored national agendas, diminishing their independence. As issue groups have aligned with party coalitions, and partisan media environments have emerged, the effectiveness of checks and balances has been compromised. Politicians face strong incentives to support their party, often at the expense of bipartisan cooperation.
Judicial appointments have also become more politicized, with the courts reflecting partisan loyalties. While courts maintain the rule of law, the selection processes contribute to partisan biases, amplifying the stakes of political control as winning parties gain influence over judicial nominations.
Although the American democratic system has thus far navigated the challenges of polarization, the political climate remains fragile, with signs of instability that echo the issues faced by other nations.