Securing Democracy? How Security Narratives Shape Public Attitudes and Democratic Values

Application summary

This four-year research project investigates how security-based narratives influence democratic judgment among both political elites and the general public. In times of perceived crisis, whether due to pandemics, war, terrorism, or climate instability, governments often justify exceptional measures in the name of national security. While prior research has explored democratic backsliding and support for norm violations in electoral contexts, this project addresses a key gap: how securitization shapes attitudes toward civil liberties, minority rights, and institutional trust. It also examines a largely overlooked question: who opts out of democratic evaluation entirely, including those who say "don't know," remain silent, or feel unqualified to judge. Understanding these patterns is essential for assessing the resilience of democratic norms in moments of heightened fear and uncertainty. The project combines qualitative analysis of elite political discourse in Finland with survey experiments to test how framing, elite identity, and threat intensity influence public responses. By analyzing patterns of response and non-response, it captures both the content and boundaries of democratic engagement. By linking elite narratives to public silence and susceptibility, the research offers timely insights into how securitization may erode democratic accountability, both in Finland and in comparable contexts. In doing so, the project contributes to public understanding and debate by illuminating how narratives of threat can subtly shift the terms of political participation and reshape democratic expectations.