Case analysis reveals mechanisms sustaining authoritarian populism in Turkey despite recurring crises, highlighting systemic flaws in opposition strategies for democratic reform.
What explains the resilience of authoritarian populism in power? The case of Turkey is highly instructive from a European and global point of view, as it shows: (a) under which conditions institutionalized authoritarian populism can remain in power in spite of several crises; and (b) what are unsuccessful and successful strategies that may beat institutionalized authoritarian populism. Analysing the case of the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP) under Erdoğan, this article focuses on the Turkish presidential and parliamentary elections in 2023, and the local elections in 2024. It argues that the AKP’s embedding of neoliberalism in social redistribution mechanisms, coupled with its often-ignored grassroots politics, are core mechanisms that help explain continued popular support for AKP/Erdoğan despite its severe crises. Furthermore, the opposition’s approach remains semi-progressive, partially leading to the reproduction of authoritarian mechanisms instead of re-ordering the political sphere towards encompassing democratization. I conclude by hinting to more general lessons from the case of Turkey for the European and global struggle against authoritarian populism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alp Kayserilioğlu (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: