Description
Securitization theory has traditionally examined how states construct threats to justify extraordinary measures, yet the securitization of democracy itself remains underexplored. While democracy is conventionally framed as liberation from authoritarian rule, this paper examines how illiberal regimes invert this narrative, portraying democratic reform and liberal values as existential threats that legitimise authoritarian control. Focusing on Singapore under the People’s Action Party (PAP), the paper examines how PAP leaders construct and circulate securitising narratives of democracy through selective references to perceived Western and democratic instability. Using securitization theory and critical discourse analysis of parliamentary debates, state media, and party communications, it shows how PAP officials link political pluralism, social liberalism, and democratic reform to disorder, fragmentation, and decline. Events such as Brexit, Trump’s election, and Western political polarisation are invoked as cautionary tales of democracy’s destabilising potential, reinforcing the legitimacy of Singapore’s model of strong, centralised governance. The paper contributes to securitization scholarship by demonstrating how democracy itself becomes a referent threat rather than an object requiring protection. It shows that authoritarian resilience operates not only through coercive control but through discursive strategies that reframe liberalisation as endangerment, transforming potential reform into existential risk.
