08-03-2025
Democracy's canary: What anti-LGBTQ politics tell us about our democratic future
Ayo Sogunro is an international human rights lawyer and scholar-activist, currently undertaking legal research at Osgoode Hall Law School at York University.
The decline of a democracy rarely announces itself with dramatic flair. Instead, it often begins with seemingly isolated restrictions on specific groups – particularly minorities. Genuine democracies don't just guarantee voting rights, they also protect fundamental freedoms that ensure personal autonomy and human dignity for everyone. The right to vote is merely an illusion if some people do not have the freedom to express their identity, form relationships or make personal decisions about their bodies without state interference.
Yet today, these freedoms are now under systematic assault from forces that want to restrict individual liberties in the name of 'traditional values.' The pattern has become increasingly evident as anti-LGBTQ legislation across different countries proves to be a versatile tool for the introduction of authoritarian measures. The strategy is as effective as it is insidious: by targeting a marginalized group first, authoritarian politicians and movements minimize public resistance and test the waters for wider restrictions.
Consider recent developments: In 2021, Hungary passed restrictions on LGBTQ content in schools, alongside wider controls on information access. Russia's expanded 'gay propaganda' laws in 2022 coincided with tightened restrictions on press freedom and civil society. In the United States, what began with Florida's ' Don't Say Gay ' law has evolved into federal policy under Donald Trump 's second term, with executive orders banning diversity initiatives, restricting gender recognition to binary categories and excluding transgender persons from military service – all of which is happening in tandem with a radical consolidation of power for Mr. Trump and his inner circle, and the circumvention of institutional protections for federal government employees and the general public. Similarly, Uganda's 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act was passed in a legislative context that included stricter controls on NGO operations and expanded state-surveillance capacities. Meanwhile, Ghana's proposed anti-LGBTQ bill embeds new restrictions on media freedom and civil-society organizations. These are not coincidences, but components of a calculated strategy.
Anti-LGBTQ measures are effective as tools of democratic erosion because of their ability to fragment democratic opposition. By framing these restrictions as defences of vague 'traditional values' rather than what they truly are – attacks on civil liberties, such as freedom of expression or association – authoritarian politicians and movements can convince enough citizens to support measures that ultimately undermine their own democratic rights. The methodology is consistent across jurisdictions: create a moral panic about threatened 'values' – say, a 'war on woke' – and then leverage that fear to justify expanding state power and limiting civil liberties. This approach has proven remarkably successful in both democratic and semi-democratic contexts in Europe and Africa.
This pattern of attack distinguishes anti-LGBTQ measures from other forms of discrimination as indicators of democratic decay. Of course, racism and xenophobia remain serious concerns, but they don't necessarily signal systemic democratic failure. There are societies where racial discrimination or anti-migrant sentiment persists, but legal systems maintain remedies for affected individuals. South Africa, for instance, maintains robust democratic institutions and constitutional protections for its citizens despite widespread xenophobia, with migrants having access to courts and legal remedies even in the face of public hostility.
The queer power of reading
In essence, what sets anti-LGBTQ policies apart is their direct assault on democratic fundamentals: they typically involve not just discrimination, but the active suppression of advocacy, expression and basic civil rights for citizens within their own society. When governments ban LGBTQ-related advocacy or books, criminalize Pride marches or forbid public discussion of gender identity, they're not just targeting a specific group – they are dismantling the very mechanisms of democratic discourse and participation.
Even more troubling is the emergence of an unlikely alliance between various anti-democratic forces. American evangelical organizations, European far-right groups and certain Middle Eastern autocracies have found common cause in opposing liberal democratic values through a well-documented global anti-rights movement. While these groups may differ in their specific ideological or religious positions, they converge on an important point: dismantling the democratic institutions that limit their control over individual and social behaviour.
Paradoxically, some of the greatest beneficiaries of liberal democracy – billionaires such as Elon Musk and leading politicians from historically marginalized communities in the United States and Britain – are now actively working to reshape democratic institutions in ways that consolidate their individual power. These actors often exploit legitimate economic grievances and social anxieties to advance an agenda that ultimately serves their interests rather than addressing the root causes of public discontent.
And so, what are the implications? Defending LGBTQ rights isn't merely about supporting one marginalized community – it's about protecting the democratic principles that guarantee everyone's freedom. The same legal frameworks and civil society institutions that protect sexual and gender minorities also safeguard other fundamental democratic freedoms. When governments restrict LGBTQ advocacy, they create precedents and mechanisms that can be easily repurposed to target other minorities, independent media and civil-society organizations.
We need to understand these connections if we are to mount an effective response. Citizens who genuinely value democratic ideals must recognize that attacks on LGBTQ rights often signal authoritarian ambitions. The path forward requires building broad coalitions that understand these connections and can effectively resist the erosion of democratic norms. It means helping communities recognize that defending LGBTQ rights isn't just about equality – it's about preserving the democratic principles that protect everyone's freedom.
The future of democracy could depend on our ability to see through the smokescreen of 'traditional values' and identify these measures for what they truly are: calculated steps toward democratic erosion. In defending LGBTQ rights, we preserve the democratic principles that protect us all. The canary in the coal mine is still chirping – we would do well to heed its warning.
