Introduction
Against the backdrop of the economic crisis that began in 2008 and the rise of populist parties, a new body of research has used interwar political developments to warn that even long-established Western democracies are fragile. We challenge this interwar analogy based on the fact that a relatively large number of interwar democracies were able to survive the recurrent crises of the 1920s and 1930s. The main aim of this book is to understand the striking resilience of these democracies, and how they differed from the many democracies that broke down in the same period. Previous theoretical accounts, which can be divided into structuralist, elitist, associational, and performance-based perspectives, do not adequately explain this variation. We advance an explanation that nests an associational perspective in a structuralist perspective. The model centres on democratic legacies and strong associational landscapes (i.e. vibrant civil societies and party institutionalization). These factors are rooted in a set of structural conditions associated with socio-economic development and state- and nation-building processes. Our empirical strategy consists of a combination of systematic comparisons of all interwar democratic spells and in-depth case-studies.