The summit “In Defense of Democracy” held in Barcelona this past weekend, on April 17 and 18, brought together Pedro Sánchez, Lula, Claudia Sheinbaum, and Gustavo Petro in response to the rise of radical right-wing movements. However, it also revealed a deeper intellectual shift: in a world where authoritarianism advances not through coups d’état but through social fatigue, cultural and identity insecurities, and the feeling of state powerlessness, defending democracy is no longer enough; it is now necessary to restore it with material promise, efficiency, and a narrative.
Democracy is on the defensive
At first glance, the gathering in Barcelona may seem like a typical progressive event: over 6,000 activists and leaders from more than 40 countries, calls for multilateralism, social justice, taxing the wealthy, and resistance against the far-right. However, the fact that this vocabulary is now central signifies something more serious: liberal democracy is no longer seen as a natural horizon of history, but as a vulnerable regime in need of political, legal, and symbolic protection. Leaders like Pedro Sánchez explicitly stated that democracy should no longer be taken for granted, while Lula, Sheinbaum, and others portrayed the moment as a global battle against authoritarianism and disinformation. This analysis aligns with a broader assessment: according to the 2026 report from V-Dem, more than a quarter of the world’s countries are undergoing autocratization, with six of the ten new cases located in Europe and North America. The institute also suggests that the United States has regressed to a democratic level comparable to that of 1965. Therefore, the alarm raised in Barcelona is not merely a partisan stance but a belated acknowledgment that the core of the Western bloc itself has become a site of democratic erosion. Beyond the reflections at the summit, the real question is whether a democratic system can lead to elected autocracies, as seen currently in the United States.
The real issue is not just the far-right but the social void in the center
The most interesting aspect of the Barcelona summit is not the designated enemy but the implicit acknowledgment of progressive weaknesses. Organizers highlighted the need to reconnect with working-class populations at a time when cost of living dominates electoral concerns. This statement is crucial as it reflects a growing intuition in studies on the European democratic crisis: democracy is crumbling not only due to illiberal ideological offensives but also because of governments’ failure to ensure economic security, transparency in public choices, and a sense of collective control. In recent years, populist movements have taken root in both cultural clashes and material precariousness. Another study by Chatham House advocates for a “re-politicization” of economic policies, so that citizens feel once again that budgetary, monetary, and social decisions result from democratic choices rather than technocratic mechanisms. This is why the Barcelona summit becomes intellectually more intriguing than it appears: it suggests that rhetorical anti-fascism is no longer sufficient and that a democracy that fails to provide protection or perspective ultimately creates fertile ground for its adversaries. The institutional defense of the regime is only strong if it is supported by a social coalition that still finds the system useful.
Europe enters the era of “strategic democracy”
The analysis can delve deeper than current events. The old concept of “militant democracy,” which posits that a free regime must actively defend itself against those seeking to destroy it, is resurfacing in contemporary legal and political debates. Recent research points out that this logic can take a “hard” form through the prohibition or neutralization of anti-democratic actors, as well as a more “strategic” form based on institutional architecture, media, political finance, and civic resilience. Europe is precisely moving towards this latter logic. Carnegie notes that by 2025, European support for democracy has shifted towards protecting democratic norms within the continent, deviating from the past when Brussels primarily viewed itself as a standards exporter. The prospective document from ESPAS reinforces this view: the European democratic decline is taking the shape of a “progressive emptying” rather than a sudden collapse. Seen through this lens, Barcelona is not just a left-wing summit; it is an intellectual transition laboratory. The question is no longer just about defeating the far-right but about governing fragmented societies without sliding into authoritarian safeguarding. This is the dilemma of the era. For Europe, the stakes are high: to remain a normative power, it must show that a democracy can still protect, decide, and endure without compromising its principles. Otherwise, the word “democracy” will remain inspiring in international discourses but slowly lose credibility in the daily lives of voters.
