A Liberal in Illiberal Times

The past ten years have witnessed a profound transformation in global political landscapes, with liberal institutions facing unprecedented challenges from rising illiberal movements. What began as a period of anxiety and uncertainty has evolved into something far more nuanced—a testament to the enduring strength of democratic values.

Contrary to dire predictions, the decade proved less traumatic than initially feared. While illiberal forces gained ground in various regions, the fundamental architecture of liberal democracy demonstrated remarkable resilience. This period has revealed that democratic systems possess deeper roots and greater adaptive capacity than critics often acknowledged.

The experience offers crucial insights into how liberal values can survive and even thrive in hostile environments. Through institutional innovation, civic mobilization, and strategic adaptation, democratic societies navigated challenges that many believed would prove existential.

The rise of illiberal movements across multiple continents created genuine concern about the future of democratic governance. These movements often combined nationalist rhetoric with attacks on independent institutions, media freedom, and judicial independence. Their appeal frequently stemmed from economic anxiety, cultural displacement, and perceived failures of traditional political establishments.

What became clear over time was that illiberal governance often contained inherent contradictions. While promising stability and strength, these systems frequently struggled with economic management, international relations, and even maintaining their own support bases. The gap between populist rhetoric and practical governance proved difficult to bridge.

Key characteristics of this period included:

• Concentrated executive power challenging institutional checks
• Media landscapes becoming increasingly polarized
• Independent judiciaries facing systematic pressure
• Civil society organizations adapting to new constraints

Despite these challenges, the fundamental demand for accountability and representation did not disappear. Citizens continued to find ways to express dissent, organize collectively, and demand better governance—even when formal democratic channels were constrained.

Liberal institutions proved more adaptable and resilient than anticipated. Rather than collapsing under pressure, many democratic systems evolved new mechanisms for preserving core values while operating within constrained environments. This adaptation occurred across multiple levels—legal, political, and social.

Independent judiciaries in several countries developed innovative strategies to maintain their authority. Through careful interpretation of existing laws and strategic case selection, courts preserved essential checks on executive power. Some jurisdictions saw judges emphasize procedural correctness and constitutional principles as bulwarks against political interference.

The role of civil society transformed significantly. Organizations that previously focused on policy advocacy shifted toward monitoring, documentation, and legal defense. This pivot proved crucial for maintaining institutional memory and creating accountability mechanisms even when formal oversight was weakened.

Democratic values persisted not through institutional perfection but through the daily commitment of citizens and officials who found ways to uphold principles within changing constraints.

Media ecosystems also demonstrated remarkable resilience. While traditional outlets faced pressure, new forms of independent journalism emerged. Digital platforms, despite their own challenges, provided alternative channels for information sharing and public discourse.

The decade produced several surprising developments that challenged initial assumptions about democratic decline. Economic performance under illiberal governance often proved less robust than promised, creating domestic pressures that limited political consolidation. International isolation and sanctions also created practical constraints on illiberal regimes.

Perhaps most significantly, the period revealed that democratic expectations once established are difficult to fully extinguish. Citizens who experienced democratic governance—even imperfect versions—retained expectations about participation, accountability, and rights. These expectations created persistent pressure for reform and restoration.

The international community also played a more complex role than initially anticipated. While external pressure had mixed effectiveness, diplomatic engagement, economic incentives, and people-to-people connections maintained channels for democratic ideas to circulate. The global interconnectedness that illiberal movements often criticized actually served as a lifeline for democratic values.

Key factors that limited illiberal consolidation included:

• Economic interdependence creating practical constraints
• Generational differences in political values
• Professional communities maintaining ethical standards
• Regional alliances providing alternative support structures

This decade offers crucial lessons for democratic renewal. First, institutional resilience depends less on perfect design than on the people who operate within them. Judges, journalists, civil servants, and citizens who maintained professional integrity under pressure proved essential to democratic survival.

Second, adaptability without principle is insufficient. Democratic institutions must evolve to meet new challenges, but they must do so while preserving core commitments to rights, accountability, and pluralism. The most successful adaptations were those that strengthened democratic substance rather than merely preserving democratic form.

Third, international engagement matters, but it must be strategic and sustained. Short-term pressure campaigns proved less effective than long-term relationship building, educational exchanges, and economic integration that created natural constituencies for democratic values.

Finally, the experience suggests that democratic decline is not inevitable. While challenges remain significant, the capacity for democratic systems to adapt, citizens to mobilize, and institutions to defend themselves is greater than often assumed. This does not mean complacency is warranted, but rather that despair is unwarranted.

The decade's experience suggests that liberal democracy remains a viable and resilient system, even in challenging environments. While the threats were real and significant, the response demonstrated that democratic values have deep roots and can adapt to new circumstances.

The path forward requires realistic optimism—acknowledging genuine challenges while recognizing the capacity for democratic renewal. This means investing in institutions, supporting independent media, and fostering civic engagement, all while remaining adaptable to changing circumstances.

Most importantly, the period reminds us that democratic resilience is ultimately a human project. It depends on the daily choices of citizens, officials, and communities who decide that democratic values are worth defending and adapting. This human dimension—often overlooked in institutional analysis—proved to be the decisive factor in how the decade unfolded.