Democracy Is a Living Thing
A report from the “Challenges to Democracy” forum in Zürich, 10 June 2025
Democracy is in decline across the world — not just in the United States.
To better understand the decline and thus (fingers crossed!) how to rebuild democracy, I’m trying to learn as much as I can — wherever I am.
Tuesday night, that was Zürich, where the law firm of Walder Wyss hosted a “Challenges to Democracy” forum, organized by the Harvard Club — in cooperation with alumni clubs from several other elite universities, including Stanford. I was there in person. The event was also livestreamed: As one of the organizers mentioned, in addition to many people from around the world, several bots also registered.
Our speakers were:
Dr. Eri Bertsou, Assistant Professor at the University of St Gallen (Switzerland), expert on democracy
Velina Tchakarova, founder of FACE consultancy (Austria), advises clients (companies, governments) on geopolitical challenges
Matt Johnson, MA in journalism from KU, published in many outlets, journalist based in Zürich
I love the internationalism represented here: Bertsou hails from Greece, Tchakarova grew up in Bulgaria, and Johnson is American. (He was zooming in via Teams, but the others were there in person.)
To encourage open conversation, the organizers did not record the event. Out of respect for the organizers’ decision, I did not take any photos, lest I make any audience member uncomfortable. (Speaker photos are all from their websites.)
But the event was public — and publicized. And all three speakers do this work in public. So, I feel comfortable sharing their remarks — or my imperfect notes on their remarks, at any rate.
➡️ If you don’t have time to read the full account, scroll down to my 4 takeaways (at the end) ⬅️
Prof. Eri Bertsou
Democracy is a living thing
Prof. Bertsou noted that democracy is a living thing: It is dynamic, and changes over time. And there are different types — Switzerland has a direct democracy, in contrast to the US’ representative democracy. Indeed, the Swiss would find the US model quite weird: delegate power to individuals who make decisions for you? No. (The Swiss are always voting on various referenda, and their government makes this easy to do.)
Six characteristics of democracies
The University of Gothenberg’s V-Dem Institute is studying democracy around the world. They identify these characteristics of an electoral democracy:
free and fair elections
freedom of expression
freedom of assembly
respecting your opponents
A liberal democracy has the above four characteristics and these two additional ones:
constraints on executive power
protections for minorities
The take-away from this: liberal democracy is the model to aspire to.
Four types of governance in the world today
The V-Dem Project identifies four types of governance, which I will list here in order of preference:
Liberal democracy
Electoral democracy
Electoral autocracy
Autocracy
Electoral autocracies have elections, but they’re not meaningful ones. Russia. Hungary. In contrast, autocracies don’t even have the pretense of elections.
Democracy is on the decline around the world
She showed us the Electoral Democracy index, 2024 time lapse.
There is also a Liberal Democracy index, 2024 time lapse.
A stark example of democracy on the decline:
In 2004, 51% of people lived in democracies.
In 2024, 28% of people live in democracies.
Indeed, of these four types of governments, liberal democracy is now the rarest type.
Why autocracies are on the rise
Prof. Bertsou noted that the favorite weapon of autocratizers is attacking the media.
“Unlike previous waves of autocratization [in the latter half of the twentieth century], the challenges are coming from within. But this is not new.” Think of Hitler and Mussolini, for example. She also cites several Latin American countries that faced challenges from within.
When she said that the rise in polarization plays a key role in autocratizing, I thought immediately of the United States, where polarization has been on the rise since the 1980s (thank you, Newt Gingrich).
Prof. Bertsou reminded us that trust is fundamental to a democracy. “It is what makes the world go around. It allows cooperation.” This, too, immediately made me think of the US — and the collapse in trust.
She pointed to US tariffs as an example. “One you destroy trust, it’s not there,” she said. And then countries look for other countries to trust — and to do business with.
Prof. Bertsou pointed out that those who are disenchanted from politics are looking for a leader who mirrors their desires. And, unfortunately, “this is all happening at a time when we are all becoming dumber” — thanks to social media content and algorithms.
We’ve stopped talking to, listening to, and believing each other.
And, she said, our world is becoming more unstable — AI, natural disasters, pandemic. So, this is a time we need more trust, not less.
Reasons for hope: Democracy needs updating
In conclusion, she reminded us that democracy is a living thing: “Do not despair.”
She advised us to stand by principles of cooperation — and several other democratic principles that I didn’t manage to write down. Respect is likely one.
Prof. Bertsou noted that “Democracy does need updating, but not replacing.” She said we should keep the principles, but update as needed.
She advised us to “be vigilant against those who offer easy solutions via chainsaws or other easy metaphors.”
As Prof. Bertsou reminded us, “Democracy only survives when it delivers.” It needs to deliver economic ability, decency, and being able to receive benefits that allow you to live in decency.
She cautioned us, also, to resist the hyper-polarized environment of the on-line media space.
And Prof. Bertsou offered some good news. In 2024, pro-democratic mobilization is on the rise, according to the Varieties of Democracy Project
Going forward, she said, we face two main challenges:
“Large segments of society have lost their trust in society”
“Democratic institutions are not able to deal with technological changes that have taken place and will take place.”
Velina Tchakarova
As our moderator noted, Tchakarova is the founder of VASE consultancy and, among other things, serves in an advisory role for the Austrian Ministry of Defense.
Fear disguised as order
Tchakarova’s talk, “Democracy in the Age of Grayzone Warfare and Geopolitical Upheval,” began with personal stories of growing up in Communist Bulgaria. As she said, “We lived in the age of fear disguised as order” — a line that very much resonated with me, since that is exactly what the Trump administration is peddling.
Echoing Gramsci’s famous statement (unconsciously, perhaps?), Tchakarova said of her life in 1980s Bulgaria, “The old world was dying but the new world was still being born.”
Freedom: Its Four Dimensions
She spoke of what freedom means — and that it has four dimensions. Those are:
Individual freedoms
Freedom as a responsible citizen
Freedom within society
Freedom from authoritarian rule
These distinctions help me think about where freedom is under threat and where it needs to be expanded.
“What holds a democratic society together?” Tchakarova asked. “It’s freedom.” She then offered four points in support of the four dimensions of freedom.
She cited the famous Voltaire quotation: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Although there’s no evidence that Voltaire ever said these words, it’s a powerful quotation.
Tchakarova offered this from Elbert Hubbard: “Responsibility is the price of freedom.”
She pointed out that when you go down the road of banning things, you’re heading down the path towards authoritarianism.
It’s our duty to rise against authoritarianism
Conditions that create autocracies
Tchakarova cited FDR on the need for economic independence: “People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.”
She pointed out that “Freedom is not the absence of coercion. It is the presence of responsibility, accountability,” and a third item that I failed note but which may be on the V-Dem Institute website — she also explicitly cited their work later in her talk.
After the Cold War, Tchakarova said, the promises of technology, economic freedom, and democracy all came up short. “Technology brought surveillance.” Economic freedom did not bring rights — it brought wealth to autocrats. And “democracy became a brand rather than an ideal.”
Three lessons from the post-Communist era
She offered three lessons derived from former Soviet bloc countries making their way after the USSR and the bloc collapsed.
1. Societal resilience is the immune system of democracy.
2. Economic liberalization prevented total collapse.
3. Democratic forces, though young and imperfect, held the line.
The Age of the Gray Zone
Tchakarova said “We live in an age of a war with no bullets but many casualties.” There are:
“Hybrid attacks”
“Commodities coercion”
“Economic blackmail”
“Cyber sabotage”
Information is weaponized
Indeed, there’s “the weaponization of everything”
Institutions are attacked silently
Freedom, she said, is now the most contested resource in global politics
Tchakarova asked:
“Can democracy survive when trust is broken?”
“Can people remain free when media is compromised?”
Europe’s Geopolitical Position on Democracy
She outlined three challenges Europe faces:
The EU is at a crossroads—is politically fragmented.
NATO depends on US leadership.
Strategic autonomy remains elusive.
Tchakarova observed that “The war in Ukraine is a frontline in global battle between freedom and autocratic revisionism.”
“What does this mean?” she asked. “It is a test of courage. Freedom is no longer a theoretical debate.” And, she said, “Eastern Europeans understand this better than anyone.”
Asia’s Strategic Paradox
Tchakarova predicted that Asia will be the most controversial theatre of the 21st century. China and US are already in a cold war, she said.
She outlined China’s approach:
Maintain legitimacy via economic performance or nationalist narratives
Use advanced technologies for coercion and control
Engage diplomatically and economically with global order
Retain tight control over media, civil society and political ferment
China, Tchakarova said, delivers prosperity without democracy, economic growth without freedom
The battle in Asia, she said, “is not East vs West. It’s control vs freedom.”
Asia is the battleground for the post-liberal democratic order. And who wins there (in Asia) will shape the world.
Democracy in Decline
Tchakarova spoke of democracy in decline, covering some of what Prof. Bertsou already said – and so I didn’t write it down. There were also slides with a font too small for me to read.
She noted that the “umber of conflicts around the world are highest since end of WWII.”
See also the Democracy Index, 2024
As she noted (and Prof. Bertsou noted) the rule of law, free elections, and freedom of association are in retreat.
We have been through worse
In a section subtitled “The End of Fukiyama’s End of History,” Tchakarova acknowledged the dangers we face and offered a path forward.
“We all watched scenes of US Capitol being attacked by its own citizens,” she said. “Democracy is retreating and it’s retreating fast.”
“But it is not time to despair,” Tchakarova advised. “We have been through worse.”
She offered a contrast between free societies and autocracies. “Free societies are more innovative. They build deeper alliances and partnerships that create societal resilience. Free societies correct their mistakes through pluralism of ideas.”
In contrast, “Autocracies may move fast but they fall hard in the long term. They cannot abide uncertainty. But democracies thrive on uncertainty” because they invite debate.
Tchakarova said “We have fought back against autocracies before. We have to be bold in leading by examples and by ideas.”
I very much liked her concluding metaphor: “Democracy is like a mirror: once cracked, it is hard to restore. Once broken it is hard to repair. When it works, it reflects all of us.”
Matt Johnson
Johnson participated from the US via Teams.
I took fewer notes on his talk. Three reasons. First, it covered points that (as a US citizen and resident) I had heard before. Second, it was shorter than Tchakarova’s. Third, the program began at 6 and we were at this point already running long.
Johnson’s focus was the state of democracy in the United States and its impact on the rest of the world. He apologized for using “the T-word” a lot, which amused me. He offered a very good recap of Trump’s efforts to overturn 2020 election.
As he noted, Trump is working to undermine faith in democracy.
Why the “save democracy” campaign fell short in 2024
Discussing why the Democratic Party’s “save democracy” campaign message fell short, Johnson offered three reasons:
1. There’s a sharply divided electorate — Republicans believe Trump
2. American voters saw Democrats’ defense of the systems of democracy as defense of the status quo, and many were unhappy with the status quo.
3. For many voters, it too abstract—Americans can’t imagine a descent into tyranny.
Johnson said that a better way make the anti-autocracy argument is to “emphasize Trump’s corruption.” The Qatar plane, crypto bribery. Trump’s opponents need to focus on his corruption, he said. Focus on the cost of using the White House as an extension of his business empire. I thought this was an excellent point and something pro-democratic forces need to emphasize every time they talk about the current US president.
Pro-democracy forces face a generational challenge
Johnson noted that “Trump forces us to revisit and restate democratic principles.” So, he said, “liberals need to have clear answers to these questions.”
He said that supporters of democracy face a generational challenge. Opponents of liberal democracy have more momentum now than since WWII.
Yet, he reminded us, Fukiyama’s thesis that liberal democracy is a more robust form of government is still a live thesis.
Johnson concluded: “Our biggest threat now is apathy.”
Q&A
There followed a Q+A period during which many ideas were debated. My notes here are too brief, but here is what I recorded.
In response to one questioner (and perhaps also Johnson) citing US GDP data, Prof. Bertsou said don’t cite GDP because numbers like GDP hide the unequal distribution of that GDP. I thought that was an excellent point — and is likely another reason why the Democratic Party’s 2024 campaign argument fell short.
I believe it was Prof. Bertsou who pointed out that medicine, security, “basic things” are not being met. (These things not being met create conditions for autocracy.)
A questioner based in Geneva but from Venezuela (and who, he said, cannot return to Venezuela) asked “Do we as democracies have a moral duty to support other democratic movements?” And “Are sanctions a legitimate tool to oppose autocracy?” As an example, he cited sanctions against South Africa.
At one point, Velina Tchakarova observed that the biggest indicator for success of democracy is the middle class. It’s disappearance is a cause of autocracy rising, she said. Tchakarova also suggested that the emergence of a middle class will lead to upheaval in more autocratic places. And, she said, the disappearance of the middle class means that political parties “are not functioning anymore.” Traditional parties are “sticking to a reality that doesn’t exist anymore.”
In Zürich, a man with posh, Oxbridge British accent said without irony that he’s glad Trump was elected, and offered a defense Le Pen & other “so-called far right” candidates. It was surreal to hear such a well-spoken fellow with an upper-class English accent make a case for the right of autocratic candidates to run for and win elected office. At first, I thought it was a quasi-libertarian free-speech argument — opponents of democracy should have the same rights to participate in democracy. But I think he’s actually a polite fascist.
All panelists who responded to him were gracious and not combative.
One questioner in the audience asked, “Why is democracy declining?” And then he answered “Because it’s linked to the 19th-century nation-state.” I thought this was a very interesting thesis, and would like to hear more about it.
Our final questioner asked “Would compulsory voting be a solution?” This is a great question – some democracies do have compulsary voting. But we were well over time at this point, and so that question didn’t get addressed.
As a children’s literature scholar, I was interested to note that the Zürich Harvard Club’s gift to speakers is always JK Rowling commencement speech at Harvard — which, apparently, is available in a bound copy. Rowling’s anti-trans activism has made her toxic within the children’s literature world. I’m intrigued that her work can still be an appropriate gift in polite society. That said, the speech also precedes the professional bigot phase of her career — and, as I recall, it does offer some good advice.
At the very end, Velina Tchakarova also recommended a book — one she had drawn from several times in her talk. The book is Austrain-Swiss banker Felix Somary’s Krise und Zukunft der Demokratie (1952), which I will note has been translated into English as Democracy at bay: a diagnosis and a prognosis. (The literal translation of the title would be “Crisis and Future of Democracy.”)
During the reception afterwards, I asked Tchakarova if she had any advice for our Indivisible movement or other activists. She said that, as a professional consultant, she has to stay out of politics — remaining objective means not getting involved in this way. Given the focus of her speech, I found this surprising. On the other hand, she’s a consultant and not an academic: so, in another sense, I quite understand her imperative. Unfortunately, I didn’t get a chance to talk with Prof. Bertsou — who, I suspect, would have offered a more detailed answer.
FOUR TAKEAWAYS
Here are my four takeaways.
1: We are not alone. The United States’ current backsliding is part of a global trend. We must take heart, and learn from other pro-democracy movements — such as those being studied by the V-Dem Project at the University of Gothenberg.
2: Make democracy work again. As Prof. Prof. Bertsou observed, “Democracy is a living thing.” As such we need to update it so that it works.
3: Whenever we see them, we should expose fascist/autocratic behaviors — “fear disguised as order,” to quote Velina Tchakarova. Or let’s keep the focus on Trump’s prolific corruption, to borrow a point from Matt Johnson. This strategy can help make the dangers visible to more people.
4: Make the case for democracy. As Johnson reminded us, the ascent of Trump “forces us to revisit and restate democratic principles.” And the V-Dem Institute’s Defending Democracy Against Illiberal Challengers: A Resource Guide is a great place to start. I highly recommend it and other publications on their site, such as the Case for Democracy report and Democracy Report 2025: 25 Years of Autocratization - Democracy Trumped?
The work that V-Dem are doing can help guide the pro-democracy movements in the US and around the world. Highly recommend.
Finally, thanks to my sister, a Stanford alumna, for calling this even to my attention! Since it was organized by Ivy League universities, it was mostly attended by alumni/ae/x based in or near Zürich. But, as I said above, it was open to the public. And I’m up for learning all I can.