Democracy at Risk: Is the European Union a Modern Revolution or a Constraint for the Future?

The European Union is often described as one of the most ambitious political projects in modern history. Conceived in the ashes of two devastating World Wars, it was designed to secure peace, foster prosperity, and gradually build a common European identity. For decades, the EU seemed to embody precisely what many nations craved: a guarantee that Europe’s past divisions would not return and that cooperation, rather than conflict, would shape the continent’s future.

Yet, as the Union expanded and evolved, its promise of unity has been tested. The debate has shifted from celebrating economic integration and open borders to questioning whether the EU strengthens or weakens democracy. Citizens across the continent increasingly ask whether this “modern revolution” in governance is still a source of empowerment—or whether it has become a constraint, diluting national sovereignty and alienating voters.

When the European Economic Community was established in 1957, enthusiasm ran high. Integration promised not only economic growth but also the creation of a supranational community capable of transcending historical rivalries. Institutions like the Common Agricultural Policy and cohesion funds were intended to reduce inequality and foster solidarity. For many, Europe’s post-war transformation stood as proof that democracy and prosperity could advance hand in hand.

But history has shown that integration, while visionary, is never straightforward. By transferring power to supranational bodies such as the European Court of Justice or the European Central Bank, member states simultaneously gained collective influence and lost some degree of autonomy. For decades, this balance was broadly tolerated. It was seen as the price for stability and shared progress.

The 2008 financial crisis dramatically altered perceptions. Austerity policies, particularly in Southern Europe, left many citizens feeling that Brussels was dictating terms without regard to national realities. In Greece, Italy, Spain, and beyond, the sense of democratic disempowerment was acute. Who, after all, truly decided? National parliaments or technocrats in distant institutions?

This sense of alienation was amplified in 2016 with Brexit. For many Britons, the EU symbolized lost sovereignty: a bureaucracy imposing rules at odds with local democratic choices. Although Brexit exposed deep internal divisions within the UK, it also served as a warning sign for the EU: when citizens feel that integration overrides their voice, they turn away from the project altogether.

This is the core democratic dilemma facing the Union today. While globalization has eroded the power of individual states to tackle challenges like climate change, digital transformation, or migration, citizens still expect their national institutions to provide answers. When those institutions seem powerless, frustration grows.

In this environment, populist and Eurosceptic movements thrive. They tap into the perception that “Brussels” is distant, technocratic, and unresponsive. Democracy is at risk not because citizens no longer value it, but because they feel excluded from it. The EU’s so-called “democratic deficit” is no longer an abstract academic debate; it is an everyday reality that shapes voting behavior across the continent.

Paradoxically, the EU also represents democracy’s greatest chance for renewal. In a world where even the largest European states struggle to assert themselves alone, pooling sovereignty may be the only way to maintain real democratic influence globally. Collective action on climate change, the digital economy, or defense can amplify the voice of European citizens far beyond what any single nation could achieve.

But for this model to work, legitimacy is key. Citizens must feel that they are part of the decision-making process—not mere bystanders. That means strengthening the European Parliament, enhancing transparency, and creating new forms of citizen participation. The Conference on the Future of Europe, launched in 2021, was a step in the right direction, but initiatives like these need to move from symbolic consultation to genuine power-sharing.

The EU is navigating an increasingly unstable world. Russia’s war in Ukraine has brought security back to the forefront of European politics. The pandemic exposed the vulnerabilities of fragmented health policies. Meanwhile, the green and digital transitions demand massive investments and social adjustments. These pressures could either fracture the Union—or push it toward deeper integration.

Younger generations, in particular, will determine the outcome. They tend to value the freedoms the EU provides—mobility, educational opportunities, access to a continental labor market—but they also demand more ambitious responses to the crises of their time. Climate change, inequality, and technological disruption are issues where the EU must prove its relevance. Failure to deliver risks turning apathy into disillusionment, and disillusionment into rejection.

So how can democracy be revived within the EU framework? Three avenues stand out:

• Reinforce Democratic Legitimacy: The European Parliament should play a stronger role, bridging the gap between citizens and decision-making. National parliaments, too, must be better integrated into EU processes.
• Combat Inequality: Economic divides between North and South, East and West feed resentment. If citizens feel left behind, they will not invest emotionally in a shared project. The EU must double down on policies of solidarity and fair distribution of resources.
• Engage Citizens Directly: From digital platforms that allow participatory debates to more local engagement through municipalities and civil society, the Union must innovate. Democracy cannot be preserved with 20th-century structures alone; it needs 21st-century solutions.

The European Union has always been more than a common market. It is a laboratory for a new kind of democracy: transnational, plural, and responsive to global realities. But this vision is fragile. If institutions fail to adapt, the Union risks being perceived not as a revolution, but as a bureaucratic cage.

Reviving democracy requires courage—both from leaders willing to share power and from citizens willing to engage beyond national borders. If achieved, the EU can remain a beacon of hope, showing that democracy is not only resilient but adaptable to the demands of a complex, multipolar world.

If not, the risk is clear: democracy will not disappear, but it will weaken, retreating behind borders at a time when borders alone cannot protect it.