The 2025 Programme of Government embraces ‘stability’ in a time of geopolitical upheaval and democratic backsliding. The new government’s ‘stable majority’ is framed as Ireland’s anchor in a world of growing chaos. But let’s be honest about what this really means: political stability is being sold as an economic safeguard. What should have been said is that true stability depends on Ireland remaining one of the last open democracies in the world—and making that our absolute priority.
The Programme of Government does reference efforts to combat misinformation, strengthen local government, encourage voter registration, and encourage becoming a candidate in elections. However, small, targeted measures like these won’t be enough to address democracy’s existential crisis and - more pointedly - if Ireland’s key trading partners are moving away from democracy, then how can Ireland resist the trend?
To truly respond to this question, we need to stop conflating democracy with an open economy. Ireland’s economic success has relied on an open market, but defending democracy is not the same as preserving an economic model.
According to the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index, democracy is measured as the ‘Extent to which citizens can choose their political leaders in free and fair elections, enjoy civil liberties, prefer democracy over other political systems, can and do participate in politics, and have a functioning government that acts on their behalf’. Ireland scored a 9.2 on the 2023 Index, behind only Norway, Sweden, Finland, and New Zealand.
But scores and rankings won’t protect us from complacency.
Protecting democracy means defending political rights and institutions - especially as we witness their erosion in the United States, Hungary, Israel, and Argentina. However, we also have to account for the public desire for democracy, which repeated surveys suggest cannot be taken for granted. Recent polls in the UK show that younger generations want major political reform, if not a strong leader unaccountable to a parliament or elections. If democracy represents the status quo, and the status quo is not appealing, then democracy becomes less attractive.
So far, far right and extremist politics have not had the same success in Ireland as they’ve had in other countries, but declining voting rates suggest that our commitment to democracy may be faltering.
To prevent this argument from taking hold here in Ireland, we have to identify the political narrative and actions that will encourage both individual and collective participation and trust in what democracy represents. The case has to be so convincing that it will make a cross-section of society fight for our political system.
The far right already understands this. Movements like Trump’s MAGA project are built on restoring social hierarchies, sowing distrust in elites, and dismantling democratic guardrails. They promise a sense of power, identity, and belonging - albeit in a xenophobic, exclusionary, and sometimes explicitly racist, misogynistic and violent manner.
The response cannot simply be to defend institutions or offer technocratic fixes. Instead, we need to flip the script: if the far right weaponises dignity and trust to undermine democracy, we must make restoring dignity, trust, and active citizenship the foundation of a democratic revival. And crucially, we must prove that strong, transparent institutions - not demagogues - are the best means of achieving these aspirations.
Writing for The Free Press about why young men have not just favoured Trump politically, but, in some ways, glorified him as a generational leader, Mana Afsari describes conversations with young men she met at the 2024 National Conservative Conference in Washington, DC. For them, she says, “Trump’s movement and NatCon seem tailored to what they longed for: not to be the last men in politics, but rather the first men to participate in a political future worthy of their heroic aspirations.”
Yet, Trump, Orban, and any other would-be autocratic leader cannot democratise ‘heroic aspirations’ or they risk these aspirations eventually competing with their authority. Likewise, these leaders must undermine the institutions that ultimately enable the fulfilment of individual aspirations, like education or even public sector employment, because they cannot benefit personally from a rational bureaucracy or independent agencies.
In a 2020 lecture, anthropologist Arjun Appadurai characterised the 21st century as the ‘revolt of the elites’ - a reactionary backlash by privileged groups against the very principles of democracy. These elites – like those surrounding Trump - ‘hate liberty, equality, and fraternity—except for themselves.’ They despise checks and balances, which they see as obstacles to their power. They loathe regulation, seeing it as a conspiracy against their version of capitalism. And above all, they reject deliberation and compromise, because these require patience, listening, and accountability.
To prevent such a revolt and protect open democracy in Ireland, we need to return to the egalitarian argument that individual fulfilment can only be achieved through collective gain. Universality works better than selective access and only public institutions guided by efficiency, experience, and accountability prevent the myth of aspirations becoming the wealth and control of the few.
We must keep making the case that equality is not just an idealistic goal, but a pragmatic necessity. Corruption, cronyism, and incompetence—not inclusion—are what stifle ambition and undermine prosperity. The real threat to aspiration is not the expansion of rights, but the hollowing out of democracy itself. If we want stability, this is the fight we must take on—and win.
Dr. Shana Cohen
Dr. Shana Cohen is the Director of TASC.
She studied at Princeton University and at the University of California, Berkeley, where she received a PhD in Sociology. Her PhD analyzed the political and social consequences of market reform policies in Morocco for young, educated men and women. Since then, she has continued to conduct research on how economic policies have influenced political and social identity, particularly in relation to collective action and social activism.
She has taught at George Washington University, the University of Sheffield, and most recently, University of Cambridge, where she is still an Affiliated Lecturer and Associate Researcher. Her areas of teaching have included global social policy, globalization, and human services.
Before coming to TASC, she was Deputy Director of the Woolf Institute in Cambridge. In her role at the Institute, she became engaged with interfaith and intercultural relations in Europe, India, and the Middle East.
Beyond academic research, Shana has extensive experience working with NGOs and community-based organizations in a number of countries, including Morocco, the US, the UK, and India. This work has involved project design, management, and evaluation as well as advocacy. She has consulted for the World Bank, the Grameen Bank Foundation, and other private foundations and trusts.
Share:
![Duggan, Vic]](/assets/img/2017/04/1491994913319631_sq.jpg)