The power of the margins: youth, participation, and the rule of law in democratic Europe

Europe and the crisis of generational disaffection

At the heart of the European Union, whose founding treaties guarantee democracy, fundamental rights, and the rule of law, a profound sense of institutional fatigue is spreading. Public disaffection and polarisation are on the rise, disproportionately affecting younger generations. Populist and extremist movements are gaining ground, while the democratic narrative is losing its vitality, appeal, and emotional resonance. A simple everyday act, turning on the television and watching the news, is enough to feel, unfiltered, the tension that runs through our democracies: crossfire of insults, shouting in parliaments, disinformation on social media, empty speeches, and a growing erosion of mutual respect. Polarisation is no longer a latent threat; it is a reality that fragments dialogue, undermines consensus, and fuels disillusionment. In the most recent European elections, youth abstention rates remained alarmingly high in several Member States, despite concerted efforts to increase participation. According to an analysis by FEPS, in the 2024 European elections, only 36% of eligible voters under the age of 25 turned out, representing a 6% drop compared to the 42% recorded in 2019[1]. The lack of representation and the widespread feeling that "nothing ever changes" feed a generational gap that is no longer symbolic, it is structural. A divide that calls into question not only the legitimacy of the European project, but also of global institutions such as the United Nations, created after World War II with the promise of safeguarding peace and protecting human rights. That promise, however, is increasingly fragile: in 2024, more than 56 armed conflicts were active worldwide, the highest number since 1945, according to the latest United Nations report on the Sustainable Development Goals[2]. Talking about youth participation is not a matter of fashion or institutional quotas, it is a question of democratic legitimacy. Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union states that “the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights.” But these values cannot be upheld if a significant part of the population, its youth, feels excluded from the democratic process or does not get involved in it. The risk is not merely institutional. It is also cultural, generational, and political. A democracy that fails to engage in dialogue with its younger generations is doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past, unable to evolve, progress, or regenerate.

European youth: between apathy and silenced passion

It is often said that young people are “disconnected” or simply not interested in politics. That they don’t stay informed, don’t vote, don’t participate. But this oversimplified diagnosis overlooks a more uncomfortable truth: traditional forms of politics must adapt and be redesigned to meet the new languages, needs, and expectations of today’s youth.

What is often interpreted as apathy is, in many cases, a reaction to institutional cynicism, a lack of tangible results, and symbolic representation without real power. n many Member States, young people lack effective channels to exercise their right to influence public affairs—despite recent reports such as the Youth Progress Index by the European Youth Forum and OECD studies highlighting the structural barriers young people face when trying to engage in civic and political life[3]. Although Article 12 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union recognises the right to freedom of assembly and association, this is often limited by precarious conditions, the digital divide, or the absence of safe and meaningful spaces.

A revealing example of what happens when youth are genuinely engaged was the election of the new pope, Leo XIV. Against all odds, millions of young people across Europe—both believers and non-believers—followed the conclave via live streaming, commented on social media, placed bets, and discussed the frontrunners as if it were a Champions League final. Pope Leo XIV was received as a relatable, modern figure capable of connecting with people. Public squares filled up, online platforms exploded with religious content, and for a brief moment, something seemingly distant became a collective phenomenon. What institutional politics has long failed to generate, community, narrative, shared emotion, was, in that moment, successfully catalysed by the election of a new pope.

Rule of law: Beyond norms, toward connection

The rule of law cannot be reduced to the mere formal existence of laws. It also entails procedural safeguards, the separation of powers, effective access to justice, and an informed, conscious, and active citizenry. This is clearly stated in the European Commission’s Communication on Strengthening the Rule of Law in the EU and its Rule of Law Report, which in its 2024 edition highlights systematic setbacks in some Member States[4].

Article 10 of the Treaty on European Union enshrines the principle of representative democracy, while Article 11 of the same treaty calls on institutions to maintain an open, transparent, and regular dialogue with civil society. In turn, Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) recognises the crucial role of youth in democratic life and promotes the exchange of best practices among Member States.

However, the structures meant to guarantee such participation are outdated or insufficient. The right to take part in public life—also recognised in Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 39 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union—loses effectiveness when there are no real decision-making spaces, dedicated budgets, or opportunities for structural influence. Without Connection, without voice, without recognition, the rule of law becomes an empty scaffold for new generations.

In contrast to this limited architecture, Mariana Mazzucato offers a radically different vision: that of the state as an entrepreneurial agent capable of co-creating value with its citizens, rather than merely correcting market failures or enforcing procedures. In her book The Entrepreneurial State, Mazzucato advocates for a model in which public institutions take risks, lead transformative missions, and work side by side with diverse social actors to define the direction of society. Applied to the rule of law, this means moving from a state that merely “informs” or “consults” to one that co-creates public policy with young people, marginalised communities, and civil society movements[5].

The true rule of law in the 21st century is not measured solely by the robustness of its legal framework, but by its capacity to generate trust, belonging, and shared responsibility. Co-creation is not a trend—it is an institutional strategy to regenerate democratic bonds at their core.

From disconnection to disaffection: a fertile ground for extremism

When legal and institutional frameworks do not translate into real opportunities or tangible improvements in people’s lives—especially for younger segments of the population—trust in institutions tends to erode. This disconnect between democratic expectations and everyday experiences creates a space of disaffection that exclusionary political discourses can exploit.

In recent years, the rise of nationalist movements across Europe and beyond has illustrated this trend. In countries such as Hungary, Poland, and Italy, political parties critical of the European liberal model have come to power, promoting reforms that have triggered infringement procedures and formal warnings from both the European Commission and the European Parliament. In other parts of the world, including India, Turkey, and the United States, nationalist rhetoric has gained traction among social groups that feel neglected by traditional political structures. In many cases, these narratives oversimplify complex structural issues, appealing to conventional national identities, security as a core value, and the restoration of an allegedly stable past.

Within this context, young people—often exposed to labour precarity, inequality, and a lack of prospects—may become especially vulnerable to such narratives. The promise to “defend what has always been” is presented as a response to uncertainty, even if it entails the erosion of rights or a rollback in democratic standards.

In light of this scenario, strengthening the rule of law cannot be reduced to preserving existing institutions. The approach must be expanded: renewing participatory frameworks, diversifying political representation, and advancing a new social contract rooted in inclusion, transparency, and shared responsibility.

Architectures for intergenerational co-governance

The good news is that when real, meaningful spaces are opened, young people respond. And not only do they respond—they innovate, transform, and lead. In cities like Helsinki, Lisbon, and Barcelona, youth participatory budgeting processes have produced bold, inclusive, and feasible proposals. Local legislation has successfully adapted to give young people both a voice and a vote.

France, for instance, has implemented the The National Youth Council (Conseil National de la Jeunesse), an advisory body composed of young people who contribute to high-level political decision-making. In Germany, Jugendparlamente allow youth to debate and submit proposals directly to local governments. In Belgium, the Youth Forum acts as a legal interlocutor between young people and the federal government, with the authority to issue binding opinions.

In Spain, regions such as the Basque Country and Catalonia have developed strategic plans with specific pillars for youth participation, including mechanisms for evaluation and accountability. At the national level, the platform Talento para el Futuro, in which I have had the opportunity to participate, fosters youth political advocacy through structured dialogue with institutions. Initiatives such as Mujeres al Frente—in whose second edition I had the privilege to participate, in collaboration with the German Embassy[6]—highlight the transformative leadership of young people in vulnerable contexts. These experiences demonstrate that young talent does not require tutelage or condescension, but rather real opportunities to influence, shape, and lead.

Rebuilding democracy from the ground up

Rebuilding European democracy is not simply about reforming treaties or sanctioning those who violate the rule of law. It is about repoliticising the everyday, about returning to citizens—especially the youngest—the ability to imagine, decide, and transform.

The institutional future of the EU depends on our capacity to activate its civic dimension. Reforms such as lowering the voting age to 16 in European elections, introducing generational quotas in consultative bodies, allocating funds for youth-led projects, or even creating a permanent European Youth Parliament are not idealistic dreams: they are urgent and necessary measures.

Institutional imagination is just as important as legal architecture. We need frameworks that empower, spaces that welcome, and processes that listen because the margins of today may well become the centre of tomorrow.

Platforms like Talento para el Futuro remind us that all is not lost. That there are young people who propose, lead, and challenge. Those who refuse to inherit hollow institutions. Listening to their voices is not merely a democratic obligation—it is an opportunity to rebuild Europe with more courage, more justice, and more truth.

Because, ultimately, democratic renewal is built. Through trust, political will, and a citizenry that does not merely obey rules, but transforms them. If Europe wants to remain a project for the future, it must open itself to those who are already inhabiting it from the margins: young, diverse voices who are not asking for permission, but for a place. Rebuilding Europe requires courage, but also institutional design, political will, and a genuine recognition that legitimacy grows from the ground up.

Minerva Cano Domínguez 01/08/2025

[1] Foundation for European Progressive Studies (FEPS), Youth Turnout in the 2024 European Elections: A Closer Look at the Under 25 Vote, publicado en julio de 2024. Disponible en: https://feps-europe.eu/youth-turnout-in-the-2024-european-elections-a-closer-look-at-the-under-25-vote

[2]United Nations,The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2025, New York, 2025. Disponible en:https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2025

[3] European Youth Forum (2023). Youth Progress Index. Available at: https://www.youthforum.org/youth-progress-index

[4] European Commission (2024). 2024 Rule of Law Report – The Rule of Law Situation in the European Union. Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2024-rule-law-report_en

[5] Mazzucato, Mariana. El Estado emprendedor: Mitos del sector público frente al privado. Barcelona: RBA, 2020.

[6] Talento para el Futuro, Mujeres al Frente – Edición Especial, disponible en: https://talentoparaelfuturo.com/mujeres-al-frente-edicion-especial/