European governments are rearming. Defense budgets are rising, military narratives are deepening, and the language of resilience has become synonymous with security against external threats. From NATO commitments to national defense strategies, the focus is clear: Europe must be prepared to defend itself on the battlefield. But this focus risks overlooking a quieter, less visible vulnerability. While tanks and deterrence may protect borders, the stability of democratic societies depends just as much on what happens within them; on trust, cohesion, and the way citizens interpret the world around them. If resilience is understood only in military terms, Europe may strengthen its military defenses while neglecting the democratic foundations it aims to protect.
Internal pressure on democracy
The idea that democratic systems can erode from within is not new. History shows that moments of economic disruption often coincide with political instability, as insecurity reshapes how people relate to institutions and to each other. The Great Depression stands out as one of the clearest examples of this dynamic, as economic collapse rippled through societies and fundamentally altered political landscapes.
In interwar Germany, these effects were particularly severe. By the early 1930s, unemployment had surged to around 30 percent, while savings held by the middle class were effectively wiped out, eroding not only financial security but also confidence in the state’s ability to provide stability. This breakdown created fertile ground for radical political alternatives, as traditional parties struggled to respond to the scale of the crisis. The rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party was not simply the result of ideological appeal, but of a broader collapse in trust, where large parts of the population became receptive to narratives promising order, renewal, and national restoration.
What followed is often remembered in moral or ideological terms, but its structural roots are equally important. The lessons of the 1930s teach us that extremist ideologies can emerge effectively when economic distress converges with social fragmentation and political disillusionment.
Parallels with the past
Europe today is not facing a crisis of the same magnitude. Yet beneath headline economic figures that suggest stability, there are signs of growing pressure. Economic output, commonly measured through GDP, has recovered in many European countries after recent shocks. But this does not necessarily reflect how people experience their daily economic reality.
Across the European Union, recent data shows that the middle class has shrunk in a majority of member states, while the share of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion reached around 20 percent of the population in 2025, roughly 93 million people. At the same time, households across Europe have faced a sustained increase in the cost of living. Energy prices surged sharply following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, while food prices have risen significantly over recent years, placing pressure on household budgets even where wages increased.
This creates a growing gap between macroeconomic indicators and lived experience. While economies may expand in aggregate terms, many households report that their purchasing power has stagnated or declined. According to survey data, a large share of Europeans say they struggle to make ends meet, reflecting a sense of economic insecurity that is not always visible in growth figures alone.
When economic progress is unevenly felt, perceptions of unfairness can take hold. This matters politically. Research shows that when people feel left behind or uncertain about their future, trust in institutions tends to weaken and dissatisfaction increases. Evidence of this can already be seen across Europe. In the Netherlands, for example, 2025 saw the lowest trust in public institutions since measurements began, with only one in four citizens expressing trust in parliament.
From pressure to cracks in democratic values
As economic pressure grows, so does the demand for clear explanations. Structural issues such as housing shortages, labour market changes, and rising living costs are complex and slow to address. This creates space for political actors who offer more immediate and accessible interpretations of what is happening.
Across Europe, far-right movements increasingly frame these pressures through the lens of migration. Housing scarcity is linked to asylum seekers, pressure on public services to newcomers, and job insecurity to labour migration. These claims simplify reality, but they resonate because they connect everyday frustrations to visible groups.
This dynamic becomes particularly visible at the local level. In the Netherlands, protests against asylum reception centres have intensified in recent years. Municipal plans to open new locations have led to demonstrations, sometimes drawing large crowds and, in some cases, escalating into violent confrontations with local authorities. Concerns raised by protesters often centre on housing shortages, pressure on local services, and a perceived lack of consultation. While these concerns are rooted in real pressures, they are frequently directed at asylum seekers themselves rather than at the broader structural causes of scarcity.
There is often a gap between perception and measurable impact. Research from The Economist shows that countries with higher levels of support for far-right parties often have relatively lower shares of immigrants. This suggests that attitudes are shaped as much by narratives and political framing as by direct experience.
Support for these narratives is not evenly distributed. Far-right parties tend to draw more support from voters who experience economic insecurity or feel politically unrepresented. Across the European Union, a significant share of citizens report that their voices are not adequately reflected in political decision-making, reinforcing the appeal of movements that position themselves as alternatives to the current system.
These developments do not unfold in isolation. Political actors and media environments play a role in reinforcing and spreading simplified narratives, especially when they tap into existing frustrations. Digital platforms can amplify these messages, increasing their visibility and reach. Together, this creates a dynamic in which economic pressure, declining trust, and repeated exposure to polarising explanations reinforce each other, shaping how people understand both their situation and the society around them.
The importance of social cohesion
If these pressures reveal anything, it is that democracy is shaped by more than elections, constitutions, or formal institutions. It depends on the strength of the social fabric that holds societies together: societal resilience. Yet at the very moment Europe is confronting growing internal pressures, its understanding of resilience is becoming increasingly narrow.
Across the continent, governments are making historic investments in defence. In response to pressure from Donald Trump, military spending among European NATO members has risen sharply, with many countries accelerating efforts to meet or exceed the alliance’s 2 percent of GDP target. These decisions reflect a real geopolitical threat. But resilience cannot be measured by military preparedness alone. A society may strengthen its borders while becoming more vulnerable within. If trust declines, public debate fragments, and citizens become increasingly susceptible to polarising narratives, democratic stability weakens regardless of military capacity.
This is the blind spot in Europe’s current security debate. The greatest long-term threat to democratic resilience may not come from external aggression alone, but from the gradual erosion of the social and civic foundations that allow democratic societies to withstand pressure in the first place.
This erosion is already visible in different ways. The legitimacy of international law has come under growing pressure during the genocide in Gaza, particularly as several European leaders signalled reluctance to enforce international legal mechanisms consistently, including discussions surrounding potential obligations linked to the arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu issued by the International Criminal Court. At the same time, far-right narratives that were once politically marginal have become increasingly normalised within mainstream Dutch political debate, shifting the boundaries of what is considered acceptable public discourse.
Resilience beyond military security
While money is flowing to defense budgets, many of the institutions that sustain social cohesion and counter the erosion of social foundations face mounting pressure. Across Europe, community spaces, public libraries, cultural institutions, and local social initiatives have faced years of funding pressure and austerity measures. In the Netherlands, for example, the number of public library branches declined substantially over the past decade, particularly in smaller municipalities. Although increased access to information through the internet may explain this trend, it has reduced access to public spaces centred around education, information, and community interaction.
These are often treated as secondary concerns. They are not. Community centres, public libraries, schools, cultural spaces, and local journalism are part of the infrastructure that allows democratic societies to function. They create places where people meet across differences, build trust, and learn to navigate an increasingly complex information environment.
If resilience is the goal, investment should not stop at defence. It should also include the social spaces and institutions that hold societies together. That requires political choices, but also public pressure. Speaking up when these spaces disappear. Demanding investment in education, culture, libraries, journalism, and community initiatives at work, in local politics, and in everyday life.
Military preparedness may be necessary, but it is not enough. If distrust and polarisation continue to erode the social fabric, democracy weakens from within long before any external threat arrives. So while Europe rearms itself against threats at its borders, we should also ask what is happening inside our societies, and what kind of resilience we are choosing to build. Shall we?
This article is part of The Outside World, ftrprf’s very own research center.
As changemakers, we believe that what happens in the outside world is the most powerful force shaping organizational strategy – and also the most underestimated. To do well, organizations need to understand what’s happening in the outside world. To do significantly better, they need to be aware of what it means for their future, their relations, their strategy, and their impact. We serve as a bridge between society and tailored strategy by analysing societal dynamics, global trends, and shifting public expectations with a multidisciplinary team of international analysts, excellent tooling, sophisticated AI, and a systems approach. This article is part of our second trimester research focus, which centers on resilience.
For more information, please contact theoutsideworld@ftrprf.com