Democracy - The Work of a Generation?

Much of the literature on transformation assumes a linear development of democracy. However, what we frequently observe is a cyclical pattern: a phase of consolidation is followed by stagnation or regression. This pattern contradicts common concepts that posit institutional structures gaining stability over time and actors adapting to democratic procedures. One possible explanation could lie in generational effects, a factor that has received limited attention in democracy research thus far. A closer look at historical transformation processes reveals the crucial role of generational contexts in the course of democratization. Democracies often experience crises when the founding generation exits the political stage. What causes this pattern, where can it be empirically confirmed, and to what extent can it be generalized? To address these questions, I draw on Karl Mannheim, ideational-institutionalist approaches, and theories of collective action. According to Mannheim, generations are formed based on formative historical experiences. Regime change and participation in a democratic movement are experiences that not only create a lasting context for action but also anchor the foundational idea of a democratic system. Subsequent generations lack this experience, potentially leading to a weakening of the democratic consensus and a resurgence of past conflicts. To explore the significance of generational contexts, I will use selected empirical examples, including Chile and Venezuela. Based on these examples, the aim is to further concretize and hypothesize the role of generations in the development of democracy.