Against the Odds

Summary

Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) is seen as a region where authoritarian-populist leaders dominate, but its political landscape has become much more varied since 2020. After a clear authoritarian surge, pro-democracy forces have bounced back, unseating authoritarian incumbents in five countries. There is an ebb-and-flow of democratic gains and setbacks, shaped by electoral systems, coalition permutations, the resilience of society and institutions, and strategic political agency. Recently formed liberal-progressive parties were typically at the forefront of defending democracy and achieved considerable anti-authoritarian successes. They have been in government amid stable conditions in Czechia, Slovenia, and Poland. They have also been in government in Bulgaria and Romania for shorter times and amid greater political volatility. Such parties have not been in government in Croatia, Hungary, and Slovakia yet. In government, liberal-progressive parties have pursued democracy-enhancing reforms and cracked down on corruption. In parliamentary opposition, they have acted as key democratic watchdogs and defended fundamental rights. They have also spearheaded or contributed to some of the most significant anti-authoritarian campaigns and efforts even when not represented in parliament. Liberal-progressive parties did all of this in a difficult political, social and institutional environment. 

Analysis of liberal-progressive campaigns across Central and Eastern Europe identifies four lessons for pro-democracy actors in the region and the rest of Europe. First, successful actors own the issue, catch the wave, and create the narrative. Campaigns were most effective when they were on topics where these actors had authentic credibility—such as corruption, the rule of law, and human rights—and when they seized critical moments of political opportunity. They did not only mobilize emotions but translated them into concrete outcomes: protests, legislative proposals, referendums, and policy reversals. Clear objectives turned diffuse frustration into actionable demands, while well-timed interventions ensured that issues remained at the center of public debate.

Second, broad, issue-based coordination is decisive. The most impactful campaigns brought together political parties, civil society, activists, and professional communities in complementary roles. In low-trust environments, no actor commands sufficient legitimacy alone; the combination of institutional capacity and grassroots authenticity sustains pressure and forces accountability. A unified chorus proved far more effective than fragmented efforts, keeping issues in the spotlight and extending their political lifespan.

Third, successful campaigns translated complex policy issues into clear, emotionally resonant narratives grounded in everyday experiences. While authoritarian-populists have often dominated through fear and outrage, liberal-progressive actors achieved breakthroughs when they offered credible, hopeful, and relatable alternatives, using creativity, humor, and authenticity to broaden their appeal beyond their core electorate.

Fourth, social media is the central arena of political contestation. Issue salience today depends as much on visibility as on substance, and digital platforms are key to agenda-setting and mobilization. The most effective campaigns treated social media not merely as a communication channel but as an organizing infrastructure—using it for mobilizing supporters, amplifying messages, and sustaining engagement over time. In an attention economy, where visibility shapes perceived importance, liberal-progressive actors succeeded when they actively competed for narrative dominance across platforms.

Anna Vindics is a ReThink.CEE Fellow 2024 of the German Marshall Fund of the United States.

The views expressed herein are those solely of the author(s). GMF as an institution does not take positions.