We feel free because we lack the very language to articulate our unfreedom.
Liberal democracy has long been seen as the final stage of human political development. We have been told if there are Western-style elections, laws, and institutions, then freedom, equality, and development will follow suit.
But this beautiful story belies an ugly truth: liberal democracy is never neutral. It is never equal for everyone. And it has never been democratic. It has been spread across the world by the West since the colonial era. It has worked not as a tool for liberation, but as an instrument to control and subjugate.
The greatest strength of liberal democracy is, it makes being ruled feel like freedom. You can change parties in the office, but you cannot change your life. Voting and elections are called freedom. But poverty, inequality, or exploitation are never questioned.
From Europe to the Global South, what is happening is not a "democratic crisis" but rather the natural and inevitable outcome of liberal democracy. The system that once declared the "end of history" is now collapsing because of contradictions within itself. The rise of far right, people's aversion to politics, increasing inequality, and a deep disillusionment with liberal ideas have emerged across the world.
Liberal democracy: A child of profiteering and modernity
Contrary to what many Western thinkers say, liberal democracy was not born from a desire for human liberation. It was devised to meet the needs of a particular time when the madness for profit only began.
The revolutions in Britain, America, and France between the 17th and 19th centuries are thought of as uprisings for justice. In reality, they were primarily movements of the middle class. They aimed to remove the obstacles of feudal rule and clear the way for commerce, markets, and private property. The political system that emerged from this did indeed grant rights. But to whom? Mainly those who already had wealth and status.
Here, democracy was compromised at the outset. Industrialisation required educated workers, urban infrastructure, and a measure of political legitimacy. So suffrage, public education, and worker protections came under pressure from below. At the same time, these were arranged in such a way that the main characteristics of the economy remained unscathed.
The beauty of liberal democracy is that it presents itself as the neutral protector of the ordinary folks. But its real role has always been to safeguard the interests of property, markets, and profit. It speaks of freedom. But that freedom can never disrupt the existing economic structure.
Whenever freedom becomes a threat to the interests of capital, when workers strike, organise, or when the poor demand land and food, this democracy didn't hesitate to suspend itself. From the 1973 coup in Chile to the repression in Egypt in 2013, Western powers have repeatedly shown that when needed, votes, rights, and even elected governments can be discarded.
The system uses the language of human rights, freedom, and equality before the law. It not only protects the market but also imposes the same rules across the world for its sake. Thus, liberal democracy has become not only a Western invention but also a Western export. It does not leave room for other forms of democratic possibilities.
Imposed democracy and lost alternatives
The greatest trick of liberal democracy was to present itself as the only form of democracy. Western powers spread it across the world through their empire, wars, and economic pressure.
After World War II, the US imposed this model in the name of the "free world". Newly independent countries were told to open their markets, usher in foreign investment, stay quiet and vote during elections.
Those who tried to choose another path, who sought to build their own local systems of rule, were treated as threats. Lumumba, Mossadegh, Allende were all assassinated or overthrown.
Alongside military force came the tightening of economic ropes. Loans from the IMF and World Bank arrived with strings attached: open your markets, cut spending, and privatise. As a result, countries were compelled to put the investors' interests first, and people's second.
The deepest impact, however, was psychological. The West dictated what is democracy and what is not. The local systems of Asia and Africa were dismissed as "primitive". The result was that effective systems of local participation were dismantled and replaced by Western parliaments, courts, and bureaucracies. But power remained in the hands of the elite and foreign institutions.
The "freedom" concealed deep subjugation. Elections were held, but the structure was never questioned.
Liberal democracy survived because it decimated alternatives. The imperial powers kept alive with capital and global institutions. In today's Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Myanmar, the imported model is not a guarantor of justice, but a shield for the powerful.
Democracy for show
In countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Myanmar, liberal democracy has brought a new governing system. Elections are held, commissions are formed, and parliaments are operated. At the same time, inequality grows, violence deepens, and authoritarianism becomes entrenched.
The real task of liberal democracy is to keep the show going, while ensuring that real power remains untouched.
In Bangladesh, there are reform commissions on education, digital development, and governance reforms. The thought of having commissions on unequal distribution of resources, exploitation of workers, or the control of donor agencies were not even considered. This is not a mistake. Everything proceeds according to liberal rules. Reforms may take place, but the basic economic structure remains intact.
In India, majoritarianism and suppression of dissent happen in the name of elections. The world's "largest democracy" walks toward authoritarianism behind the facade of votes and markets.
In Pakistan, democracy means the change of governments under the shadow of military intelligence. The economy is in the hands of the IMF, and foreign policy in the hands of the army.
In Myanmar, for a while, there were talks of a democratic transition. Then a military coup ended it. The Western corporations opened the economy and left the country in the hands of local elites.
In all these countries, liberal democracy is not the solution to problems, but a means of buying time. People are told to be patient, wait for the next election, and everything will gradually improve. Yet land grabs, labour exploitation, persecution of communities, and environmental destruction continue unabated.
This model is backed by international donors and organisations. Millions are poured into "strengthening democracy". But the money sustains the same economy and repressive regimes.
Liberal democracy is not a failed dream, but a carefully crafted illusion. It speaks in the language of justice, but ensures that justice never prevails.
The rise of far right
Contrary to what people think, the far right is not taking over democracy in the West. Rather, liberal democracy itself is gradually taking on authoritarian form. For years, it promised stability and steady progress. It claimed that moderation was the antidote to extremism.
But in the US and Europe, the far right is no longer a fringe element. They are winning elections, coming to power, shaping policies, and shifting the direction of public debates. They are doing this through democratic means. The very institutions that once served as guardians of democracy are now legitimising authoritarian populists, superrich tech entrepreneurs, and neo-nazis.
Trump is a major example. He is at once a white nationalist, populist, and a distorted expression of mainstream democracy. Elon Musk, too, represents the outcome of today's liberal democracy. He pretends to be the rebel, but keeps the structures of power intact.
The scenario is the same in Europe. Germany's AfD, France's National Rally, Italy's Brothers of Italy, or the Dutch leader Geert Wilders have all risen through elections and gained popularity through harassing immigrants and invoking the dreams of a national rebirth.
Centrists say these are threats to democracy. But they are the ones who created this situation. Harsh economic policies and technocratic governance have pushed people away from politics. The far right has taken advantage of that vacuum.
Yet, these forces are not opposed to a world owned by a select few. They simply redirect popular anger towards immigrants, women and minorities.
Liberal democracy can no longer inspire trust. It thrives upon suppressing dissent and strengthening the powerful, while the dominant class feigns being attacked.
That is why the crisis we are seeing is not an exception. It is the natural outcome of liberal democracy. What was long concealed under the cover of civilisation, rights, and choice is now coming into the open.
The illusion of rights
The real intention of ideology is not to produce a wrong answer, but to frame the question in such a way that the real answer can never be discovered.
We are taught that liberal democracy ensures freedom, human rights, representation, and equality. But in reality, the ideas remain on paper only. There is no equality among citizens.
In truth, liberal democracy is not the path to justice.
You may cast a vote, but there is no guarantee you will not be homeless. You may speak, but the algorithms decide how many can hear you. You may protest, but only within the boundaries and under surveillance. You may be equal before the law, but the laws are made by the wealthy.
Liberal democracy makes us feel that we are powerful. But it keeps the doors to real economic change firmly shut. There is no greater misconception than the idea that political rights can exist separate from economic reality. Even the starving man who takes his own life and kills his wife and children is free.
Liberal democracy has not failed. On the contrary, it has succeeded. For it makes injustice appear like a personal failure. It dismantles collective resistance. It convinces us that poverty is our fault and emptying out a bank and becoming rich is a reward for talent.
That is why the rise of the far right does not negate liberal democracy, but rather its liberal democracy's distorted form. Musk or Trump are not the alternatives. They openly say what liberal democracy keeps under the rug.
Musk can openly spread fascist ideas and still be portrayed as a visionary. His rebellion is only skin deep.
Meanwhile, real demands for housing, healthcare, or democratic control over land are dismissed as "unrealistic". As long as you do not seek to change the structures of power, you will be allowed to shout.
It is a mistake to think liberal democracy is collapsing. It is only completing its historical task. And that task is to perpetuate the system in which a few own everything, to turn protests into a safe ritual, to ensure nothing changes, and to reduce politics into a spectacle.
The myth of necessity
Since the Cold War, liberal democracy has ruled not only by force but also by narrative. It was portrayed as the final destination of history: If you want progress, you must open markets, hold elections, and honour rights.
This myth is now falling apart.
For example, China is not a Western-style democracy. There are no elections in which multiple political parties run for office. Yet, China has reduced poverty, sustained growth, and become a global power.
This begs the question: If development does not require the Western model, then why must Bangladesh, Ghana, or Bolivia follow the conditions set by the IMF and World Bank? If China can build high-speed trains, state-of-the-art industries, and infrastructure without liberal democracy, then why not others?
China is a threat to the West not for its military, but for setting an example. China has shown that democracy and capitalism are not inseparable, that another path exists.
This has also exposed a Western hypocrisy. Those who cry out over human rights in Beijing are the same who fund genocide in Gaza, militarise borders in the Mediterranean, and jail whistleblowers.
We must be clear that China's model is far from being perfect. Its authoritarianism is real.
If liberal democracy is truly indispensable, then why is it collapsing in the West itself? Why does it need censorship, surveillance, and corporate propaganda? Why are Western citizens themselves turning to fascism and conspiracy theories?
Liberal democracy is dying from within. Its institutions are hollow, its promises exhausted, its ideology disintegrating, and Western capitalism itself is in decay.
What may come later is new authoritarianism, digital feudalism, or ecological catastrophe. Or perhaps the path to liberation may open before us.
The question is no longer "will liberal democracy survive?" The question is, "Do we have the courage to think beyond it?"
Beyond Liberal Democracy
Our task today is not to abandon democracy, but to free it from liberalism.
The fall of liberal democracy is no accident. Its historic role of legitimising the rule of capital in the name of democracy is over. Today its rights, laws, and institutions feel like hollow rituals.
Liberal democracy is not a sacred system. It is a phase in history. It can be surpassed. The belief that democracy equals liberalism is the greatest obstacle to imagining a new future.
But what could the alternative look like? It could take the form of local communities' assemblies, workers' cooperatives, land councils, or federations of communities. It could mean prioritising the renewal of nature over endless growth, solidarity over competition, and collective decision-making over individual consumption. It could be an economy where the resources of the Global South are no longer syphoned out to feed the North.
What matters most is that the future democratic system must be free from economic exploitation. Democracy is not a brand, not an exportable commodity. It is not only elections or individual liberties. It is an ongoing process that every generation must recreate.
Today, as liberal democracy collapses from Washington to Dhaka, from Brussels to Delhi, two paths lie before us. Either we sink into the darkness of digital authoritarianism and nationalist decay. Or we seize this rupture as a chance to rebuild politics from below, anew.
The time for preserving democracy in its old form is over. It is time to reshape it. There is no reason to mourn the fall of liberal democracy. The real tragedy is only that we once thought this was the only way.
Comments