A Vicious Spiral: Political Violence in Fragile Democracies

Image: Achim Wagner / shutterstock.com

The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk in the United States on 10 September 2025 signals a renewed threat to democratic stability in the United States and beyond. Far from an isolated tragedy, the killing forms part of a broader pattern of political violence that transcends borders and increasingly shapes the political landscape of both established and emerging democracies.

The American Situation: From Polarisation to Violence

The United States is experiencing its highest level of political violence since the 1970s. In the first half of 2025 alone, roughly 150 politically motivated attacks were recorded—almost double the figure for the same period in 2024. Violence spans the ideological spectrum: right-wing extremists, left-wing militants and unaffiliated actors have all contributed to an environment in which grievances readily spill into violence.

Charlie Kirk’s prominence among young conservative voters and his role as a close ally of President Donald Trump made his killing particularly symbolic. The national reaction reflects a persistent anxiety about democracy’s future amid deepening polarisation. Analysts describe a ‘vicious spiral’, with each act of violence raising the risk of retaliation. Economic uncertainty, demographic shifts, and inflammatory political rhetoric have lowered the threshold for violent action, while social-media platforms—through algorithmic curation and proliferating conspiratorial networks—amplify anger and turn disagreement into personal grievance.

Europe’s Parallel Crisis

Similar dynamics are evident across Europe. In 2024, Germany recorded a rise of about 40 per cent in politically motivated crime, the highest level since records began in 2001. Although most incidents were linked to far-right actors, recent increases in anti-Semitic attacks and violence directed toward politicians of various parties underscore the breadth of the phenomenon. The German government and other European partners have strengthened legal measures and public-security responses, yet analysts caution that formal steps alone cannot reverse the trend.

Across the continent, populist and extremist parties continue to gain ground. Russia’s war in Ukraine and ongoing refugee flows have heightened tensions, while Europol reports that the volume and intensity of extremist propaganda online are increasing across multiple ideologies—Islamist, far-right and far-left—raising cross-border security risks.

A Widening Set of Global Risks

Political violence is hardly confined to Western democracies. Latin America faces deepening democratic backsliding as some incumbents use state authority to override legal and institutional constraints. Watchdogs and academic groups note that competitive elections often coexist with efforts to weaken judicial independence and restrict civic space.

In parts of Asia, leaders who came to power through free elections have likewise curtailed opposition and oversight mechanisms. The global appeal of China’s authoritarian-capitalist model provides both a rationale and a template for those seeking to consolidate power.

Political assassinations have re-emerged as a major security concern. Their destabilising effects are profound: research by the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime documented more than 2,700 assassination targets across dozens of countries in 2019–2020, involving both criminal and explicitly political actors.

Strengthening Democratic Resilience

Kirk’s assassination is a stark reminder that political violence remains a potent force capable of undermining public trust and democratic institutions. Building resilience will require action on several fronts:

Foster civil political discourse by rejecting hate and division and promoting constructive debate. Improve security for public officials and election candidates, including day-to-day protection beyond high-profile events. Analyse and address root causes of violence, from income inequality and social fragmentation to the viral spread of conspiracy narratives. Ensure swift and consistent accountability through impartial justice systems to deter future attacks.

Utah Governor Spencer Cox captured the importance of leadership at such moments, calling the assassination “a watershed in American history,” and asking, “The question is what kind of watershed. Is this the end of a dark chapter or the beginning of a darker one? Do we escalate, or find an off-ramp? It’s a choice every one of us must make.”

No single institution can address these risks alone. Democratic resilience depends on the shared responsibility of governments, political parties, technology companies and civil-society organisations to champion dialogue, transparency, and peaceful dispute resolution. The true test for fragile democracies is whether they can sustain these commitments in the face of mounting pressures.

Related articles by this author:

US Bars Palestinian Delegation: A Dangerous Precedent for UN Universality (3-minute read)

Reluctant Truth-Tellers and Institutional Fragility (3-minute read)

From Democratic Leader to Autocratic Example: The Global Impact of U.S. Backsliding (3-minute read)

Countering Human Rights Regression to Safeguard Peace (10-minute read)

A Defining Moment for the United Nations: The Global Stakes of U.S. Disengagement (3-minute read)

Jordan Ryan is a member of the Toda International Research Advisory Council (TIRAC) at the Toda Peace Institute, a Senior Consultant at the Folke Bernadotte Academy and former UN Assistant Secretary-General with extensive experience in international peacebuilding, human rights, and development policy. His work focuses on strengthening democratic institutions and international cooperation for peace and security. Ryan has led numerous initiatives to support civil society organisations and promote sustainable development across Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. He regularly advises international organisations and governments on crisis prevention and democratic governance.