Does Civic Involvement Strengthen Democracy — or Can It Also Weaken It?

Whether someone organizes through a trade union, volunteers in a local sports club, campaigns on social media, or participates in a movement such as the German “Querdenker” anti-lockdown and anti-establishment protests may have fundamentally different consequences for their democratic attitudes. Collective, institutionalized forms of participation tend to correlate with higher institutional trust and pluralistic attitudes. Individualized and primarily digital forms of involvement show mixed effects: They may foster a sense of self-efficacy, but they can also reinforce resentment, exclusion, and authoritarian views.

That civic involvement can cut both ways is not a new observation. In their study Bowling for Fascism, Satyanath, Voigtländer, and Voth show that dense networks of associations — such as choirs or sports clubs — accelerated the spread of NSDAP membership in Weimar Germany. Vibrant civic life is therefore not automatically a bulwark against authoritarianism; under certain conditions, it can become its vehicle. Under which conditions each dynamic prevails today remains empirically under-examined.

TACIT addresses this question systematically by comparing Germany and the United States — two democracies facing similar challenges despite markedly different institutional conditions: rising polarization, eroding institutional trust, and the resurgence of anti-democratic movements. Because these movements often mobilize through civil-society structures, the question of how civic involvement shapes democratic outcomes has become increasingly urgent.