Is Voting Enough to Save Our Democracy?

(Part 1 of the series “Why voting for Kamala Harris is only the first step to saving American democracy”)

When I was a teenager, I remember my father taking me along to the polling station. He was very proud of living in a democracy. The alternative, just kilometers away, claimed to serve the true needs of the people but was indeed a dictatorship: We lived in the western part of Berlin, within walking distance of the Berlin Wall and the communist regime. And it wasn’t only this contrast that informed his pride. He knew what he was voting for, and despite occasional dissatisfaction, he knew the party he voted for, and of which he was a member for some years, truly represented his values. For him, voting was a powerful act, an expression of control over our lives. And I believed him. The act felt grand. With voting, we were steering our world. But as I grew older, that sense of empowerment faded. Like so many Americans today, I began to wonder: is voting really enough?

Over time, I’ve noticed a growing sense of disillusionment with traditional voting, not only in the United States but also in other democracies. We’ve come to rely on voting as our primary means of influence. Every few years, we cast our ballots, hoping for meaningful change, only to find that the issues we care most about remain unresolved. We’re left watching from the sidelines, disempowered as policy decisions are made far from our reach. For many, voting is starting to feel more like a ritual of democracy than an effective means of participation.

This disenchantment has found powerful expression in the rise of figures like Donald Trump. Now, I’m not a Trump supporter – quite to the contrary. Politics needs to be done by many hands, these hands need to be connected in a useful way, and populists who promise to be alone the rescue always end up making things worse.

But it is important to see that Trump’s critique of the “system” resonates with millions who feel that traditional politics no longer work for them. They see this inherited billionaire as an outsider who speaks to their frustrations, whether his claims are substantiated or not. When he decries a system he claims is “rigged,” he taps into a deep-seated feeling of alienation. It’s a sentiment that isn’t unique to the United States; people across the political spectrum and around the world feel increasingly disconnected from the democratic process.

And this disconnection matters. It indicates that we are dealing with more than a political problem—it’s a democratic crisis. I often think back to those trips to the polling station with my father, to his pride in the idea that his vote truly counted. But the reality today is that people feel their votes, even when counted, don’t really change anything. Traditional democracy, as it exists now, was designed for a different era. Our systems have not evolved at the same pace as our societies, and it shows. We are left with institutions that prioritize control over adaptability, and this rigidity has fostered polarization instead of unity.

While the right to vote remains crucial, it is increasingly insufficient on its own to address today’s complex issues. Our society is more interconnected than ever before, yet our political systems remain isolated, too often removed from the lived experiences of the people they serve. Voting, in this sense, becomes a blunt instrument—effective in expressing broad support but inadequate in addressing specific needs. This isn’t just a critique of American democracy, either; it’s a reality for democracies around the world that are struggling to respond to rapid social, technological, and environmental changes.

So, if voting isn’t enough, what is? The solution, I believe, lies in creating new forms of engagement that go beyond periodic elections. We need a system that allows for ongoing participation, where citizens have a real say in the issues that affect their lives. This is where the concept of *Civil Democracy* comes in—a model that I’ve explored extensively and that offers a way to address these challenges. Civil Democracy is about giving people the opportunity to participate actively and continuously, allowing them to shape policy in real time. It’s not simply about voting every few years; it’s about fostering a culture of engagement, where everyone has the opportunity to contribute to the collective decision-making process.

Imagine a system where, instead of casting a single vote for a candidate who may or may not reflect your views on every issue, you have the ability to influence decisions as they arise. Imagine being able to trust not just one representative but a diverse range of actors—local community leaders, experts, and advocates—who can participate alongside you in shaping policy. Civil Democracy embodies this vision by emphasizing two core principles: *meta-decision freedom*, where citizens can decide how they want to be involved in each decision, and *actor openness*, which allows citizens to choose trusted representatives for specific issues.

This is the kind of democracy that can meet today’s challenges. It addresses not just who holds power, but how power is exercised. In a Civil Democracy, we are not forced to limit our participation to a single, sweeping vote. Instead, we can contribute where we feel most informed, draw upon the knowledge and experience of others, and collectively work toward solutions. This is a model that can adapt to modern life, where people are busy but still care deeply about the decisions being made on their behalf.

The rise of Trump and other political figures who claim to “speak for the people” is a symptom of a broader crisis—a crisis that won’t be solved by simply casting another ballot. People want to feel that their voices matter. They want a system that reflects the complexities of modern life, where their input can be nuanced, flexible, and specific to the issues that matter most to them.

But first, we must recognize that voting, while powerful, is only the beginning. It’s essential, yes, but on its own, it cannot address the deeper structural issues that plague our democracies. Our task is to create a system that empowers people to engage with democracy continuously and meaningfully. We need to reclaim our sense of agency, not just through the act of voting but by building a democracy that responds to our needs, adapts to our realities, and allows us to take an active role in shaping our future.

So, I ask again: Is casting a vote enough? Honestly, I don’t think so. It is time for us to take responsibility, not just for choosing leaders, but many more things, and through doing so, for the very democracy we live in. In the next part of this series, we’ll dig deeper into how many feel disillusioned with the current system—and get first ideas what can be done to restore trust in democracy.