The tone of political life in parts of Europe is darkening, as scenes of public hostility towards defeated elected officials increasingly replace the rituals of democratic respect.
In a recent intervention, French MEP François-Xavier Bellamy warned that the line between political competition and outright humiliation is being crossed with alarming frequency, raising urgent questions about the health of civic culture.
Across several cities, the aftermath of local elections has been marked not by orderly transitions or gestures of reconciliation, but by episodes of jeering, intimidation and, in some cases, behaviour verging on physical aggression.
Bellamy’s remarks point to a deeper malaise: a shift from a democracy grounded in debate and pluralism towards one increasingly defined by tribal loyalties and antagonistic blocs. His observation that “it is now merely the victory of a clan” captures a growing sense that electoral wins are being interpreted less as mandates to govern and more as licences to dominate.
“Honor, civility, and political decency require that, even after a hard-fought campaign, one respects the defeated opponent, all the more so when it comes to a mayor who has served for years. These scenes multiplying in so many cities no longer have anything to do with democracy: it is now merely the victory of a clan, which turns into a pack in the face of the loser,” Bellamy wrote on X.
This phenomenon is not confined to a single political camp. Reports suggest that mayors and local officials from across the ideological spectrum have been subjected to similar treatment. The common thread is not policy disagreement but the erosion of a shared understanding of democratic etiquette.
In established democracies, the peaceful transfer of power has long depended not only on legal frameworks but also on unwritten norms of restraint, dignity and mutual recognition. When those norms fray, the system itself becomes more fragile.
The fact that even this sphere is now susceptible to what Bellamy describes as “community clashes” suggests that polarisation has penetrated deeply into the social fabric. The mayor, once a figure of proximity and civic service, risks becoming a lightning rod for broader cultural and political tensions.
The implications extend beyond individual episodes of misconduct. If elected officials come to expect humiliation or hostility at the end of their tenure, fewer may be willing to serve, particularly in roles that demand long-term commitment and personal sacrifice. Moreover, the normalisation of such behaviour risks legitimising further escalation, as each incident lowers the threshold of what is considered acceptable public conduct.
Bellamy’s call to “restore the very conditions of civic life” is therefore more than rhetorical. It speaks to the need for a renewed emphasis on democratic culture as much as democratic procedure. Laws and institutions can set the framework, but they cannot alone sustain the spirit of mutual respect that allows democracy to function.
