Bouncing Back or Forward? Two Approaches to Democratic Resilience After Extremist Attacks

Violent extremist attacks pose a serious threat to democracy, undermining its institutions, norms and practices. This article examines the disruptive impact of violent extremism on the public sphere and considers the role of political leaders in responding to these challenges. Leaders are widely recognised as the key actors shaping the public discourse after extremist attacks, by either reinforcing or resisting the division intended by these attacks. Yet, their role in building democratic resilience – that is, fostering the public sphere’s ability to respond to extremist attacks without compromising its democratic commitments – remains underexplored. Drawing on a range of case studies, the article examines the spectrum of leaders’ responses to violent extremist attacks and their effects on democratic resilience. It identifes two distinct approaches to democratic resilience: ‘bouncing back’ by maintaining the status quo, or ‘bouncing forward’ by deepening democratic commitments. The article considers the implications of each approach and underscores the necessity of the latter in strengthening the public sphere and its deliberative capacity in the aftermath of extremist attacks.