When students take back democracy: Serbia shows it is possible
Croatia and Brazil are separate national stories, but they are connected by a shared global anxiety: who really controls democracy, the people, elected governments, foreign powers, or the tech platforms that decide what citizens see online?
Serbia has now offered the most powerful answer so far: citizens can still take control, if they organize, stay on the streets and turn anger into votes.
Serbia: the people fought back
Serbia’s student-led movement, the Student List, has won a historic parliamentary election, ending 14 years of rule by Aleksandar Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party. The movement won 52.65% of the vote, against 39.22% for Vučić’s alliance, according to the Republic Electoral Commission.
Turnout reached 68.78%, the highest since 1992, showing that ordinary Serbians did not merely protest they voted.
The movement began after the collapse of a concrete canopy at Novi Sad railway station in November 2024, which killed 16 people. Protesters blamed corruption, negligence and a political system that protected the powerful.
From protest to power
For nearly two years, students blockaded universities, organised rallies and campaigned across the country. Their cause spread beyond campuses, drawing in farmers, teachers, actors, judges and ordinary citizens.
They did not present themselves as a traditional political party. They ran as a citizen platform, focused on corruption, transparency, accountability and the rule of law.
Their programme includes creating an independent police unit accountable to prosecutors, purging officials linked to organised crime, ending party-loyalist appointments to state companies, and freeing the public broadcaster from political control.
Why Serbia matters
Serbia proves that democracy is not dead when citizens feel powerless. It can be revived when people refuse to accept corruption as normal.
The students did not wait for a perfect leader. They built a movement, gathered 400,000 signatures, published an anti-corruption plan and converted street pressure into an electoral majority.
That is the opposite of the “tired voter” problem seen in Croatia, where more than 75% of people believe the country is heading in the wrong direction, yet the opposition has failed to unite behind a convincing alternative.
The Croatian warning
Croatia shows what happens when public anger exists but does not become organised political power.
The government survived its 44th no-confidence vote over the Gospić hazardous-waste scandal, winning 79 votes to 55. Yet public dissatisfaction remains high, and the opposition has not produced a broad, credible movement capable of challenging the establishment.
Serbia’s lesson is clear: anger alone is not enough. It must become organisation, messaging, candidates and votes.
Brazil: the digital battlefield
Brazil adds another warning. Lula defeated Trump-aligned Flávio Bolsonaro, but the election became a fight over whether Meta’s platforms restricted Lula’s reach while boosting Bolsonaro’s.
Meta says it did not interfere and that the problems were technical. But Brazil’s electoral court ordered the company to treat both campaigns equally, while Meta’s Oversight Board said the company failed to dispel suspicions of interference.
This shows that winning an election is no longer only about rallies, manifestos and votes. It is also about algorithms, moderation, advertising systems and AI deciding which political messages citizens actually see.
Trump and the new pressure
Trump’s role in Brazil shows another modern threat: foreign pressure without armies or ballot-stuffing.
Tariffs, threats against judges, political backing for the Bolsonaro family and claims that Lula’s win was “rigged” all shaped the political environment. Even when a foreign power does not steal an election, it can try to influence the conditions under which citizens choose.
That is why Serbia’s student victory matters beyond the Balkans. It shows that people can resist not only corrupt governments, but also the sense that democracy has been captured by elites, foreign interests and digital gatekeepers.
The real lesson
The question facing democracies is no longer simply “who won the election?” It is: who set the conditions under which people could decide?
In Croatia, the danger is entrenched power and public resignation. In Brazil, it is foreign pressure and platform power. In Serbia, students have shown that citizens can still reclaim the political space.
Democracy will not die because people stop voting. It will weaken when voting no longer feels like real power, when leaders seem untouchable, foreign governments meddle freely, and algorithms decide which voices are heard.
Serbia’s students have reminded the world that citizens are not powerless. They can protest, organise, vote and win. The challenge now is for other countries to learn from them before frustration turns into resignation.
About The Author
