This thesis examines how citizens across Europe with populist attitudes, Christian orientations, and authoritarian predispositions understand democracy. At a time when democratic backsliding is increasingly tied to choices made by ordinary citizens, these groups are often portrayed as inherently anti-democratic or “democratically suspect”. Such portrayals rest on the assumption that orientations like populism, authoritarianism, and Christian religiosity inevitably undermine democracy, while their absence guarantees liberal commitments. Challenging this assumption, this thesis shows that such orientations do not necessarily pose a uniform or insurmountable threat to liberal democracy and can be channelled in ways that align with democratic principles. For example, populist citizens may simultaneously demand greater responsiveness while upholding core liberal procedures. Similarly, Traditional Christians may combine communitarian commitments to equality with authoritarian preferences for order, while authoritarian citizens may reinterpret liberal institutions as stabilising or destabilising depending on the context. Even libertarians, often assumed to be democracy’s strongest defenders, may at times take liberal rights for granted.

The thesis’ findings collectively highlight that citizens’ visions of democracy are not monolithic or predetermined, nor do they map neatly onto elite projects. Citizens bring diverse and sometimes conceptually inconsistent democratic demands to the political arena, which can be channelled in ways that either weaken or strengthen democracy. In this sense, what matters is not whether people hold “good” or “bad” orientations, but how their views are engaged by institutions and political actors. Therefore, this thesis’ broader message is that democracy’s resilience cannot be strengthened by treating certain groups of citizens as uniformly hostile or as mere reflections of their elite counterparts. Instead, it requires recognising the plurality of democratic visions that ordinary people hold, and taking seriously the ways in which these visions reflect both dissatisfaction with the present system and possibilities for its renewal.