Inclusion of Marginalized Groups

Democratic systems are strengthened when they are inclusive - particularly of groups historically excluded from political, economic, or social life. According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), inclusive political processes are essential to democratic resilience because they ensure marginalized populations have a voice in public decision-making. These groups can include ethnic and religious minorities, women, the LGBTQ+ community, indigenous peoples, rural populations, and economically disadvantaged citizens. Political exclusion and systemic discrimination are common drivers of extremism, as they often lead to a sense of hopelessness or injustice that radical movements can exploit. Free and equal elections are a primary channel through which inclusion can be institutionalized - whether through proportional representation, accessible voting systems, political outreach, or, in some contexts, reserved seats for minority groups. The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance notes that more than 30 countries have adopted minority quotas or reserved seats in their legislatures as a strategy for political inclusion. Examples include India (for different castes and tribes), New Zealand (Māori seats), and Colombia (Afro-Colombian and Indigenous representation). When marginalized communities see themselves reflected in political power structures and decision-making processes, the appeal of extremist ideologies tends to diminish. As highlighted by UNDP and USAID, inclusive governance offers peaceful pathways to address grievances, thereby reducing the likelihood that individuals turn to extremism.

To measure this dimension internationally, one of the most referenced databases is the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project, which includes specific indicators under its Equal Protection Index and Political Equality Index. These sub-indices assess the extent to which individuals from different social groups enjoy equal political power and influence, as well as legal protections. V-Dem’s approach is grounded in a multidimensional view of democracy and relies on expert-coded assessments for consistency and global comparability. It provides disaggregated data on group inclusion, including access to civil liberties, representation in legislatures, and protections against discrimination. Additionally, the Gender Quota Database - maintained by International IDEA, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and Stockholm University - offers insights into formal mechanisms like candidate quotas, which require political parties to nominate a minimum percentage of women on their electoral lists, and reserved seats, which guarantee a fixed number of legislative positions for women regardless of electoral outcomes. These mechanisms are widely used, and as of 2023, over 130 countries have adopted some form of gender quota.

According to V-Dem’s 2023 data, the United States ranks relatively high on formal inclusion metrics, such as universal suffrage and legal anti-discrimination protections. However, it lags behind many high-income democracies on effective inclusion and equitable political representation. For instance, the U.S. Political Equality Index (2023) score is 0.67 on a 0–1 scale, reflecting a moderate level of inclusion with significant room for improvement. While laws prohibit explicit discrimination in voting, systemic inequalities and structural barriers continue to limit genuine political participation for many groups.

While the United States may perform reasonably well on paper - thanks to constitutional guarantees, civil rights legislation, and anti-discrimination statutes - the practical enforcement of these protections often falls short. Legal frameworks alone are insufficient when the institutions responsible for upholding them are themselves implicated in perpetuating inequality. For instance, institutions such as law enforcement agencies and election officials - tasked with safeguarding equal access and civil rights - have historically engaged in practices that suppress minority political participation. While the most overt forms of disenfranchisement, like literacy tests and white-only primaries (which excluded Black voters from participating in primary elections), were outlawed during the civil rights era, more subtle tactics persist today. These include reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods, imposing strict voter ID laws, and purging voter rolls - all of which disproportionately affect communities of color. Studies by the Brennan Center for Justice and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights have documented how such measures contribute to unequal access to the ballot. This disconnect between democratic ideals and uneven implementation fosters a credibility gap, undermining public trust in institutions that claim to uphold equal rights. It also highlights the importance of not only enacting inclusive policies but ensuring they are implemented equitably and without bias. In short, the presence of anti-racist laws does not guarantee an anti-racist system - especially when those tasked with applying the law operate within structures shaped by decades of racial inequality.

Racial and ethnic minorities in the U.S. - especially Black, Latino, and Indigenous communities - face enduring obstacles in political participation, including voter suppression tactics such as purging of voter rolls, gerrymandering of minority districts, strict voter ID laws, and limited polling access in minority neighborhoods. The 2013 Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which invalidated key provisions of the Voting Rights Act, has been widely criticized for weakening federal oversight of discriminatory practices at the state level.

According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, women’s representation in U.S. politics has grown but remains comparatively low. As of 2023, women hold around 29% of seats in Congress - below the global average for national parliaments and far behind countries with gender quotas or proportional systems. The situation is more dire for intersectional representation: Black, Latina, Asian, Indigenous, and LGBTQ+ women are significantly underrepresented in elected office, with women of color holding less than 10% of congressional seats (CAWP).

Despite increasing visibility, the LGBTQ+ community faces legislative backlash in many states, including restrictions on gender-affirming care and the inclusion of queer topics in education. These developments contribute to a political climate that discourages full civic participation and representation, even when formal legal rights exist.

The exclusion of racial and ethnic minorities from full political participation has far-reaching consequences for American politics. When these communities encounter systemic barriers - such as voter suppression, underrepresentation, and discriminatory districting - they often become disillusioned with traditional democratic processes. This erosion of trust contributes to lower voter turnout, weaker civic engagement, and a growing perception that political institutions do not serve their interests. In some cases, this marginalization has fueled support for outsider candidates or movements that promise radical change, disrupting conventional party coalitions and reshaping the political landscape. For instance, both left-wing and right-wing populist movements have capitalized on the grievances of underrepresented groups - either by mobilizing them with promises of justice and reform, or, conversely, by exploiting racial and cultural anxieties to suppress their influence or redirect blame. At the same time, many rural and lower-income white communities have been drawn to right-wing populist movements like the MAGA coalition, feeling abandoned by mainstream political elites and excluded from national economic and cultural narratives. In these cases, perceived exclusion - not only from material resources but from political recognition - has also driven radicalization. The resulting polarization further entrenches exclusion, creating a feedback loop that undermines democratic legitimacy. Addressing the political exclusion of minority communities is therefore not only a matter of equity but a crucial step in restoring faith in democratic governance and preventing the drift toward extremism.

Comparative Case Studies in Inclusion of Marginalized Groups

Germany performs considerably better on indicators of political inclusion. V-Dem ranks Germany at 0.85 on the Political Equality Index, citing strong anti-discrimination laws, inclusive political party structures, and high levels of gender and minority representation. Germany’s use of proportional representation encourages diversity among elected officials, and the federal government has adopted national strategies to promote the political participation of immigrants, disabled persons, and ethnic minorities (Federal Ministry of the Interior, 2017). As of 2023, nearly 35% of Bundestag members are women, and the number of legislators with migrant backgrounds continues to grow. These efforts contribute to the perception that democratic institutions are open and representative - limiting the appeal of anti-systemic extremism.

Tunisia also presents a notable example of progress. Following its 2011 revolution, Tunisia implemented a vertical gender parity law requiring party lists to alternate between male and female candidates, resulting in one of the highest percentages of women in parliament in the Arab world (41% in the 2019 election). The Tunisian constitution also enshrines rights for people with disabilities and commits to combatting racial discrimination. However, challenges persist: political inclusion of Black Tunisians and the Amazigh community remains limited, and recent authoritarian backsliding threatens the gains of the post-revolutionary period. Nevertheless, Tunisia’s early reforms demonstrate how institutional change can foster participation and dampen extremist impulses by empowering long-excluded groups.

In contrast, Egypt and Turkey illustrate the risks of exclusionary governance. In Egypt, political power remains concentrated in the hands of military elites, and opposition parties, civil society organizations, and minority groups face severe repression. The Coptic Christian minority and other religious groups face restrictions in representation and expression. Women’s participation is limited by both legal hurdles and social norms, and LGBTQ+ individuals face criminalization and persecution. V-Dem ranks Egypt among the lowest globally on group equality and inclusion, scoring below 0.3 on the Political Equality Index.

Turkey exhibits similar trends. Although the country has held regular elections, President Erdoğan’s increasingly authoritarian rule has narrowed space for political dissent. The pro-Kurdish HDP (People’s Democratic Party) has been systematically targeted, with its leaders imprisoned and members expelled from parliament. Minority inclusion - especially for Kurds, Armenians, and LGBTQ+ communities - has declined sharply. Gender parity has also deteriorated, especially after Turkey’s 2021 withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention on gender-based violence.

The United States can draw valuable lessons from both positive and negative examples. Like Germany and Tunisia, the U.S. could implement institutional reforms to improve representativeness and remove barriers to participation. Conversely, the U.S. must avoid the path taken by Egypt and Turkey, where exclusionary governance, repression of dissent, and erosion of civil liberties undermine political inclusion and fuel extremism. Ignoring or suppressing the voices of marginalized communities does not eliminate discontent - it redirects it into more radical channels, as numerous studies have shown that political exclusion and perceived injustice are key drivers of extremism and support for anti-establishment movements (UNDP, 2016; Schmid, 2013).

Ultimately, inclusion is not merely a moral imperative; it is a pragmatic strategy for democratic resilience. Ensuring that all citizens see themselves represented and respected in democratic institutions reduces the appeal of extremist ideologies and strengthens the social contract. A truly inclusive democracy is a more stable and peaceful one.