Nearly 25% of young Spaniards see democracy as no better than Francoism

One in four young Spaniards believes democracy is equal to or worse than Francoism

The CIS figure that has shaken up Spain's political autumn is this: nearly 25% of young people aged 18 to 24 consider the current democratic system to be equal to or worse than the Franco dictatorship. Ana Iris Simón published it in an article in El País that has sparked an uncomfortable debate, because it does not simply mock young people, but asks which broken promises have fed that nostalgia. The author, who describes herself as the granddaughter of a communist prisoner held in Valdenoceda, does not deny the figure: she contextualizes it. And in doing so, she touches a nerve that goes beyond Spain.

What is really missed about Francoism?

The article's central thesis is that young people do not miss fascism, but rather sovereignty, certainty and the possibility of making a living from their work. Simón illustrates this with a comparison that stings: public housing construction under Francoism was far greater than it is now. "Is there any point in removing the yoke and arrows from social housing blocks if similar ones are no longer being built?" she asks. It is a calculated provocation. Because Francoism, she reminds us, is not only in history books, but in literature, in the news, in museums and in the oral memory of many families.

The article does not fall into the trap of equating dictatorship and democracy. On the contrary: it points out that the phenomenon is repeated in countries of the former Soviet bloc, where farmers took to the streets with communist flags. What underlies it, she argues, is a shared frustration at the broken promises of globalization and liberal democracy. The answer young people receive, she says, is to stop complaining, because it could be worse. And however true that may be, it builds no future.

Housing as a symbol of the generational rupture

Housing runs through the entire debate. And it is no coincidence. Under Francoism, thousands of government-subsidized housing blocks were built that still stand today, some with the yoke and arrows still on their façades. Today, the complaint is the opposite: no public housing is being built and rents devour the minimum wage. Some argue that this contrast explains youth disaffection better than any speech. Deep down, what is missed is not the regime, but the material stability provided by an interventionist state.

The discussion then turns to the role of the state in the economy. One line of analysis holds that postwar prosperity came not from liberalism, but from statist policies applied alike in the Western and Soviet blocs. The so-called thirty glorious years would have ended with the arrival of neoliberalism in the eighties. From then on, the argument goes, housing became a financial asset and stable employment a memory. It is not a new reading, but it connects with the discontent of a generation that has known nothing but crises and precarity.

The discontent is not exclusive to Spain

Simón insists that the phenomenon repeats itself in Eastern Europe, where nostalgia for communism is also taking hold among the young. The comparison is not trivial: it suggests the problem is not each country's historical memory, but something deeper. Globalization promised prosperity and democracy; what it has left in many places is inequality and disenchantment. Young people do not vote for dictatorships, but neither do they defend a system that has not given them what they expected.

Some read this discontent as a mere generational tantrum. Others see a warning sign. The article does not resolve the tension, but it raises uncomfortable questions: which Francoism are young people referring to? The one of the forties or the one of the seventies? What do they find enviable: the legal injustice toward women or the public housing? These are questions that unsettle everyone, including those quick to label any young person with doubts a fascist.

---

The conclusion, if there is one, is that youth discontent is not fought with memes or name-calling. It is fought with material answers. And those, for now, are conspicuously absent. If the trend continues, the percentage is likely to keep growing, though no one knows quite how far it can go. What is clear is that the problem will not be solved by ignoring it.