Spanish politics continues to face a serious problem: in 2025 it is perceived as the main problem, according to the CIS’s July barometer. When asked about the main problem in Spain, “the Government and specific parties or politicians” receive a 14.1% share of mentions, ahead of housing (13.9%) and corruption and fraud (13.1%). But the issue appears more intense when considering the political aspects that citizens see as the main problems: “political problems in general” (6.9%), “the bad conduct of politicians” (6.4%), and “what political parties do” (3.3%). Setting aside differences in nuance and painting with a broad brush, about one third of the citizenry (30.7%) sees the political arena as a problem. A similar situation, though milder, was already present in 2012. It is not a new problem, but its persistence invites reflection, especially if one understands that, when faced with serious problems requiring collective decisions — for example, housing or wildfire prevention under new climatic conditions — you are either part of the solution or part of the problem.
“El funcionamiento normal de toda sociedad descansa sobre la confianza que construyen sus miembros entre ellos y respecto de las instituciones que les gobiernan”
The normal functioning of any society rests on the trust its members build among themselves and in the institutions that govern them. Not everything in society, as Durkheim suggested, is contract. Trust is vital. I think the question is whether a political actor or an institution can generate trust if it is perceived as a persistent problem. I have no evidence that would allow me to establish such causality firmly and directly, but I fear that this perception of politics as a problem may also be linked to trustin politics. We have two indicators.
On the one hand, the view that “citizens are losing trust in our democracy”. In a survey conducted by 40dB last July, 73% of respondents in this study on polarization among elites and the public agree or strongly agree with the above statement (6% disagree). Remember Thomas’s principle: if people define a situation as real — regardless of whether it is — this situation will be real in its consequences.
On the other hand, trust in two key institutions remains at a low point. When asked to place on a zero-to-ten scale the degree of trust that citizens place in the actions of political parties in public life, 52% sit on the distrust side (zero to four) while only 11% are in the trust side (seven or more). The average trust is 3.4. The Congress of Deputies stands only marginally better: 43% display strong distrust, while only 17% tend to trust this political institution. The average is 3.8. In other words, the balance tilts toward distrust in two institutions essential to democracy: parties and the Congress.
For comparison, the average trust in the security forces is 6.1, in the Judiciary 4.8, and in the Spanish Crown 4.6.
“Explicar la desconfianza en las instituciones es complejo, hay que fijarse en muchas variables como el papel de los medios, la corrupción o la rendición de cuentas”
Explain the construction of distrust in the institutions that shape the functioning of democracy is complex. Several scholars have devoted themselves to this. One must pay attention to government actions, the role of the media, corruption, accountability, political expectations, individual behaviors, transparency, and several other factors that surely help build solid explanations.
But there is one that can serve as a telling illustrative example: political frustration. It has occurred among a group of students. It does not matter whether it is confined to a limited territory or a small group of people. This case is not the whole reality, but it is part of reality and well deserves reflection.
In 2023, a group of concerned and ideologically engaged students crafted an ethical code for people who engage in politics. Also for the citizenry. Aquí tienen la génesis. En su versión última se presentó como una especie de contrato en el que el/la representante que se adhería se comprometía, sorpréndase, a decir la verdad, no incumplir lo prometido, renunciar al insulto y al ataque ad hominem en el debate político, buscar puntos de encuentro con los rivales como estrategia para reducir la polarización. El alumnado implicado y su profesor, Eduardo Ortiz, fueron recibidos con parabienes en instituciones diversas y algunos políticos significados —todos ellos en activo— firmaron su adhesión a este código. Otros lo rechazaron.
Un año después, los alumnos se sentían frustrados, decepcionados, engañados, pues veían cómo estos mismos firmantes ignoraban reiteradamente su compromiso público. Lo tieneaquí y aquí. Se rearmaron de valor y volvieron a presentar una versión de tal código ético ante la deriva de la política actual. Lo relanzaron hace unos días. Tiene la noticia aquí o aquí. Probablemente, lo que han experimentado estos alumnos es extensible a cualquiera que lea esto o esté interesado por la política en España. No es relevante cuántos alumnos son, ni en qué instituto o colegio estudian, pero, por si sirve de algo, provienen de Navarra, que tiene la cámara de representación con mayor grado de inclusión a la hora de aprobar las leyes que regulan la vida de su ciudadanía. Es decir, donde hay más acuerdos entre rivales políticos.
“Estos alumnos han tenido el coraje de poner encima de la mesa unas líneas rojas que si se respetaran la política cambiaría a mejor”
Call them naive, inexperienced, dreamers, idealists, utopians, or whatever term you prefer in this dismissive line. But these students, led by their teacher, have had the courage to put on the table red lines that, if they were minimally respected, would substantially change the way politics is handled in Spain. They are not addressing anyone in particular. They challenge us all.
I believe, however, they will continue to be frustrated, as probably many voters are. As noted in this piece, the Castilla y León elections presage an electoral cycle that prolongs another covert phase that would seem to have begun after the last elections. As elections approach, the political climate tightens and substantive debate or the building of agreements becomes impossible. Perhaps when the way politics is conducted is adjusted a bit, the frustration and impotence of these students, and by extension of many voters like them, will be reduced.
