humboldt-universität zu berlin “crisis of democracy? what crisis?” wolfgang merkel cologne may...

25
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin “Crisis of Democracy? What Crisis?” Wolfgang Merkel Cologne May 18 2015

Upload: dayna-wade

Post on 27-Dec-2015

215 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

“Crisis of Democracy?What Crisis?”

Wolfgang MerkelCologneMay 18 2015

 

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Content

1.Democracy as a contested concept2.Crisis as an undefined concept3.Crisis theories of democracy4.3 Research strategies: testing the „concept“? Experts Demos Analyses5.Crisis? What Crisis?

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

3

Three Concepts of Democracy

Minimalists: Schumpeter, Dahl, Przeworski

Mid-Range: Freedom House, Diamond, Habermas(Merkel: Embedded democracy), (Pateman, Barber:

Restriction to input) Maximalists: Heller, Meyer, Latin American democratic

theory: > social democracy

Input and Output Hypothesis: The more minimalist, the less crisis and vice versa Choice of concept determines the answer to the crisis question Minimalist concepts are analytically inappropriate for the crisis

question

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

„Embedded Democracy“ – internal and external challenges

A

B

E

C

D

Electoral Reg

Civil Rights Political Rights(de jure; in use)

Horizontal Accountability

Effective Power to Govern

Money?PR campaigns?Inequality?

Participation: selective?Representation: gap?Parties: decline?

Freedom: challenged?Fairness: obsolete?Minorities: protected?

Decline of parliaments?Dominance of the Executive? Loss of ext & int Souvereignty?

Illegitimate decision makers?

Heterogeneity

Europeanization Globalisation

Socio-economic

Inequality

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

5

Two Meanings of Crisis I1. Acute crisis: Death or life?

Crossroad Fundamental decisions/medicine are required Existential threat

Examples:Italy 1920-1922Weimar 1930-1933Spain 1933-1936/9Greece 1965-67Chile 1970-1973

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Two Meanings of Crisis II

2. Latent crisis: Slow decline, erosion

Unfulfilled normative promises of democracy Erosion: Worsening of quality, chronic diseases Diminished subtype: Defective, illiberal, exclusive democracies,

but no collapse/regime transition Threshold question not resolved!

Hypotheses:

If Type I, the smaller the crisis sample (clearer defined)

If Type II, the bigger the crisis sample (and less defined)

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

What should Crisis Theories explain?

Defining properties of a CrisisNecessary and sufficient conditionsThreshold questionCauses and effectsAn analytical concept embedded in theory

has to cover Pt. 1-3 and allow for analyses of Pt. 4

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Habermas (1973): Legitmation Crisis

Economic crisis

-contradict.

-ec.growth

- bus.cycles

Rationality crisis

-administrat.-political system

--Welfare State

Legitimation crisis

- Mass withdrawal of support from

“formal democracy”

Motivational crisis

Support to the normative order of

democr. and to work ethic is

withering away

Economic

steering problem

Inability

to cope

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Trilateral Commission (1975): The Overload Hypothesis

1. Delegitimation of Authority: Pursuit of equality and individualism led to a delegitimation of authority, a loss of trust in leadership and a weakening of social bonds.

2. Overloading of Government: Expansion of participation, increasing expectations: overload on government.

3. Disaggregation of Interests: Intensified political competition > disaggregation of interests > decline and fragmentation of political parties.

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Crouch (2004): Postdemocracy

– Decline of pol. participation- Imbalance between capital and labour– Erosion of the welfare state– Disempowering the state (privatization,

outsourcing..) – Competent private firms – incompetent

governments– Commodification of social relations– Negative freedom prevail over positive freedomDemocratic moment in the past as standard for

comparison

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

11

What do crises theories don`t tell us:A Critique

Critique: No clear concept of democracy Democracy as an institutional black box (var of dem) No clear definitions of crisis properties No definition of thresholds How to deal with simultaneuous pos & neg

developments? Trend to monocausality: although causal hypotheses

are the strongest part

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Three Levels of Analysis

1.What do the people think: Legitimacy Beliefs (Surveys)

2.What do the experts think: Normative standards (Indices)

3.How are the democratic functions fulfilled within the 5 partial regimes: (partial analyses)

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

13

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

14

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Quality of Democracy in 30 „best democracies“ (1990-2012)

Own figure based on Democracy Barometer

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

5 Partial Regime as Units of Analysis Electoral Regime: Who votes?

Decline; increase of social selectivity Political Rights: Who is represented?

inequal substantial representation (class); better representation of minorities; better descriptive representation of women.

Civil Rights: Who is protected?better protection of minority rights; trade off between freedom rights and security needs

Horizontal Accountability: Who controls?Parliaments of loser of globalization & Europianization

Power to Govern: Who governs?Loss of state power to markets; loss of nat. govt to supranat. Org, & regimes

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

19

Decline of Catch-all Parties in Western Europe, 1958-2012

Note: The figure shows yearly country-means for the concentration of votes on catch-all parties in Western Europe. The time-series starting in 1958 does not include Greece, Portugal, and Spain. The time-series starting in 1977, however, does. Luxembourg and Malta are excluded.Source: Database „Elections, Parties, Governments“ of the Research Unit „Democracy“ at the Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB), 21.06.2012; my figure.

40

45

50

55

60

65

70M

ean

of A

ggre

gat

ed

Vo

te S

har

e

since 1958 since 1977

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

RESULTS

In regimes 1-3: pos & neg results Regimes 4 & 5: mostly negative trends

Analytical Problem: how do we discount these different pos & neg trends?

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Conclusion I

1. Experts & Indices: No crisis of democracy

2. Demos-Surveys: No crisis of dem, but of certain institutions

3. Threshold question theoretically not solved: surveys and indices do not signal a beginning of crisis

4. Dissimultaneity: decline & improvement of dem. institutions (women, minorities vs class)

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

CONCLUSION 2

However: Shifting axes of legitimacy From majorit. Institutions to non-majorit. Institutions:

permissive consensus of the people Partcipation and parliaments in decline Strong trend towards a 50% Demos:oligarchisation „People do not bother about decline of parliaments „The citizens“less critical than the „critical citizens

hypothesis“ assumes Schloars: Erosion of Repr. Dem! People: Good so!

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Conclusion 3Can dem innovations help?

Referenda? Deliberative Democracy? Digital Democracy? More Europe and supranational Governance?

Perspective: Two-Third-Democracy

23

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Appendix

24

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Quality of Democracy - Decline?

Own figure based on Democracy Barometer