In a recent special edition of the journal Global Policy entitled “Changing the European Debate: A Rollback of Democracy”, contributors tackled key questions about the immediate challenges that democracy, both at the national and international level, face. Helmut K. Anheier looks at some potential problems to the broad issues that democracy faces in an age characterised by what might be described as a global ‘hollowing out’ of democracy

Anheier, Helmut K.

LSE Research Online

By Democratic Audit UK 2015-8-4Democracy requires the critical engagement of practitionersand experts alike if it is to thrive in these challenging timesdemocraticaudit.com /2015/08/04/democracy-requires-the-critical-engagement-of-practitioners-and-experts-alike-if-it-is-to-thrive-in-these-challenging-times/In a recent special edition of the journal Global Policy entitled “Changing the European Debate: A Rollback ofDemocracy”, contributors tackled key questions about the immediate challenges that democracy, both at thenational and international level, face. Helmut K. Anheier looks at some potential problems to the broad issues thatdemocracy faces in an age characterised by what might be described as a global ‘hollowing out’ of democracy. Credit: Ggia – via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY SA 3.0Recent developments in a number of European countries, but also in the United States, have given rise to seriousconcerns about the current state of democracy generally. The erosion of trust in government and in establishedparties, the rise of (nationalist) populist movements and parties, lower voter turnout, and new forms of politicalengagement, the empowerment of executive branches – all these factors pose growing challenges to the futureprospects of democracy.We might indeed witness what the late Peter Mair termed the “hollowing out” of Western democracies – anincreasing “anti-political” sentiment from citizens and politicians alike. Other observers diagnose a “rollback” ofdemocracy, a backsliding into somewhat semi-authoritarian practices. However labelled, democracy, it appears,seems stalled in most, even retreating in some, and progressing a very few countries. What are the implications ofsuch findings?The most important lesson is probably that these developments must be set into context – geographically as well ashistorically. First of all, while the erosion of trust in established democratic institutions is indeed a widespread, eventransatlantic phenomenon, the degree to which a “hollowing out” or “rollback” of democracy takes places variesacross countries and regions.Second, the worrisome developments, in particular the erosion of trust in established democratic institutions, have1/3different origins. They are driven by multidimensional, highly interwoven processes, which might be hard todisentangle across cases, if at all. In other words, they are as much more deep-seated, and not only a product ofrecent events and developments. This makes the “democracy problem” a rather complex one. While such problemsmight prove difficult to solve, they can nonetheless be addressed. They require, to be sure, patience, carefulanalyses and critical discussions.What can be done?The question arises as to which structures and practices have to be changed to strengthen public participation andto enhance the legitimacy of democratic institutions in the medium and long term, and at what levels? There is noone-size-fits all solution. Instead, any solution requires a comprehensive approach tailored to national and regionalneeds and political agendas. Something new is needed, it seems.One way forward is to better clarify what we mean by democracy and democratic practices in the first place. Ademocratic order must not be defined by its existing procedures and political institutions – elections, referenda,parties, parliaments – since they are always in flux, but by its very purpose: collective self-determination. Eachhistorical time requires different answers to achieve that goal, given prevailing social, economic, technologicalconditions. Underpinning concepts such as “equality”, “freedom” and “representation” could and maybe should beimagined differently in the 21st century.Another set of more medium-term suggestions points to a strengthening of civil society and a greater participation ofthe electorate in political processes and decisions. Suggestions include greater NGO involvement, more use ofreferenda and forms of deliberative democracy, and new rights for citizens to contest executive decisions (“right tochallenge”) to allow for the accommodation of a wider range of political preferences.What such policy recommendations share is the promotion of a more inclusive concept of democracy, and thenotion that popular involvement should not be restricted to voting alone. The solutions aim at enhancing legitimacyand responsiveness of democratic systems through more participatory channels and ways of inclusion. The goalhere is to empower “the people”, by giving them a greater voice in multiple processes as well as ways and means.Other proposals target the efficacy, accountability and transparency of governance at regional, the national and thelocal levels. Ideas revolve around adding a social accountability component to decisions and increasing the“watchdog” function of different political institutions to safeguard certain political standards and rights. Such a rights-based approach empowers the rights-holder. It seeks to strengthen institutions on the European Union (EU)-leveland the member state level to uphold the rule of law.Of course, these measures are far from exhaustive and exclusive. Moreover, they are no guarantee againstdemocratic backsliding or a “hollowing out” of Western democracies. By contrast, a range of alternative strategiesand measures might be relevant and warrant future analysis:Technological innovations, for example, offer another potential mean to engage citizens. Social media lower the costof communication and allow for more interactive approaches with a wider public. A more digitally-empowered civilsociety could help re-connect citizens to political institutions, processes and enhance decision-making. With the rightplatforms and know-how, digital technologies could bring more voices to the political arena, and across differentlevels.Another possibility to counter the distrust in established democratic institutions is the reform of organizations.Distrust in parties, for example, could be countered by internal party reforms that allow for more flexibility such asintra-party alliances. In other words, existing parties could arrange for caucuses, political wings, and supportorganizations in more systematic ways such as to counteract the possibility of technocratic and populist majoritiesand elites.Overall, parties should remember they are often the outcome of political and social movements, and that they rest2/3on a lived connection to civil society. They are social creatures that require legitimacy beyond their actual orpotential success at the ballot box. By being open and re-rooted at different levels, parties would add voice to civilsociety and thereby become more responsive to different and changing demands.Résumé: The future prospects for democracyWhile there was probably never a “Gilded Age” of democracy, there are without doubt better and worse times fordemocracy, just as there are some developments that give rise to hope or concern. Yet, overall, it seems thatdemocracy as a normative order seems to be not in acute danger, however defined. And, yet, public content with theperformance of democracy is declining on both sides of the Atlantic. This is alarming in its long-term consequences.A well-performing democracy requires ‘work’, a certain stewardship: it requires periodic, if not constant, renewal anda persistence in asking questions that “no-one dares to ask”, as Ralf Dahrendorf so aptly put it when pointing to therole of the intellectuals, and, in the context of democracy, national and transnational elites. As such, democracyrequires the critical engagement of practitioners and experts alike.—This post represents the views of the author, and not those of Democratic Audit or the LSE. Please readour comments policy before posting. —Helmut K. Anheier is President and Dean at the Hertie School of Governance, and holds achair of sociology at Heidelberg University.3/3

Democracy requires the critical engagement of practitioners and experts alike if it is to thrive in these challenging times

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online