Transformation Impediments and Barriers: It’s Politics, Stupid! 5.3
ernance and life-worlds: democracy’s core element is the congruence between rulers and ruled – or, as Abra ham Lincoln so famously said, democracy is ‘govern ment of the people, by the people, for the people’. Its most important achievement is therefore the legiti mation requirement for all acts of governance, which in democratic systems is guaranteed by the political equality of all (inclusion). For 2500 years, democra cies have put their trust in the (political) ‘wisdom of crowds’. That is why they function according to differ ent variants of the majority rule, which must, however, not be construed as a ‘tyranny of the majority’, but must rather effectively and fairly allow minorities to have a say, to be involved, and to be protected. Moreo ver, democratic political systems are embedded in legal orders and the rule of law; fundamental constitutional standards are explicitly eliminated from revision by majority decision. Effective decision-making advantages such as the reversibility of decisions and effective stakeholder par ticipation on the part of the citizens, instigated through direct and indirect involvement in the decision-mak ing process and public multi-level communication, go hand in hand with these principles. Improved consoli dation of preferences and interests, best-possible use of widespread knowledge, and the highest level of ‘input legitimation’ of any political system therefore reflect the rationality and comparative advantage of democ racies. What this effectively means is that citizens do not merely receive services from an authoritarian state, but make a sovereign contribution to their composi tion and direction. In this respect, modern democracies respond to the general decoupling of modern societies from hierarchies and the proven ethical impact of pub lic discussion and deliberation; both ensure that each individual develops a relatively strong awareness for the (notional) common good whilst also enjoying the chance to pursue and assert their own individual inter ests. It is obvious that no democratic system has ever achieved this ideal, and the theory of a ‘post-demo cratic’ development of liberal systems with a long dem ocratic tradition is widely discussed in socio-scientific literature (Crouch, 2004; Jörke, 2010). Essentially, there are three problematic factors: (1) the growing social inequality in many developed societies, impact ing negatively on participation opportunities and will ingness; (2) the discouragement of civic activity caused by global economic imperatives undermining the civil culture of cooperation, responsibility and solidarity by providing incentives for individual competition; and (3) the empirical linking of welfare state systems with the paradigm of an economic growth that erodes the natu ral foundations of democratic societies through dispro
portionate consumption of resources (Section 2.3; Box 5.2-1). Despite such by all means serious crises ten dencies, the general democratisation trend outlined in Section 1.2.2 continues worldwide beyond the western core countries. Democracy could, then, be considered as a system model for political order which has become globally established; it would therefore have to prove its effectiveness with a view to the forthcoming Great Transformation.
Democratic Performance At present, democracy has certainly not yet proven its future viability (Box 5.3-1). Time pressure and the complexity of the transformation inevitably lead to the question of the performance and suitability of dem ocratic systems. The quality and the performance of democracies are usually measured by their input, i. e. by effective citizen participation and the willingness of policy-makers to respond to citizens’ interests and aspi rations, and by their output, i. e. their political effec tiveness in the form of effective and efficient action by the executive powers (Brusis, 2008). The measures required by a transformative policy place the usual form of democratic governance under pressure, both in terms of time and space. Democratic processes gen erally need time, as they take many different inter ests into account. Moreover, they usually focus on the short-term achievement of political objectives, making the handling and resolution of long-term problems dif ficult (Section 5.3.1.1). Slowness is, however, not an inherent property of democratic systems and institu tions. As demonstrated by the handling of the finan cial and economic crisis in the autumn of 2008, democ racies are certainly able to react quickly to financial and economic crisis situations and to make far-reach ing reform decisions. Under the pressure of financial and economic crisis, multi-billion bank bailout and eco nomic stimulus packages were adopted within a very short time (Meyer-Ohlendorf et al., 2009). In summary proceedings, the passing of the German financial mar ket stabilisation act (FMStG) and the establishment of a € 480 billion fund were decided by the Bundestag and the Bundesrat, i. e. the German parliament, and signed off by the German Federal President within a week (BMF, 2008). If the requisite legislative coalitions are in place, democratic systems also allow far-reach ing reform decisions to be made within a very short period of time. However, as far as a transformation policy is con cerned, there is no sign of any such blanket coalitions and rapid decision-making processes, despite aware ness of the grave consequences of global warming. This fuels the democracy scepticism mentioned earlier, and a belief in the allegedly greater efficiency of autocratic
193