Disenchantment with democracy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term disenchantment with democracy denotes in a narrower definition , like the term disaffection with democracy , which is usually used synonymously , a fundamental dissatisfaction of citizens of a parliamentary democracy with the political system of the state concerned. A person disaffected with democracy in this sense is not only dissatisfied with current politics ( disenchantment with politics ) as well as with the persons ( disaffection with politicians ) and parties ( disaffection with parties ) who are responsible for what the disgruntled "wrong" politics are, but with the principle of representative democracy as such. Thus arose in Germany Demokratieverdrossene in contrast to Art. 79 para. 3 GG , according to which democracy to the structural principles of the free democratic basic order is one that must not be (even with a 100-percent majority) substantially altered or abolished by vote .

There is also talk of disaffection with democracy in a broader understanding of the term when those affected doubt that the statements standardized in the constitution can be (consistently) implemented in practice in politics and the application of the law. As evidence for this assumption, it is stated above all that the blank space in Article 20.2 of the Basic Law, according to which there can also be votes at federal level , has only been substantiated since 1949 by Article 29.2 of the Basic Law, the one for cases prescribes a compulsory referendum for a reorganization of the federal territory .

Extent of disaffection with democracy in Germany

The Weimar Republic failed because of the unwillingness of voters to vote for democratic parties in the 1930s. In the Reichstag elections on November 6, 1932 , the NSDAP and the KPD together received a narrow absolute majority (296 of 585) in the Reichstag seats. In addition to those who fundamentally rejected democracy since the establishment of the Weimar Republic (those who despised democracy), many people who were disaffected by democracy were among the voters of both parties. Both groups had in common the will not to be represented by the established parties; instead, they advocated a National Socialist or Communist dictatorship .

In the " Bonn Republic " lost in view of the ban on the SRP (1952) and the KPD (1956) by the Federal Constitutional Court and the relatively low number of votes of right-wing and left-wing extremist parties in Bundestag and Landtag elections (decidedly right-wing parties were able to form after the 1950s to establish not permanent in West German parliaments 1990) many of the eyes that there is always also gave democracy despised or demokratieverdrossene voters who opposed the free democratic basic order within the meaning of the basic law. With the accession of the five new countries to the FRG, the proportion of those who viewed their democratic system with fundamental skepticism, if not negative, increased.

In 2013, the Bertelsmann Foundation disseminated the thesis that the assumption that there was increasing disenchantment with democracy in Germany was a “myth”.

Dieter Fuchs and Edeltraud Roller pointed out in a publication by the Federal Agency for Civic Education that in East Germany the proportion of those satisfied with the functioning of democracy in Germany had fallen to 47% in 2015. However, among the dissatisfied respondents in 2015 there were also people who wanted democracy to function better. In 2016, the same authors found that in 2014 90% of West Germans and 82% of East Germans said that democracy was the “best form of government”.

In comparison with other countries, the development in Germany is not out of the ordinary: In 2017, the US polling institute Pew conducted surveys in 38 countries on the subject of democracy. 78 percent of those questioned were in favor of a representative democracy, 28 percent wanted an authoritarian government, for example a “staunch leader” or a military junta . 46 percent of the respondents were satisfied with the democracy in their country, 52 percent were dissatisfied.

After the 2017 federal election , the Institute for Democracy and Civil Society (idz) found that there were local political cultures in both East and West Germany, “especially in economically drifting, but also in prosperous regions”, in which “disaffection with democracy and Could normalize right-wing extremism. [...] Structural weaknesses, alienation from democracy and a greater willingness to vote for right-wing extremist parties go hand in hand in many regions and significantly favor the electoral success of right-wing populists. In addition, however, there are also high mobilization successes in regions with middle and higher incomes ”.

Reasons for disenchantment with democracy

High demands on the functioning of a democracy

Wolfgang Merkel differentiates between three types of expectations of a democracy, which emerged from the "minimalist", the "middle" and the "maximalist" theory of democracy. “ Joseph Schumpeters (1883–1950) 'realistic' theory of democracy from 1942 is the classic of democratic minimalism. For him, elections are not just the core of democracy, but the core of democracy. Representatives of medium-sized democracy models such as democracy, which is bound by the rule of law, argue that free and general elections are only democratically effective if they are embedded in secure civil rights and control of violence and if they are elected Governments actually rule, and not ' financial markets ', (central) banks or other democratically illegitimate actors. That is not enough for maximalists. You want to include policy outcomes , especially social justice and social security , in the definition of democracy. The Weimar constitutional law teacher Herrmann Heller [sic!] (1891–1933) is an early representative of this school. If you follow Schumpeter's normatively undemanding understanding of democracy, you will hardly see any signs of a crisis in the developed democracies. But if one feels obliged to the normatively highly demanding concept of 'social democracy' (Heller), one senses nothing but crisis everywhere. Social injustice is then easily stylized into a crisis of democracy. In short: Depending on which model of democracy you use, you will hardly, often or almost always be able to speak of a 'crisis of democracy'. "

According to Wolfgang Merkel, dissatisfaction with democracy is primarily due to high expectations in the sense of the “maximalist democratic theory”, for whose supporters a democratic policy is not (only) legitimized by the application of democratic procedures . For many, the information that there are 117 “electoral democracies” (ie countries in which politicians are elected) worldwide today is not very meaningful, which is actually a success story. But only 4.5% of the world's population lived in a “full democracy”. The "Democracy Index 2017" presented by the "Economist Intelligence Unit" even downgraded the USA to a "defective democracy".

According to a survey carried out by the opinion research institute insa in January 2017 , 70% of those questioned believe that referendums are more “democratic” than votes in the Bundestag. This would suggest that a majority of eligible voters in Germany are not satisfied with a purely representative democracy. The result of the survey can be interpreted to mean that a majority of Germans want “more democracy”. As early as after the Bundestag election in 1969 , Willy Brandt, as Federal Chancellor, put his government declaration under the motto: “ Dare more democracy! ".

Deviation of constitutional reality from the ideals of the constitution

Instead, scholars like Colin Crouch see the developed Western states on the way to post-democracy . In his analysis mentioned above, Wolfgang Merkel summarizes the diagnoses pessimists make: “The trend is towards two-thirds or even halved democracy. […] Core functions of democracy such as participation , representation and inclusion [are] undermined in developed democracies […]. Participation diminishes, representation breaks, inclusion fails. Democracy is losing its participatory core and degenerating into an elitist audience democracy. [...] The undemocratic side effects of anonymized 'discourses' on the internet or low-deliberation electronic voting are considerable. The power of banks, rating agencies and global corporations has grown immensely. The globalization of the markets restricts democratic leeway. Supranational regimes such as the EU and international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund cannot be democratized either according to the pattern or the quality of nation states . […] Government beyond the nation state will not only be different and more complex, but also less democratic. ”Merkel acknowledges that the tendencies cited do exist, but denies that the picture is complete, since there are also contrary developments. The politics of the democratic states also had a positive output: "Women have more rights and opportunities than 40 years ago, cultural and sexual minorities are better protected, the transparency of parties, parliaments and the political class is higher."

Georg Diez and Emanuel Heisenberg radicalize the thesis that one should no longer speak of democracy in more and more states with elections: “In fact, to describe the prevailing practice, one should speak of oligarchy instead of democracy and from financial feudalism instead of capitalism , this applies to Vladimir Putin's Russia and also to Trump's America - and the move towards authoritarian democracy can be seen from Hungary to the Philippines and will continue to pick up speed. "

Importance of wealth and empathy

It is noticeable that in many countries members of the lower classes have become non-voters, although they are relatively easy to mobilize by populists . At the same time, disenchantment with democracy could easily increase to contempt for democracy. Ian Kershaw sees the historical origins of the contempt for democracy in Europe in the 1970s, when the economic crisis ended the boom of the post-war period and economic neoliberalism began to gain importance. Even after this turning point, there were social liberalization processes. But social inequality has increased over the past few decades. The widening gap between rich and poor leads many people to contempt for the elites - and to disaffection with democracy.

The study “A look in the middle” developed at the University of Leipzig represents the “seal thesis”: right-wing extremist thinking always existed in Germany after 1945; But there was a “ narcissistic seal” in West Germany : “The prosperity that set in relatively quickly with the so-called economic miracle in West Germany left neither space and time for thoughtfulness nor for shame.” The hope of East Germans, after the fall of the Wall, to prosperity just as quickly like the West Germans forty years earlier, they were largely disappointed. A lack of or dwindling prosperity, however, “let the seal crumble”. Political and even disenchantment with democracy were the result of those who were susceptible to right-wing ideas: "Whenever prosperity crumbles as a seal, anti-democratic traditions emerge again from the void."

People who are not able to empathize with other people are particularly susceptible to right ideas. The researchers also emphasize the importance of the willingness to openly deal with Germany's National Socialist past and one's own family: “Even among today's 20 to 30-year-olds we can see that a democratic attitude often goes hand in hand with coming to terms with the Nazi past, shame and admits guilt about family entanglements ”.

Topos of the “right” politics

A recurring element in the argumentation of those disaffected by democracy is the statement that in democratic systems those who are empowered to make binding decisions systematically make “wrong”, harmful decisions and important decisions are not made.

Central role of a unified "popular will"

In his work On the Social Contract or Principles of State Law (1762), Jean Jacques Rousseau explains his understanding of democracy. According to him, representative democracies are not democracies because in them the volonté générale (the “general will” or “popular will”) cannot become a reality because of the egoism of members of parliament. What the “will of the people” is is clear from the outset (a priori). He endeavors to assert the common good . If egoism as a source of interference can be eliminated, then “the general will is always clearly evident”, and the people are not mistaken. The “general will” can be “found out” through reasonable thought (like the correct solution to a math problem). All the good-willed and rational who claimed to be part of the people should want the same thing. Those who achieve different results of thought and a different will are either incompetent or malicious (i.e. unwilling to disregard their “selfish” private interests). Rousseau believes that in polls the people even the Volonté générale will unfold. Rousseau does not see the possibility that voting on complex issues could overwhelm citizens (as in mathematics poor students are overwhelmed by the task).

Critics object that mathematics plays an important role in politics (especially in financial and economic policy), but that one cannot “calculate” what has to happen. Politics does not consist in finding the "right" solutions, but in arriving at legitimate, generally binding regulations. The legitimacy, in turn, is based on the procedure: What the majority determines, gains legal force, regardless of whether the decision is "correct".

Although the Basic Law is based on the competitive model of democracy , many associate the call for “more democracy” with the (“Rousseauist”) hope that “the right thing” will become reality through politics. The problem with this approach is the insinuation of the hopeful that he is part of the “people” who (in Rousseau's sense) cannot be wrong, and in this respect is by definition right. The reply that his wishes are not a majority or should be rejected for other reasons meets with the hopeful incomprehension. He fails to recognize that he is part of a pluralistic society in which other interests that deviate from the interests of the hopeful are also considered legitimate.

Rejection and defense against encroaching majorities

On the other hand, the statement: “The majority wants it!” Is sufficient legitimation, but it is not always helpful. The claim that there are no “objectively correct” decisions, e.g. B. in cases in which a large majority of natural scientists predict that "wrong" decisions would lead to irresponsible disasters. This applies, for example, to a waiver of rigorous measures by the state to contain global warming or in the event of pandemics . In times of the climate crisis, figures of thought that have been central and have had positive connotations since the middle of the 20th century: ambivalence, ambiguity, undecidability (with the result that every decision necessarily has an element of arbitrariness attached). What will happen in pandemics with novel pathogens in the event of inaction by politically responsible persons is not a question of belief, but can be calculated with the help of exponential functions , so that indications of the legitimacy of diverging (majority) opinions appear absurd.

Most democratic states are also “democratic constitutional states ” in the sense that the essence of the fundamental rights of those who are the objects of decisions of the state concerned must not be impaired even by a unanimous vote by those who are democratically legitimized to make decisions.

Radical individualism

The psychologist Thomas Grüter puts forward the thesis that in the context of the "economic theory of democracy" in the tradition of Anthony Downs (" An Economic Theory of Democracy ") it is irrational behavior for individuals to take part in elections. “From an economic point of view, there is no point in voting. You have to [...] take the time to study the election programs and go to the polling station. In return you get a tiny share of participation in the composition of parliament. The yield is therefore close to zero and - viewed rationally - does not justify any expenditure. ”Rather, it must be explained why, in view of its citizens, still participate in elections. Anyone who assumes that voting is a civic (moral) duty is misunderstanding the effectiveness of the homo oeconomicus , who is only interested in how he can gain personal advantages and avoid disadvantages. With people in whom the “homo oeconomicus” is strongly pronounced, one always has to ask oneself whether they went so far as to “pragmatically” advocate a dictatorship because it offers them personally more advantages than disadvantages. "The interest in maintaining democracy would [...] by no means be economically compelling".

Reactions to disenchantment with democracy

Perplexity

The "taz" quotes with approval the conclusion of the Jena conference in January 2018 (see web links) that "the enthusiasm for [democracy] must be rekindled". At the same time, however, she is at a loss as to how this should be done. Disdain for the elite is certainly appropriate if you look at the behavior of Siemens boss Joe Kaeser (which was a topic of discussion in Jena). Kaeser had announced that it would close the turbine plants in Görlitz and Leipzig , thereby destroying 1,000 jobs in East Germany. Allegedly, the global demand for the gas turbines produced there is too low. At a dinner in Davos, however , Kaeser promised US President Donald Trump to build a new generation of gas turbines in the USA. With all this, elected German politicians obviously either have no influence or they do not take advantage of it.

Lowering expectations

In 2009, Thomas Böckenförde recommended, following the constitutional law teacher Christoph Möllers , whom he reviewed , to reduce expectations of democratic systems: “Democracy does not promise basic material security or a certain standard of living. What it guarantees is a minimum of individual self-determination and political equality, not economic and not even equal opportunities. - It is perhaps not the worst recipe against disenchantment with democracy to take some of the associated expectation of salvation from this form of government and, as Möllers does, to see it in a more "reduced" way: as one that weights all parties equally and therefore does not protect against unreasonable decisions Form of organizing political processes. "

State sanctions

Ban on parties and "radical decree"

As a reaction to the failure of the Weimar Republic, the SPD politician Carlo Schmid demanded in a session of the Parliamentary Council on September 8, 1948 : “For my part, I am of the opinion that the concept of democracy does not include the prerequisites for their elimination creates. [...] You also have to have the courage to intolerance those who want to use democracy to kill them. "

With these words Schmid describes the principle of defensive democracy . This has been taken into account in Article 21 of the Basic Law, which gives the Federal Constitutional Court the opportunity to ban unconstitutional parties. Working for banned parties underground is considered a criminal offense. Members and functionaries of the banned KPD were convicted from 1956 onwards for secret bundling , formation of criminal organizations , endangering the state (§§ 88–98 StGB) and treason (§§ 99-101 StGB). Many suffered professional disadvantages as "previous convicts".

The so-called radical decree , according to which persons who become or want to remain civil servants in the public service , must be constitutional, is based on the principle of “defensive democracy” (also called “militant democracy”) . The decree responded primarily to the announcement by representatives of the student movement (the “ 68ers ”) that they wanted to “ march through the institutions ”. From 1972 until the final abolition of the regular request to the responsible Office for the Protection of the Constitution in 1985, most recently in Bavaria in 1991 , a total of 3.5 million people nationwide were checked. Of these, 1,250 predominantly left-wing teachers and university lecturers were not hired, and around 260 people made redundant.

The use of the instrument of party bans is no longer considered appropriate today. In addition, the problem arose from October 1990 that millions of (former) members of the SED , a successor party to the KPD, became citizens of the Federal Republic of Germany in the course of the reunification of Germany . It was practically impossible and also not politically opportune to treat them all as communists (including members of the legal DKP ) had been treated in the Bonn republic simply because of their party membership.

Criminal Law Measures

Even people with radical or even extremist views have the right to express them (even in public) (according to Art. 4 and Art. 5 GG). However, there are criminally prosecuted types of statements, especially insults ( § 185 StGB), defamation ( § 186 StGB), slander ( § 187 StGB) and sedition ( § 130 StGB). In addition, due to Germany's National Socialist past, it is forbidden to spread the Auschwitz lie ( Section 194 (2) of the Criminal Code) and to use symbols of unconstitutional organizations ( Section 86a of the Criminal Code).

As far as the use of criminal law instruments is concerned, political scientist Hans Vorländer recommended in 2016: “You have to talk to those you can still talk to. You shouldn't talk to those you can't talk to anymore. But one should be very clear about the limits of the rule of law. Wherever insulted or harassed, the rule of law has to be tough. "

Keeping constitutional patriotism alive

In the Bonn Republic recommended intellectuals like Jürgen Seifert , Dolf Sternberger and Jurgen Habermas the constitutional patriotism as an appropriate attitude towards the German part state "Federal Republic of Germany". Constitutional patriotism is understood to mean the citizen's identification with the basic values , institutions and procedures of the republican basic political order and constitution and the citizen's active role as a citizen. Getting involved in the political process is at the center of this concept. Although this stance is directed against nationalistic interpretations of the people as ethnos as well as against individualistic, emotion-free and politically distant apathy, there were voices who considered this stance obsolete after the restoration of the German nation-state in 1990.

Federal President Joachim Gauck countered this in his farewell speech by stating that “the word constitutional patriotism, which was born in the academic world, is not just a theorem, but can also be a reality - wherever people feel this inclination towards democracy. It refutes all those who regard constitutional patriotism as a pale, anemic construct, a makeshift from the times of a divided and morally discredited nation. "

Not turning away from democracy, but striving to bring constitutional theory and constitutional reality closer together is therefore the task of citizens and politicians.

Educational measures

A major problem is that, in both right-wing and left-wing politics, the willingness of many to distance themselves from violent criminals and extremists is relatively low. This is partly due to a lack of historical and political education.

A study by the Free University of Berlin comes to the conclusion that left-radical young people must be theoretically distinguished from left-wing extremists and practically separated. The former wanted to reform the existing social and political system and not abolish it. Although left-wing extremists left no doubt about their contempt for democracy and their fundamental rejection of civil society, non-extremist left groups often had no reservations about working with them in local, regional and national alliances.

According to its scientists, three surveys of young visitors in various GDR memorial sites by the “Research Association SED State” showed how complicated and complex prevention strategies are. The vast majority of young people have no connection between the communist movement and the regime phase, i. H. between the policy of the KPD until 1933 or until the end of the Second World War and the SED between 1946 and 1989. According to the researchers, the interviewees assessed the GDR, in particular the GDR State Security ( Stasi ), very negatively [...]. A majority, however, rejected the statement that socialist and communist ideas would flow into political systems similar to that of the GDR.

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Thomas Petersen / Dominik Hierlemann / Robert B. Vehrkamp / Christopher Wratil: Split democracy: political participation and satisfaction with democracy before the 2013 federal election . Institute for Demoscopy Allensbach / Bertelsmann Foundation 2013
  2. ↑ Dieter Fuchs / Edeltraud Roller: Satisfaction with the functioning of democracy in Germany . Federal Agency for Civic Education. 2016
  3. ↑ Dieter Fuchs / Edeltraud Roller: Acceptance of democracy as a form of government . Federal Agency for Civic Education. 2016
  4. ↑ Martin Klingst: Disaffection with democracy - why do so many not trust democracy, even though we are experiencing an upswing? . zeit.de. December 26, 2018
  5. ↑ idz Jena: Democracy distance premises? Constituency analysis for the 2017 federal election . 20th November 2017
  6. ↑ Wolfgang Merkel: Future of Democracy: Crisis? Crisis! faz.net . May 5, 2013
  7. ↑ Thomas Seifert: Democracy worldwide under pressure . wienerzeitung.at . February 27, 2018
  8. ↑ Germans are dissatisfied with democracy . Cicero . January 26, 2017
  9. ↑ Georg Diez / Emanuel Heisenberg: Crisis of the system: Democracy is not capitalism . Spiegel Online . January 7, 2017
  10. ↑ Felix Bohr: Report on the conference “Contempt for Democracy. Authoritarian Dynamics in the Interwar Period and in the Present “of the Jena Center History of the 20th Century and the Imre Kertész Kolleg Jena . January 25-27, 2018
  11. ^ University of Leipzig: Press release: “A look into the middle. Causes of right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany " . Friedrich Ebert Foundation . 2008, p. 2
  12. ^ Jean Jacques Rousseau: From the social contract or principles of constitutional law . Second book. Third chapter ( Whether the general will can be wrong ) online
  13. ↑ Marc Scheloske: Traditions of the speech of the political disaffection »Right and left variants of the parliamentary criticism in connection with Jean-Jaques Rousseau . wissenswerkstatt.net. June 21, 2007
  14. ↑ Matthias Probst: Climate change: The shock when everything suddenly seems very simple . zeit.de, April 5, 2019
  15. ↑ Thomas Grüter: Why voting is not profitable - and why democracy works anyway . BLOG: Thought Workshop - the psychology of irrational thinking. Spectrum of science . September 12th, 2013
  16. ↑ Sabine am Orde: Conference in Jena on the contempt for democracy - How dictatorships arise . taz . 29th January 2018
  17. ↑ Thomas Böckenförde: Keeping expectations in check . Neue Zürcher Zeitung . May 9, 2009
  18. ^ Carlo Schmid's speech on September 8, 1948 in the Parliamentary Council
  19. ↑ Alexander von Brünneck: Political Justice against Communists in the Federal Republic. Suhrkamp, ​​FfM 1978, pp. 272-278.
  20. ^ Friedbert Mühldorfer: HLB radical decree , June 16, 2014.
  21. ↑ Toralf Staud: Parties and Prohibitions: Seven questions and answers. Question 7: What would a ban do? . Federal Agency for Civic Education. October 16, 2013
  22. ↑ "Candy for the turning necks". Interview with the Prime Minister of Lower Saxony, Gerhard Schröder . The mirror . Issue 30/1990, July 23, 1990
  23. ^ Occupational bans - The neverending story . The mirror . Issue 49/1991, December 12, 1991
  24. ^ After riots in Dresden: "Disturbed relationship to democracy" . tagesschau.de , October 4, 2016
  25. ↑ http://www.bundespraesident.de/SharedDocs/Reden/DE/Joachim-Gauck/Reden/2017/01/170118-Amtszeitende-Rede . html
  26. ↑ Free University of Berlin: Attitudes, enemy images and hate messages. Scientists from the Free University of Berlin present the results of a research project on left-wing extremist attitudes and enemy images . July 12, 2016