Proportional democracy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With proportional democracy - see also consociational democracy , consensus democracy , consensus democracy , political integration  - is called democracies in which all the main political and social forces of society are involved in the political process. The participation of these forces can take place on an equal footing or according to their relative strength in society.

The people elect the parliament. In proportional representation, the government corresponds to parliament. So there is no opposition. The system is often enriched with plebiscitary elements. There are similarities to concordance democracy .

Decision-making is not based on the majority principle , but on the negotiation path (see negotiating democracy ).

Theory of proportional representation

The construct of proportional representation must include at least two self-contained parties and be characterized by both political stability and marginal mobility. Developments take place slowly and continuously; Changes can be foreseen with some certainty.

However , what is known as pillaring occurs here , which affects the entirety of social processes. This is "politically reshaped", and so all activities are inevitably dragged into the sphere of influence of political interests. Everything can be assigned to party politics in some way.

In order to give stability to the democracy that has emerged in this way, a so-called amicabilis compositio , a kind of amicable agreement, is necessary, just as it played an important role in the development of the Peace of Westphalia . The term also has its origin in it. Concessions are made on all sides in order to get as close as possible to each other. On the one hand, this can be viewed positively as a compromise policy, on the other hand, however, as a veritable “mess”. The historical analysis is, however, subject in any case to the most objective possible evaluation system, and above all the polemical aftertaste of the rather derogatory state of "proportional democracy" should not lead to a biased perception of it as a grievance.

criticism

At the party-political level, confessions of an ideologically too explosive topic can lead to internal party conflicts, which often threaten to stiffen to such an extent that finding a compromise on the topic is completely ruled out. All those ideologically disguised points lead to a problem jam.

Outside the party-political framework, this proportional representation policy is characterized above all by a division of administrative elites and private persons into political camps. This results in a true "office patronage and clientele care"; the administration loses the necessary distance to political events.

In Austria, the Council of Europe criticized the fight against corruption in 2008 and in this context also named the proportional representation system as an obstacle, since this makes leadership positions in the police and judicial apparatus dependent on party affiliation or proximity. In the comment of the editor-in-chief of the standard , this reads: “In the report, which is in English, one word immediately catches the eye because it is written in German: The 'proportional system' is the reason why it works the way it does. Or a lot is not tracked. Those who are 'not the right political color' must expect career disadvantages as 'a public prosecutor, police investigator (or to a lesser extent as a judge)', the report says. In plain language: sensitive cases are delayed or not even touched. "

literature

  • Dieter Nohlen and Ralf-Olaf Schultze: Lexicon of Political Science. Munich 2002.
  • Margareta Mommsen-Reindl: The Austrian proportional democracy and the Habsburg case. Boehlau Verlag, 1976, ISBN 3-205-07126-3 .

Web links

swell

  1. ^ A b c Ernst Hanisch : History of Austria 1890–1990: The long shadow of the state. Vienna 1994.
  2. ↑ http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/ifp/kd87l.htm ( Memento from May 10, 2005 in the Internet Archive )
  3. ↑ Alexandra Föderl-Schmid : Like a banana republic. Political influence is the central obstacle in the fight against corruption. The standard , 20./21. December 2008, p. 40.