The term post-democracy was used by
Warwick Universitypolitical scientistColin Crouch in 2000 in his book Coping with Post-Democracy. It designates
states that operate by
democratic systems (
elections are held, governments fall, and there is
freedom of speech), but whose application is
progressively limited. That is, a small
elite co-opts democratic institutions to give itself decision-making authority. Crouch further developed the idea in an article called Is there a liberalism beyond social democracy?[1] for the
think tankPolicy Network and in his subsequent book The Strange Non-Death of Neo-Liberalism.
The term may also denote a general conception of a post-democratic system that may involve other structures of
group decision-making and
governance than the ones found in contemporary or historical democracy.[2][3][4]
"A post-democratic society is one that continues to have and to use all the institutions of democracy, but in which they increasingly become a formal shell. The energy and innovative drive pass away from the democratic arena and into small circles of a politico-economic elite."
Crouch states that we are not "living in a post-democratic society, but that we were moving towards such a condition".[5]
Causes
Crouch names the following reasons:
No common goals: For people in the
post-industrial society it is increasingly difficult, in particular for the
underclass, to identify themselves as a group and therefore difficult to focus on
political parties that represent them. For instance
laborers,
farmers or
entrepreneurs no longer feel attracted to one political movement and this means that there is no common goal for them as a group to get united.
Globalization: The effect of globalization makes it almost impossible for nations to work out their own economic policy. Therefore, large
trade agreements and
supranational unions (e.g., the
European Union) are used to make policy but this level of politics is very hard to control with democratic instruments. Globalization additionally endows
transnational corporations with more political leverage given their ability to avoid federal regulation and directly affect domestic economies.[6]
Non-balanced debates: In most democratic countries the positions of the political parties have become very much alike. This means that there is not much to choose from for its voters. The effect is that
political campaigns are looking more like
advertising to make the differences look bigger. Also the private lives of the politicians have become an important item in elections. Sometimes "sensitive" issues stay undiscussed. The English conservative journalist
Peter Oborne presented a documentary of the
2005 general election, arguing that it had become
anti-democratic because it targeted a number of
floating voters with a narrow agenda.
Entanglement between public and private sector: There are large shared interests between politics and business. Through
lobbying companies,
multinational corporations are able to bring about
legislation more effectively than the inhabitants of a country. Corporations and governments are in close relation because states need corporations as they are great employers. But as much of the production is
outsourced, and corporations have almost no difficulty in moving to other countries, labor law becomes employee-unfriendly and tax bites are moved from companies to individuals. It becomes more common for politicians and managers to switch jobs (the 'revolving door').
Privatization: Then there is the neoliberal idea of
new public management (
neoliberalism) of privatizing public services. Privatized institutions are difficult to control by democratic means and have no allegiance to human communities, unlike government. Crouch uses the term “phantom firms” to describe the flexibility and elusive nature of firms which bend to the market. He concludes that private firms have incentive to make individual profit rather than better the welfare of the public. For example, he states that there is a problem with pharmaceutical companies funding (and skewing) medical research.[6]
Solutions
According to Crouch there is an important task for
social media in which voters can participate more actively in
public debates. In addition, these voters would have to join
advocacy groups for specific interests. The citizens have to reclaim their place in decision making. He calls this post-post-democracy.
Crouch argues that some forms of
populism or
direct voice of the people might invigorate democracy, but "there
must always be another election, and opposition and government parties
alike must have the right to go on debating and using political resources in
preparation for that moment".[7]
See also
Democratic deficit – When an institution falls short of upholding the people's power in and over itself