The post-democracy after Crouch

Under the concept of post-democracy, British sociologist and political scientist Colin Crouch outlined a model of democracy in his highly acclaimed work of the same name, whose outpourings have caused political scientists in Europe and the US discomfort since the end of the 2005s. These include the growing political influence of economic operators and supranational organizations, the increasing disempowerment of nation states, and the declining willingness of citizens to participate. Crouch summarized these phenomena into a concept - the post-democracy.

His basic thesis is that political decision-making in Western democracies is increasingly determined and legitimized by economic interests and actors. The pillars of democracy, such as the common good, the interest and social balance, and the self-determination of the citizens are successively eroded.

Colin Crouch, born 1944 in London, is a British political scientist and sociologist. With his time-diagnostic work on post-democracy and the eponymous book, he became internationally known.

The post-democratic political system described by Crounch is characterized by the following features:

The mock democracy

From a formal point of view, democratic institutions and processes are maintained in post-democracy, so that the political system at first sight is considered intact. De facto, however, democratic principles and values ​​are becoming less important and the system is becoming a "mock democracy in the institutional framework of a full-fledged democracy".

Parties and election campaign

Party politics and election campaigns are increasingly freed from content that would later shape actual government policies. Instead of a social debate on political content and alternatives, there are personalized campaign strategies. The election campaign becomes a political self-staging, while real politics takes place behind closed doors.
Parties predominantly fulfill the function of casting votes and are becoming increasingly irrelevant, as their role as mediator between citizens and politicians is increasingly increasingly being delegated to opinion research institutes. Instead, the party apparatus focuses on giving its members personal benefits or offices.

The common good

Political content increasingly arises from the interplay between political and economic actors who are directly involved in political decisions. These are not welfare-oriented, but serve primarily profit and voice maximization. The common good is best understood as a prosperous economy.

Media

Mass media also operate out of an economic logic and can no longer exercise their democratic role as a fourth power in the state. Control of the media is in the hands of a small group of people who help politicians solve the "problem of mass communication".

The apathetic citizen

The citizen is de facto disempowered in Crounchs' model. Although he chooses his political representatives, they no longer have the opportunity to defend their interests in this political system. In principle, the citizen plays a silent, even apathetic role. Although he may attend the media-mediated staging of politics, he himself has hardly any political influence.

Economization of society

The driving force of political action, according to Crouch, are predominantly economic interests represented by the wealthy social elite. In the last few decades, it has been able to install a neoliberal world view in broad sections of the population, which makes it easier for them to assert their interests. Citizens would have become accustomed to neoliberal rhetoric, even if it actually runs counter to their own political interests and needs.
For crounch, neoliberalism is both the cause and instrument of increasing post-democratization.

However, Crouch explicitly does not see this process as undemocratic, as the rule of law and respect for human and civil rights remain largely intact. He just admits that they are no longer the driving force of politics today.

However, Crouch explicitly does not see this process as undemocratic, as the rule of law and respect for human and civil rights remain largely intact. He just admits that they are no longer the driving force of politics today. He describes much more a gradual loss of quality that Western democracies experience in his view, by turning away from the democratic principles of civil co-determination and a policy oriented towards the common good, the balance of interests and social inclusion.

Criticism of Crouch

The criticism of the model of post-democracy on the part of political scientists is very diverse and passionate. It is directed, for example, against the "apathetic citizen" postulated by Couch, who is opposed to a boom of civic engagement. It is also argued that democracy is "an elitist affair anyway" and has always been. A model democracy, in which the influence of economic elites would be limited and all citizens would actively participate in the political discourse, has probably never existed. Last but not least, a central weakness of his concept is seen in the lack of empirical foundation.

A model democracy, in which the influence of economic elites would be limited and all citizens would actively participate in the political discourse, has probably never existed.

Nevertheless, Crouch, and with him a whole generation of political scientists in Europe and the United States, describes exactly what's happening in front of our eyes every day. How else can it be explained that a neo-liberal policy - which has driven a whole global economy against the wall, willingly exposing public money to cover private sector losses, and still increasing poverty, unemployment, and social inequality - has not long since been voted out?

And Austria?

The question as to what extent Crouch's post-democracy in Austria is already a reality was pursued by Wolfgang Plaimer, a former research associate at Johannes Kepler University Linz. According to him, Crouch is also right in many respects with regard to Austrian democracy. In particular, the shift of political decisions from the national to a supranational level reinforces the post-democratic tendencies in that country. Likewise, according to Plaimer, a shift in power from the population towards economy and capital, as well as from the legislative branch to the executive branch, can be clearly seen. Plaimer's critique of the Crouchian model is directed at his idealization of the welfare state as the "heyday of democracy": "The glorification of the democracy of the welfare state and the associated overvaluation of current democratic deficits is misleading," said Plaimer, explaining it in part with considerable democratic deficits that already existed in the 1960er and 1070er in Austria.

Prof. Reinhard Heinisch, head of the political science working group Future of Democracy and the Department of Political Science at the University of Salzburg, also finds a hint of polemic in Crouch's postdemocracy concept and misses the empirical proof of the phenomena postulated by him. In addition, he sees the Crouch'sche postdemocracy rather resident in the Anglo-Saxon world. However, that does not mean that the points of criticism cited are not valid for Austria.
Heinisch sees the so-called cartel democracy as a special deficit of Austrian democracy. This is a quasi-cartel that has been built politically, with governing parties over the decades strategically influencing the allocation of posts in public authorities, media and state-owned enterprises. "These established power structures allow both parties to govern largely detached from the will of their members and the majority population," said Heinisch.

Crouch reminds us that an intact democracy is not a matter of course and on closer inspection probably never was. Therefore, if we reject the "specter of post-democracy" and live in a democracy that is geared towards the common good, a balance of interests and social equality, and where the law actually starts with the citizen, then it is indispensable to use it accordingly.

Conclusion to Crouch's post-democracy

Whether Crouch's post-democracy is entirely empirically verifiable or applicable to Austria or not - democratic deficits are not lacking in Germany either. Whether it is the de facto subordination of parliament to the federal government or that of our "people's representatives" to the party line, the ineffectiveness of referendums, or the lack of transparency of political decisions and competencies.

Crouch reminds us that an intact democracy is not a matter of course and on closer inspection probably never was. Therefore, if we reject the "specter of post-democracy" and live in a democracy that is geared towards the common good, a balance of interests and social equality, and where the law actually starts with the citizen, then it is indispensable to use it accordingly.

This realization is probably also the driving force behind the numerous democracy initiatives that are working in Austria both for the legal expansion and for the increased use of direct democratic instruments. As a democracy-conscious citizen, we should be able to petition our signature, support these initiatives through our time, energy, or donation, or at least pass on their thoughts and demands to our personal environment.