Democracy requires participation: a misunderstanding of democracy lies at the root of the decline of democracy
According to the latest Democracy in the world report, the decline of democracy over the last 10 years has brought global democracy to a level comparable to 1986. This was a time when the Soviet Union existed, the Berlin Wall divided Germany, the Chernobyl nuclear accident occurred and China was only gradually opening its markets to the rest of the world.
Democratic decline refers to a statist development in which democracy is gradually eroded by small changes in the institutions that are central to democracy. In practice, this often means actions in which the government exceeds its powers or makes changes to legislation that make it more difficult for the opposition or the media to monitor the government's activities and highlight its shortcomings.
In addition to the erosion of global democracy, public confidence in democracy has also been declining since 2005, according to the Global Satisfaction with Democracy Report 2020. Citizens do not feel that democratic systems can meet their needs in an increasingly complex world, and are attracted by the options of authoritarian populist leaders despite rising education and living standards globally. Why is it that in so many countries citizens are fascinated by strong leaders when we know that authoritarian systems produce poorer living conditions than democracies?
"Liberal democracy requires citizen participation also between elections."
I suggest that one factor behind this development is a misunderstanding of what democracy actually is. Let me return to the public debate last summer, when several participants called for the government to stop working because the elections had been held and it was time to put the will of democracy into practice. The underlying assumption is that democracy is the same as elections. However, free elections are only the minimum condition for democracy to take place. The hallmark of liberal democracy imposes additional conditions on societies.
According to Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem), an institute that studies the state of global democracy, liberal democracy also includes the protection of individual rights vis-à-vis the state, free public debate, equal opportunities for citizens to participate in political decision-making, and political participation of citizens. Liberal democracy therefore requires citizen participation also between elections - open and pluralistic public debate, demonstrations and listening to citizens and stakeholders at different stages and levels of political decision-making.
"The great thing about liberal democracy, but also the tiresome side of it, is that you are the one who has the responsibility to make a difference on the issues you feel are important."
This year's Global State of Democracy report highlights the role of government watchdog institutions in protecting against the erosion of democracy. These institutions include not only the doctrine of separation of powers (i.e. the separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers), the constitution, the rule of law and media freedom, familiar from social studies classes, but also a diverse and vibrant civil society, consisting of various organisations, trade unions, spontaneous popular movements, investigative journalism, active neighbourhoods and villages, and various civic networks. In other words, liberal democracy by definition requires political participation between elections, and the importance of participation is even greater in protecting against the erosion of democracy.
This also makes sense in practical terms: if our parliamentary system is to respond to the diverse needs of citizens and businesses in an increasingly complex society, these needs must be communicated to decision-makers. The great thing about liberal democracy, but also the tiring side of it, is that you are the one who has the responsibility to influence the issues you feel are important.
Although in today's representative democracies, influence is largely exercised through political parties, you can also act outside them. In Finland, everyone can comment on current affairs on otakantaa.fi or lausuntopalvelu.fi, write opinion pieces for newspapers, organise demonstrations or get involved in organisations.
In a global comparison, Finland is one of the few countries where political participation is free and safe. In authoritarian regimes, on the other hand, stakeholders' opinions are not sought (at least not very widely from outside the power elite), and from the point of view of those in power, expressing critical opinions can lead to imprisonment or disappearance. 97% of the world's population lives in countries where civic participation is restricted, reveals a report by the international network CIVICUS. We should be more aware of our exceptional position and make a difference, not only for Finns, but also for all those who cannot do so themselves.
Pihla Hankamäki
The author is a Blic trainee with a background in party politics and civic activism. In her PhD thesis, she examines the erosion of democracy in a case study set in Turkey.