Stability and Instability Factors of Multinational Democracies: Theoretical Aspects and Empirical Evidence Doctoral Program in Political Science Sps/04 Xxvi
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
STABILITY AND INSTABILITY FACTORS OF MULTINATIONAL DEMOCRACIES: THEORETICAL ASPECTS AND EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE DOCTORAL PROGRAM IN POLITICAL SCIENCE SPS/04 XXVI CANDIDATE: Maja Ajdin TUTOR: DIRECTOR: Prof. Pietro Grilli di Cortona Prof. Leopoldo Nuti 1 To Nađa “May your life be like a wildflower growing freely in the beauty and joy of each day.” 2 CHAPTER I DEMOCRACY, NATIONALITY AND STATENESS INTRODUCTION 1. Evolution of the concept democracy 2. Definition of democracy 3. “Ethnic origin” of nations 4. Nationality and citizenship 5. Stateness 6. Nationalism and Democracy CHAPTER II CONSOCIATIONAL DEMOCRACY, FEDERALISM AND POWER SHARING 1. Consociational theory and practice 2. Federalism and its features 3. Territory 4. Symmetrical and asymmetrical arrangements 5. Successful case of managing diversities: Switzerland 3 CHAPTER III DIMENSIONS OF MULTINATIONAL POLITICS 1. Group interaction and balance of power in multinational politics 2. Political parties and multiparty system 3. Cross-cutting cleavages 4. Size and democracy 5. Electoral systems in multinational countries a) Conceptual overview b) Electoral system classification c) Proportional electoral system d) PR electoral system and democracy e) PR system: proportionality and disproportionality CHAPTER IV BELGIUM: CONSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION AND POLITICAL INSTABILITY Introduction 1. Historical and Political Overview 2. Constitutional arrangements and Reforms of state a) I Reform of State b) II Reform of State c) III Reform of State d) IV Reform of State e) V Reform of State f) VI Reform of State 3. The outcome of forty years of Constitutional amendments 4 4. Form of government 5. Political Parties in Belgium 6. Factors that influenced stability and instability of Belgium Conclusions CHAPTER V SPAIN: DEMOCRACY AND ACCOMMODATION OF DIVERSITY 1. Historical overview 2. Constitutional evolution in Spain 3. The first elections and the stateness issue 4. Federalism in Spain 5. Asymmetry in Spain 6. Estado des Autonomias: conceptual overview and empirical evidence 7. Statues of Autonomy and political parties a) Regional segmentation of political parties b) Party System c) Electoral system d) Political parties and the “nationalisation” of regions 8. Final considerations CONCLUSIONS 5 INTRODUCTION The present analysis is an attempt to examine normative concepts about multinational democracy and political recognition, and a contextually-sensitive empirical analysis of the Spanish and Belgian case. Multinational democracies are fragile systems and occasionally the are facing periods of crisis or political deadlock. Several quests are posed about the stability of democracies with such an arrangement. Consociational arrangement was proposed as the most suitable for divided countries. However, consociativisim has produced several positive and many negative results throughout the recent history. Consociational theory has been developed with the aim to explain stability of states with multinational component. The analysis will be developed in several stages and it will begin with the illustration of the concept of democracy. Consequently and in relation to democratic principles it will be examined the notion of ethnicity, nationality by underling the difference between these last two concepts. The consociational democracy will be analyzed in its main features. The aim of the research is the exploration of a suitable framework for the political inclusion of different national groups through the process of recognition, accommodation and representation. Territorial arrangement, electoral systems and political parties will be examined in the light of their relation to multinational countries. The focus will be on the conditions under which a multinational state can function democratically and specifically which are the factors favor stability of deeply divided democracy What concerns this work is to find the most suitable pattern for different national groups’ accommodation within the state. Consequently and unavoidably it is of enormous importance to understand how the states face and cope with the accommodation of several national groups, trying to preserve, at the same time, unity and stability of the country. Electoral systems will be part of this analysis as they represent one of the most powerful instruments that support consensus democracies, with relation to party systems, representation of the groups in legislatures, and the stability of democratic arrangements. 6 The two empirical cases, Belgium and Spain will be examined in their constitutional arrangement, territorial organization, party system and electoral system in order to understand what kind of obstacles can threaten stability and unity of these two countries. 7 CHAPTER I DEMOCRACY, NATIONALITY AND STATENESS 1. Evolution of the concept democracy Democracy as concept has had a long evolution since its first forms and practices. The term comes from the Greek word dēmokratía and it was coined from demos (people) and krátos (power),1 or kratein2 as used by Aristotle. For the precise definition of the exact meaning of democracy in Ancient Greece a semantic excursus is needed, but for the purposes of this work it will be used the commonly accepted definition of the ancient term as a “rule of people”. A very careful analysis is needed when we accept the meaning of krátos that Greeks attributed to a segment in a society. By the meaning this word can be interpreted also as force and in the ancient meaning and conception they were attributing what we today define as sovereignty.3 Considering the atheniese practice, this first form of democracy has influenced the further political philosophy and has represented the first form of participation to the political life of a citizen. However, the concept of politics, political community and of participation was completely different of what we conceive today. The idea of political community was comprehensive of all other spheres including the economical, religious and moral sphere. The antique concept of freedom cannot be compared with nowadays definition considering that the atheniense freedom was coinciding with the participation to the political life and the notion individual freedom was far away from being regarded as a value.4 Three main aspects essentially influenced the evolution of democratic practice: the enlargement of the polity, the increasing specialization of political functions and the new concept of freedom. Today governments are states, their geographic and demographic sizes are much bigger than Greek cities, the politics domain is wider and it is connected to all other spheres of the state activity and the concept of freedom is completely changed. Considering the size of the states, from the point of view of their geographical size and population, the concept of the direct 1 Dahl, R., On Democracy, New Heaven, Yale University Press, 1998, p.11 2 Schumpeter, J.A., Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Taylor & Francis e-Library, London, 2003, p. 243 3 Bearzot, C., Un’ideologia del federalismo nel pensiero politico greco?, in “Federazioni e federalismo nell’Europa antica” (Atti del Convegno Bergamo, 21-25 settembre 1992), Milano 1994, 161-180 4 Grilli di Cortona, P., Come gli stati diventano democratici, Editori Laterza, Roma, 2009, p.4 8 democracy during the modern age, as defined by Sartori was not possible anymore.5 The modern democracy was based on representative principle, where the exercise of power was assigned to the representatives of the people.6 Constant has made a distinction between the modern and ancient concept of liberty that, as a general notion, as at the basis of democracy. He argued that the modern concept is based mainly on “the right to be subjected only to the laws […], the right of each person to express his opinion, […], the right of each person to associate with other individuals, each person’s right to have some influence on the administration of the government—by electing all or some of the officials, or through representations.”7 However, the liberty of ancients consisted “in carrying out collectively but directly many parts of the over-all functions of government, coming together in the public square.”8 Therefore, according to Constant, the liberty of ancients was based on collective and, overall, direct participation to the functions of the government. However, this was not the only reason that changed the concept of democracy during the modern age, but it was due also to modern changed concept of politics and political functions. In Satori’s words, the massification of the politics has created a complex “inversion of perspectives”. The politics, exclusive competence of the state, became more complex and structured.9 The concept of freedom was subjected to a massive evolution considering that Athenians, which were all equal citizens by having the same right to participate to the political life, they could enjoy their freedom by exercising their sovereign functions. Nowadays, the equality and freedom could be accomplished by exercising direct and indirect participation, free and fair information and responsible and responsive government.10 After the French Revolution, and particularly at the end of the nineteenth century, many policies aimed to craft a unitary homogeneous nation-state that would include only one cultural and political identity. In case of France, the French language was the only accepted language in the 5 Sartori, G., Elementi di teoria politica, il Mulino, Bologna, 1995, p.41 6 Ibidem, pag.41 7 Constant, B., The Liberty of the Ancients