Compromises has shown itself to be one of the prerequisites for a credible democracy

The most important conditions for the continuous work and the proper performance of democratic institutions in the area of political culture are trust and the ability to reach a clever compromise. Both of these conditions, trust and the ability to reach a clever compromise, presuppose one another and grow with one another. Whenever these conditions are strong enough, a society can recognize that the interests of all individuals in a democracy should be taken into consideration with fairness — and this is actually the sense of democracy. And if nearly all citizens share this experience, democracy will rest on solid ground, its great intrinsic value can be experienced, and the willingness to make a contribution to its preservation will grow through one’s own willingness to make a compromise.

Democracy is not primarily machinery made of institutions. It lives especially from the spirit and customs of its elite and citizens.

Whenever the majority principle is misused as a lever to inconsiderately establish the personal interests of the present majority against the rest of society, mistrust grows and the state is regarded only as prey by more and more participants so that they can establish advantages for their own group at the cost of all others.

Compromises are called the “advanced school of democracy.” As the experience of all democracies shows, it rightly deserves this honorary title. In exercising compromises, participants learn how to allow trust to grow and to make the correct use of democratic institutions, which need to demonstrate their usefulness for all of society.

Certainly, clever compromises are always needed to safeguard the personal interests of the participants in the long run and thereby to keep in mind the principles to which they publicly profess. In clear contrast with this, “lazy compromises”betray these principles in order to enable one to gain personal momentary advantages.

The culture of clever compromises has shown itself to be one of the prerequisites for a credible and successful democracy.

1. Compromise — The Advanced School of Democracy

The definition of “compromise” in the dictionary stresses that it is then sensible and necessary if none of the participating sides has enough strength to pursue its own personal goals resolutely and completely. However, in the political context, another function of compromise is decisive. Compromises have the productive function of resolving conflicts whenever the complete establishment of the interests of the stronger party does not bring about a lasting solution. This means that the decision which was made unilaterally is constantly brought into question and is therefore not stable. In such cases, the forced solution is often only maintained by the dominant party at a very high cost, and, in most cases, this is only for a limited period of time until the balance of power changes.

Compromises often reduce the costs for maintaining one’s own interests.

In a compromise, two or more participants agree that each of them will waive their right to completely push through their own interests, so that all participants are able to realize as many of their political goals as possible. It is equally important that an exchange of advantages takes place in such a way that is acceptable to all sides, whereby the jointly achieved results gain legitimacy in the eyes of all participants and therefore also stability.

A successful compromise therefore makes it possible for all participants — even those who are not directly involved — to experience mutual consideration, fair cooperation, the consideration of many interests in a joint decision-making process, and the value of good reasoning for overall political results which extend beyond the simple use of force.

Compromise as a give-and-take situation while incorporating the interests of the community, and as a fair exchange of advantages and disadvantages, in which none of the participants inconsiderately achieve their own goals with all the force available against the interests and goals of the others, and no one is the loser, creates trust through fairness and dependence on others and the value of mutual consideration. It conveys the idea that one’s own goals and interests can hardly ever be realized entirely, but rather always have to be negotiated together with the interests, values and goals of many others because these also have their justification.

Considering as many interests and values as possible is an important goal of democracy.

The ability to embrace as many legitimate interests as possible which are represented in society and to integrate them into the deliberating and decision-making processes of politics is an imperative principle of a well-understood democracy. For these reasons, collaborative work and the realization of clever compromises develop the attitudes, habits, and skills which democracy needs in order to function and to find recognition for all its citizens. In this sense, the culture of compromise is the advanced school of democracy.

Compromises practice skills required in a democracy.

2. Pluralism — The Basis of Freedom and Democracy

In societal and political reality, there are always differences in perceiving one’s own interests, pursued values, and the desires and hopes which are derived from political ideals if outside pressure does not work artificially and forcibly against this. Pluralism exists in accepting these differences and structuring politics in a way that is equally productive for individual societal groups and the entire community. Human society is never homogeneous in all its parts, nor unified without difference on all important issues without the use of force.

Societal pluralism is therefore an expression of freedom as the manifestation of various interests, values, and perspectives.

Political pluralism, which is the organization of various interests and values for the purpose of participating in the political process, is a part of democracy. Democracy lives from pluralism and is the appropriate form of its productive completion. The basic feature which makes democracy possible and necessary at the same time is therefore different human interests and goals.

Pluralism in practice is always group pluralism. Employees, employers, the rural population, merchants, people from the same region, people with the same religious beliefs or a similar cultural and political mentality join together in order to present their common interests all the more effectively in the political process of their country. Political pluralism is always the group pluralism of various clubs, associations, and political parties.

This is why democracy especially needs these kinds of institutions, these kinds of rules, and these kinds of procedures, which are suitable for the original pluralism in society, providing it with political expression, and allowing it to still develop an acceptable political decision-making process to the extent necessary. The freedom to establish clubs and associations, the freedom to organize and to carry out activities in civil society, and to establish political parties in a multi-party system are therefore features of democracy.

Societal differences lead to political conflicts as soon as there are rules according to which very different interests and values cannot be equally satisfied. Conflict is the normal situation in the political life of a democracy.

The necessary amount of unity can and must emerge from conflicts of interest and values which are openly settled as part of a consensus about fundamental values and democratic processes.

Appeals for harmony by political authorities who want to prevent conflict from the very beginning generally help to exclude disagreeable interests, organizations, and parties from the democratic process of developing objectives. This almost always serves the preferred interests of one of the conflict parties under the disguise of seeming general interest.

All participants in a democracy are well advised to consider their own way of achieving their interests in political conflicts. No one is guaranteed that they will not be involved the next conflict and be dependent on the protection of stronger groups. The common experience of peacefully resolving political conflicts can in fact bring participants together in the end, but only when a consensus about fair procedures, the limits of the conflict resolution, and the final results of the compromise join them. Therefore, the political culture of balancing consensus and conflict, the ability to reach a good compromise, is essential for democracy.

Almost all people belong to different societal groups. For example, someone is a farmer from a certain region of the country and is involved in religion; another is a small businessman from the same region and is involved in religion in the same parish. Therefore, economically and socially both of them have different or even opposing interests; however, regionally and religiously they have similar or even the same interests. In practice, there are almost always many of these kinds of overlapping interests. This helps to limit opposing interests and prevents a division in society.

Excerpts from the author’s paper presented at a talk program organized by the FES on the theme “Compromise-The Ideal Path to Democracy” on July 18, 2007 in Katmandu.

[The author is an old friend of the Telegraph Weekly. The next portion of his paper will be presented in the views column next Wednesday-ed.]

Posted on : 2007-07-25 06:13:29

Comments (0)