Decisions which are achieved without compromise are often unstable
Almost always overlapping interests are a good basis for a fair compromise
Being conscious of the partial overlapping of interests and cultivating a democratic consensus beyond all pluralistic conflicts is therefore an important prerequisite for political pluralism in order to lead to innovation and trust and not to enmity and the blocking of development.
Freedom to form associations is a part of democracy in a state ruled by law. It is a civil right. All citizens must have the chance to safeguard their social, cultural, regional and economic interests, and to join together in clubs and associations.
The most important influences in market economies are generally trade associations, such as employers’ associations, trade unions, and farmers’ associations. On the one hand, they have the task of settling the interests of their members among themselves, such as trade unions and employers’ associations negotiating collective bargaining agreements and working conditions. Furthermore, all clubs and associations strive for political influence in order to improve the societal and political conditions for the lives and actions of their members. This is the lobbying function of associations. Employers’ associations, for example, are continuously mindful of having an influence on laws ranging from taxes to labor laws which influence their situation. Trade unions are also not only interested in economic or social legislation, but also many other fields from fiscal to educational policy depending on the influence it has on their members. In this sense, economic and societal associations and clubs always have a political dimension for action. This is legitimate and appropriate for democracy as long as they do not want to transform their economic and social position of power directly into self-determined political power beyond the will of the majority of the population.
Associations have four legitimate instruments at their disposal for political influence:
1. They can appeal to their members for a certain voting behavior.
2. They can influence public opinion through their PR work.
3. They can influence administrative authorities and governments as lobbying organizations, and
4. They can have an influence on the goals and actions of parties through their members’ affiliation with parties and through outside negotiations.
Democracy is there in order to productively and fairly overcome differences of interests.
In a democratic sense, this is not only legitimate, but also useful. It serves the societal policy of considering and balancing interests as long as associations do not try to exercise their influence through the use of power as a hindrance to society or to use their position of power as a means of blackmail.
Associations and clubs also have to be organized democratically from within so that they can truly express the interests of their members and are not only instruments of power in the hands of a few leadership groups.
Three Ways of Dealing with Conflicts of Interest
It is desirable that ideas, intensions, and interests in society are clearly and precisely expressed because only then there is the possibility to deal with them openly and fairly, and to take everyone into consideration in the political process so that one can avoid alienation and distance, and the turning away of citizens from the political community.
The essence of politics, the art of democracy, is to allow a unity of common actions to emerge from a multitude of interests and values, which can be accepted by everyone as legitimate.
This can only be expected if the political process, from which a unity of common actions from a multitude of interests and values emerges, is regarded as fair and legitimate by all participants. It is precisely the goal of democracy to make such a process available, giving everyone an equal chance to have their interests taken into consideration. In this way, various standpoints can develop into acceptable political actions by the state. This clearly means that responsible individuals in government should responsibly practice the rules of democracy.
In principle, there are four political strategies of action available for dealing with different interests:
1. Authoritarianism: It involves a process by which several or some interests are established through the use of state force and power at the expense of the others without tolerating contradiction. This dictatorial process contradicts the principles of democracy.
2.
3. Strict majority decision: In a majority decision, the present majority, whether it is in society in general or individual decision-making bodies, uses its momentary numerical superiority in order to completely establish its interests over the minority. This can happen in a way that does not take the interests of the minority into consideration at all. In certain cases, this may be unavoidable due to the nature and topics of the interests involved. It is almost always problematic. As soon as the present minority turns into the majority under democratic conditions, everything is lost again which was won today. A minority, which was treated without compromise, will presumably proceed in the same manner when it is in power itself. Majority decisions without compromise seldom create stability and long-term security.
4. Compromise: This involves a process of negotiations which makes all sides aware that the complete achievement of its values and interests is not possible or clever. It is based on the view that any tolerable concessions to one’s own demands should be accepted in order to finally secure as many important parts of one’s interests and values as possible in the long run.
Conclusion: The authoritarian decision-making process obviously contradicts principles of democracy. It is not only unacceptable for normative reasons, but it is also a political strategy of action which is destabilizing because authoritative rule always gives rise to resistance and the disintegration of the existing order along with it.
Strategies for reaching a consensus are always desirable, but are often only practical to a limited extent and in respect to fundamental questions of the community, including the amount of time involved and the difficulty of organizing discussion processes for all of society.
Majority decisions without any compromise, which do not incorporate the interests of minorities, are often not clever political processes especially for two independent reasons, on the one hand, a rigorous majority strategy alienates important parts of society from democracy, in particular, when it involves important interests and values. It therefore undermines the political and cultural foundation of democracy although it appears to be legitimate in strictly formal terms. It goes against the conviction which is established in large parts of society that democratic decision-making processes serve the interests of everyone in the end.
The second reason appears somewhat later: decisions which are achieved without compromise are often unstable because the participants, who were not taken into consideration, often actively push for change. Therefore, these compromises are mostly not in the long-term interests of the presently superior participants.
The principle of the democratic majority should therefore also include a fair compromise strategy to an intelligent extent. It is always clever to incorporate as many of the minority interests as possible in the decision in order to tie these in to the decision, to stabilize the trust of their representatives in democracy, and to improve the consistency of decisions presently being made.
Excerpts from the author’s paper presented at a
Post Your Comment
Got something to say, just fill the form and let us know.TERMS OF USE:
The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).