Indicator of a functioning democracy

Many politicians and people in public life believe that the reference to our democracy or even the mere mention of democracy is something positive in itself.

It is easy to forget that democracy is not a homogeneous construct, that democracy does not exist in a context-free space and must always be seen in interaction with society, legal norms, state institutions and the current zeitgeist.

Democracy is not good per se, but rather the form of democracy practiced must be evaluated in its context. Depending on the assessment, the form of democracy can then be categorized as either a formal or a genuine democracy.

In a formal democracy, abuse of power, corruption and a deep state are not excluded. The ruling system has found ways to eliminate the control of the demos (the actual sovereign).

Now, even in a formal democracy, the boundaries between dsyfunctional and ineffective democracy are fluid. Furthermore, the principles of power, which have been shifted from the demos to a political elite, are different in the various forms of formal democracies.

What formal democracies have in common, however, is that acceptance among citizens erodes over time and dissatisfaction with the political system increases. The closer a formal democracy approaches the structures of an authoritarian state, the more likely the population is to accept a “capable autocrat” over an incompetent autocracy/technocracy that treats citizens in a similar way to an autocracy.

The path from a formal democracy to a de facto autocracy is gradual. In order to transform a formal democracy back into a real democracy, it is necessary to break up the prevailing political structures using the peaceful means of democracy.

German democracy is currently on a dangerous path away from genuine democracy towards a formal, autocratic form.