Representative democracy in one form or another has been the norm in Western societies since the post-industrial revolution years. The idea of one man, one vote is widely regarded as sacrosanct – a concept too important and universally accepted to be questioned. In fact, it is considered so superior to other forms of government that wars are being fought to impose it on societies which are seemingly too backwards to recognise its superiority – the vote is considered a universal human right.
But in many liberal democracies, recent years have exposed an attribute to democracy which did not feature in the early years: the gradual dismantling of civil society. Civil society is the fabric of society which lies outside government and business, the institutions and interactions between private individuals which make up life as we know it. It promotes our common values and interests and relies on concepts like courtesy, decency and politeness. And it is in a state of decay.
From the left calling out all opponents as Nazis to the right labelling those on the left as snowflakes, those who adhere to different ideologies are increasingly unable to understand or even talk to each other. On forums like Twitter, people gather in echo-chambers, reaffirming their own viewpoints and chastising those who disagree. On the fringes, increasing numbers even regard violence as an appropriate response to combat views they deem unacceptable.
Why has this happened? Three reasons spring to mind.
Firstly, as the sphere of the state grows, who is in charge increasingly matters. Secondly, politics has become increasingly tribal as generational and cultural divides deepen. Thirdly, the appeal of so-called ‘populist’ messages reflects disagreement about questions at the core of nationhood.
It is clear that the western welfare states have grown their remits sizably over the years. Many governments now gobble up half of gross domestic product but this intrusion in the economic life of the citizenry enjoys an unfortunate and baffling level of support. But increasingly the state interferes in matters that have traditionally been regarded as part of the private sphere. Some of this is a natural consequence of more responsibilities being handed over to government. Consider smoking bans and sugar taxes. If the state pays for your health care, expect it to regulate what you eat and smoke. Others, such as hate speech laws and smacking bans, are regulating ‘moral’ issue. They all directly impact on how people are allowed to behave as private individuals. This increasing interference naturally breeds animosity. When politicians start arguing for a tax on meat, we may reasonably expect those who like a steak to react with anger.
At the same time, a cultural divide is developing, not least between generations. In the US and the UK, the young vote heavily to the left whereas older voters skew to the right. In the 2017 UK general election, 18-19 year olds voted 66% for Labor, whereas those 70 or older voted 69% for the Conservatives. Voters find themselves increasingly in echo-chambers of the equal-minded, enforcing an us-versus-them attitude.
Political polarization has also come about via what some term ‘populism’; the increasing appeal of political parties addressing specific concerns of ‘ordinary people’ such as immigration and globalisation. But what populism actually addresses is often the most basic question of who we are as a nation. It turns out that though we may share nationality and heritage, we often profoundly disagree on what defines us. Is Britain defined by its historical culture and traditional values – or by its liberal mindset and openness to other cultures? It is not surprising that when these questions are decided at the ballot box, politics becomes increasingly divisive.
For democracy to work at all there has to be at a fundamental level a shared vision of society amongst the electorate, an accord that rule should be achieved by consensus where possible. In today’s fragmented, divisive political landscape that seems no longer possible. Voters are increasingly split into groups with incompatible visions and goals. The problem is of course that the modern nation states can’t split, unless by secession. But secession is in practice virtually impossible. From the US civil war to Catalonia in 2017, secession bids have been met with aggression. In other cases, the means of the establishment has been brought to bear on the secessionists, like in Scotland in 2014 or more recently in the Brexit vote and the subsequent negotiations.
In the end, countries are societies with common rules and therefore common fates. We are forced to live amongst people who do not share our values and it erodes the fabric the binds communities together: civil society. It seems that at a fundamental level, democracy is inherently incompatible with a functioning civil society.