Abstract
Capitalism and democracy follow different logics: unequally distributed property rights on the one hand, equal civic and political rights on the other; profit-oriented trade within capitalism in contrast to the search for the common good within democracy; debate, compromise and majority decision-making within democratic politics versus hierarchical decision-making by managers and capital owners. Capitalism is not democratic, democracy not capitalist.
During the first postwar decades, tensions between the two were moderated through the socio-political embedding of capitalism by an interventionist tax and welfare state. Yet, the financialization of capitalism since the 1980s has broken the precarious capitalist-democratic compromise. Socioeconomic inequality has risen continuously and has transformed directly into political inequality. The lower third of developed societies has retreated silently from political participation; thus its preferences are less represented in parliament and government. Deregulated and globalized markets have seriously inhibited the ability of democratic governments to govern. If these challenges are not met with democratic and economic reforms, democracy may slowly transform into an oligarchy, formally legitimized by general elections. It is not the crisis of capitalism that challenges democracy, but its neoliberal triumph.
Zusammenfassung
Kapitalismus und Demokratie folgen unterschiedlichen Logiken. Ersterer basiert auf Eigentumsrechten, individueller Gewinnmaximierung, hierarchischen Entscheidungsstrukturen und ungleichen Besitzverhältnissen, Letztere gründet auf der Suche nach Allgemeinwohl, Diskurs, politischer Gleichheit und den Verfahren konsensueller oder majoritärer Entscheidungsfindung. Kapitalismus ist nicht demokratisch und Demokratie nicht kapitalistisch.
Während der ersten Nachkriegsjahrzehnte wurden die Spannungen zwischen Kapitalismus und Demokratie durch einen interventionistischen Steuer- und Wohlfahrtsstaat in Grenzen gehalten. Die Finanzialisierung des Kapitalismus seit den späten 1980er Jahren hat den prekären Kompromiss zerbrochen. Die kontinuierlich zunehmende sozioökonomische Ungleichheit übersetzt sich direkt in politische Ungleichheit. Das untere Drittel der Gesellschaft steigt schweigend aus der politischen Partizipation aus. Gleichzeitig haben Deregulierung und Globalisierung die Handlungsmöglichkeiten demokratischer Regierungen erheblich eingeschränkt. Dies sind gravierende Herausforderungen der Demokratie. Werden sie nicht ernst genommen und wird ihnen nicht mit wirtschaftlichen und politischen Reformen begegnet, werden sich die oligarchischen Tendenzen in Wirtschaft und Demokratie tiefer eingraben. Es ist nicht die Krise, sondern der Triumph des Kapitalismus, der die Demokratie in Bedrängnis gebracht hat.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The article is a modified version of a co-authored text by Jürgen Kocka and Wolfgang Merkel: “Kapitalismus und Demokratie” forthcoming in: Merkel, Wolfgang (ed.) “Ist die Krise der Demokratie eine Erfindung?” (Merkel 2014). I am very grateful to J. Kocka, however, all remaining weaknesses or shortcomings of this text are my own.
Hall and Soskice, however, only describe two varieties of capitalism that they see represented in the context of the OECD: liberal market economies und coordinated market economies. New hybrid types of Manchester-like state capitalism in China, gangster capitalism in Russia and Ukraine during the 1990s, and crony capitalism in South East Asia are not taken into consideration here, since they have emerged outside the context of the OECD.
The labels for this type of capitalism vary: “organized capitalism”, “coordinated capitalism”, “Keynesian welfare state” (KWS) or “Fordism”. We use the first two terms interchangeably and take KWS as a variety of “coordinated capitalism” that is particularly compatible with democracy.
Cp. more extensively: Merkel (2004).
Such cuts were only moderate in Scandinavia, Germany, Austria and France, but drastic within the context of Anglo-Saxon economies (USA, UK, NZ).
It is thus even more surprising that neo-classical economics and neo-liberal political forces question this relationship. They see political equality fulfilled by the equal availability of political rights (cp. von Hayek 2003; the Free Democratic Party of Germany (FDP) and the liberal political parties in the Netherlands and Scandinavia respectively).
When asked whether their vote or political participation influence political decision-making, more than two-thirds of lower class citizens in Germany answer with the negative. When confronted with the same question, more than two-thirds of middle class citizens resoundingly respond with the affirmative, stating that their voice has an impact (Merkel and Petring 2012).
The exclusive character of US democracy becomes even more apparent if the 10–15 % of the lower class without citizenship are taken into account. A considerably smaller part (5 %) at the upper end of the income scale does not have citizenship (Bonica et al. 2013, p. 110).
The financial crisis and the bottom-to-top redistributive effects that have become visible within its context seem to have reached social democratic parties nonetheless. The minimum wage and the effects of deregulation on the financial and labor markets have, after two decades, slowly made their way back onto the front bench of programmatic party demands.
In non-Anglo-Saxon countries this shift did not happen by cutting back the welfare state, but was pushed through by a tax and income policy in favor of business and the better off.
The US government followed the capitalist rules of a free market more closely when it allowed many more banks to go bankrupt then did European governments.
US democracy is, of course, older than that. But even there universal suffrage for women was only introduced in 1920 (in Great Britain in 1928, in France in 1945). Until the mid-1960s six southern US states banned African Americans from voting for racist reasons. Only since that period can the “mother country” of democracy be seen as having fully implemented democratic values.
If one takes full suffrage of men and women as the crucial indicator for a complete democracy, then New Zealand (1900) was the first and Australia one of the first democracies, not the US or UK.
References
Berend, Ivan T., and Rolf Schubert. 2007. Markt und Wirtschaft: Ökonomische Ordnungen und wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in Europa seit dem 18. Jahrhundert. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Bonica, Adam, Nolan McCarty, Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. 2013. Why hasn’t democracy slowed rising inequality? Journal of Economic Perspectives 27 (3): 103–124.
Crouch, Colin. 2004. Post-democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Crouch, Colin. 2011. Das befremdliche Überleben des Neoliberalismus. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
Enderlein, Henrik. 2013. Das erste Opfer der Krise ist die Demokratie: Wirtschftspolitik und ihre Legitimation in der Finanzmarktkrise 2008–2013. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 54:714–739.
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fraenkel, Ernst. 1974 [1964]. Deutschland und die westlichen Demokratien. 6. Aufl. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Freedom House. 2010. Freedom in the world. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2010#.Uu_OLrS2yF8. Zugegriffen: 22 Jan. 2014.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1973. Legitimationsprobleme im Spätkapitalismus. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
Hacker, Jacob S., and Paul Pierson. 2010. Winner-take-all politics: How Washington made the rich richer—and turned its back on the middle class. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Hall, Peter A., and David Soskice, eds. 2001. Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundation of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harvey, David. 2007. A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
von Hayek, Friedrich August. 2003. Recht, Gesetz und Freiheit. Tübingen: Mohr.
Heires, Marcel, and Andreas Nölke. 2013. Finanzialisierung. In Theorien der Internationalen Politischen Ökonomie, ed. Joscha Wullweber, Antonia Graf, and Maria Behrens, 253–266. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Keane, John. 2011. Monitory democracy? In The future of representative democracy, ed. Sonia Alonso, John Keane, and Wolfgang Merkel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kitschelt, Herbert. 2001. Politische Konfliktlinien in westlichen Demokratien. Ethnisch-kulturelle und wirtschaftliche Verteilungskonflikte. In Schattenseiten der Globalisierung. Rechtsradikalismus, Rechtspopulismus und separatistischer Regionalismus in westlichen Demokratien, ed. Wilhelm Heitmeyer and Dietmar Loch, 418–442. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
Kocka, Jürgen. 2013. Geschichte des Kapitalismus. München: C.H. Beck.
Korpi, Walter. 1983. Democratic class struggle. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.
Lash, Scott, and John Urry. 1987. The end of organized capitalism. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Lehmann, Pola, Sven Regel, and Sara Schlote. 2014. Ungleichheit in der politischen Repräsentation? Ist die Unterschicht schlechter repräsentiert? In Ist die Krise der Demokratie eine Erfindung? Zum schwierigen Verhältnis von Theorie und Empirie, ed. Wolfgang Merkel. Wiesbaden: Springer VS (forthcoming).
Lembcke, Oliver W., Claudia Ritzi, and Gary S. Schaal, eds. 2012. Zeitgenössische Demokratietheorie, Bd. 1: Normative Demokratietheorien. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1984. Soziale Systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
Manin, Bernard. 1997. The principles of representative government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Merkel, Wolfgang. 2004. Embedded and defective democracies. Democratization 11 (5): 33–58. (Special issue Consolidated or Defective Democracy? Problems of Regime Change, ed. Aurel Croissant and Wolfgang Merkel).
Merkel, Wolfgang. 2010. Systemtransformation. Eine Einführung in die Theorie und Empirie der Transformationsforschung. 2. Aufl. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Merkel, Wolfgang, eds. 2014. Ist die Krise der Demokratie eine Erfindung? Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Merkel, Wolfgang, and Alexander Petring. 2012. Politische Partizipation und demokratische Inklusion. In Demokratie in Deutschland. Zustand—Herausforderungen—Perspektiven, ed. Tobias Mörschel and Christian Krell, 93–119. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Merkel, Wolfgang, Christoph Egle, Christian Henkes, Tobias Ostheim, and Alexander Petring. 2006. Die Reformfähigkeit der Sozialdemokratie. Herausforderungen und Bilanz der Regierungspolitik in Westeuropa, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
O’Connor, James. 1973. The fiscal crisis of the state. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Offe, Claus. 1972. Strukturprobleme des kapitalistischen Staates: Aufsätze zur Politischen Soziologie. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
Offe, Claus. 1984. Contradictions of the welfare state. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Offe, Claus. 2003. Herausforderungen der Demokratie. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus.
Piketty, Thomas. 2014. Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Polanyi, Karl. 1944. The great transformation. New York: Rinehart.
Przeworski, Adam. 1986. Paper stones: A history of electoral socialism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Przeworski, Adam. 2010. Democracy and the limits of self-government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rosa, Hartmut. 2012. Weltbeziehungen im Zeitalter der Beschleunigung. Berlin: Suhrkamp.
Rosa, Hartmut, and William Scheuermann. 2009. High-speed society: Social acceleration, power and modernity. Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press.
Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2008. Counter-democracy. Politics in an age of distrust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schäfer, Armin. 2010. Die Folgen sozialer Ungleichheit für die Demokratie in Westeuropa. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 4 (1): 131–156.
Scharpf, Fritz W. July 2011. Monetary union, fiscal crisis and the preemption of democracy. MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/11. Köln: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung.
Scharpf, Fritz W. 2012. Kann man den Euro retten ohne Europa zu zerstören? http://www.mpifg.de/people/fs/documents/pdf/Kann_man_den_Euro_retten_2012.pdf. Zugegriffen: 20 Jan. 2014.
Scheuermann, William. 2004. Liberal democracy and the social acceleration of time. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Schmitt, Carl. 1996 [1931]. Der Hüter der Verfassung. 4. Aufl. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Schmitter, Philippe C. 1974. Still the century of corporatism. The Review of Politics 36:85–131.
Schmitter, Philippe C. 1982. Reflections on where the theory of neo-corporatism has gone and where the praxis of neo-corporatism may be going. In Patterns of corporatist policy-making, ed. Gerhard Lehmbruch and Philippe C. Schmitter, 259–279. Beverly: Sage.
Simmerl, Georg. 2012. Europäische Schuldenkrise als Demokratiekrise. Zur diskursiven Interaktion zwischen Politik und Finanzmarkt. Berliner Debatte Initial 23:108–124.
Soros, George. 1998. The crisis of global capitalism. New York: Public Affairs.
Streeck, Wolfgang. 2009. Re-forming capitalism. Institutional change in the German political economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Streeck, Wolfgang. 2013a. Gekaufte Zeit. Die vertagte Krise des demokratischen Kapitalismus. Berlin: Suhrkamp.
Streeck, Wolfgang. 2013b. Vom DM Nationalismus zum Europatriotismus. Eine Replik auf Jürgen Habermas. Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik 58 (9): 75–92.
Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. New York: Basic Books.
Weßels, Bernhard. 2014. Politische Ungleichheit beim Wählen. In Ist die Krise der Demokratie eine Erfindung? Zum schwierigen Verhältnis von Theorie und Empirie, ed. Wolfgang Merkel. Wiesbaden: Springer VS (forthcoming).
Windolf, Paul, ed. 2005. Finanzmarkt-Kapitalismus. Analyse zum Wandel von Produktionsregimen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Winkler, Heinrich August, ed. 1974. Organisierter Kapitalismus. Voraussetzungen und Anfänge. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.
WZB. 2014. Data collection on elections, parties and governments from 1950–2014. Database “Election, Parties, Governments” of the Research Unit “Democracy and Democratization” at the WZB Berlin Social Science Center. Accessed: 25 May 2014.
Zürn, Michael. 1998. Regieren jenseits des Nationalstaates: Globalisierung und Denationalisierung als Chance. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Merkel, W. Is capitalism compatible with democracy?. Z Vgl Polit Wiss 8, 109–128 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12286-014-0199-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12286-014-0199-4
Keywords
- Capitalism
- Neoliberalism
- Democracy
- Rising inequality
- Disembedding of capitalism
- Financialization
- Oligarchic trends
- Marginalization of the lower strata