The European Union: A Schumpeterian Model of Democracy

Abstract

One of the most discussed aspects of the so called democratic deficit of the EU is the lack of a European Public Sphere. The Union's democracy is perceived by its citizens as Schumpeterian in nature and this perception corresponds to a large extent to reality. Schumpeter described democracy as the rule of the politician, who gains decision making power in the free competition over votes. The parliament's role is of minor importance; it decides more by acceptance than by initiative. Citizens can neither bring up the issues nor decide them. The European Union is indeed an ideal platform for such a model, because it is complicated, technocratic and rather opaque. European integration was and still is an elite-dominated project, where citizens do not have many possibilities to intervene during legislation-periods. Over many years, the consensual behaviour of the political elites hindered the emergence of broad debate and of conflict in a European Public Sphere. Only in the last years, politicians tried to turn the table by stressing the importance of the European citizens. A convention was installed to work out a Constitutional Treaty. But once again, the debate remained elite-dominated. The heads of governments finally signed another elitist compromise without listening to the citizens. In consequence, the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty in France and the Netherlands in 2005 is the result of an elitist and Schumpeterian model of democracy which is perpetuated by the new reform treaty of Lisbon. Thus, the claim for a European public sphere remains relevant. But scholars differently define such a sphere. The argument of this paper is that besides the often claimed Europeanization and transnationalisation of European debate the notion of broad conflict is of high importance for the emergence of a European public sphere.

Keywords

• European Union, Democratic Deficit, Schumpeter, European Public Sphere

Kaynakça

1. Heidrun Abromeit, Democracy in Europe: Legitimising Politics in a Non-State Polity. (New York: Berghahn Books, 1998).
2. Svein S. Andersen and Kjell A. Eliassen, The European Union: How Democratic is It? (London: Sage Publications, 1996).
3. Mark Arenhövel, Transition und Konsolidierung in Spanien und Chile, Strategien der Demokratisierung, (Gießen: Focus, 1998).
4. Thomas F. Banchoff and Mitchell P. Smith (eds). Legitimacy and the European Union, The Contested Polity. (London/New York: Routledge, 1999).
5. Lars Blichner, The Anonymous Hand of Public Reason: Interparliamentary Discourse and the Quest for Legitimacy, in: Democracy in the European Union, Integration Through Deliberation? edited by E. O. Eriksen and J. E. Fossum,London/New York: Routledge, 2000, 141 – 164.
6. Cornelia Bruell, Monika Mokre and Markus Pausch (eds.), Democracy Needs Dispute. The Debate on the European Constitution, (Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 2009).
7. Jean Cohen and Andrew Arato, Civil Society and Political Theory. (Cambridge/ Massachusetts/London, 1992).
8. Pascal Delwit and Philippe Poirier (eds.). Parlement Puissant, Électeurs Absents? Les Élections Européennes de Juin 2004, (Bruxelles: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 2005).

9. Maurice Duverger, Political Parties, Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. (London, 1965).
10. Erik O. Eriksen and John E. Fossum (eds.). Democracy in the European Union, Integration Through Deliberation?, (London/New York: Routledge, 2000).
11. European Commission, Special Eurobarometer 166, (Brussels, 2002).
12. European Commission, Eurobarometer 63, (Brussels, 2005).
13. Roberto Gargarella, “Demanding Public Deliberation: The Council of Ministers – Some Lessons from the Anglo-American History”, in Democracy in the European Union, Integration through Deliberation? edited by E. O. Eriksen and J. E. Fossum, (London/New York: Routledge, 2000), 206 - 230.
14. Helmut Gaisbauer and Markus Pausch, “The Gap Between Elites and Citizens”, in: Democracy Needs Dispute. The Debate on the European Constitution, edited by Cornelia Bruell, Monika Mokre and Markus Pausch, (Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 2009).
15. Jürgen Gerhards, “Westeuropäische Integration und die Schwierigkeiten der Entstehung einer Europäischen Öffentlichkeit“, Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 22, 2, (1993): 96 – 110.
16. Dieter Grimm, Braucht Europa eine Verfassung?, (Vortrag Gehalten in der Carl Friedrich von Siemens Stiftung, München 1994).
17. Sverker Gustavsson, 1998. “Defending the Democratic Deficit”, in: Political Theory and the European Union. Legitimacy, Constitutional Choice and Citizenshi,, edited by Albert Weale and Michael Nentwick, (London: Routledge, 1998, 63-79).
18. Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida, “Nach dem Krieg. Die Wiedergeburt Europas“. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. 21.05.2003.
19. Simon Hix. Parties at the European Level and the Legitimacy of EU Social-Economic