Conclusion: Is the Crisis of Democracy an Invention?

Populism as a challenge for Albania’s fragile democracy

“…Promoting political dialogue and consensus-building is crucial for fostering a constructive and inclusive political environment. Political leaders should prioritize open and transparent discussions that seek to find common ground and address the concerns of all citizens (Merkel, 2019). This can be achieved through the establishment of platforms for dialogue, such as national conferences or committees, that bring together representatives from different political parties, civil society, and marginalized groups.…”

Contribution to a Historical-Structuralist Understanding of Latin American Democracy

“…It is the “performance” of democracy in the “post-democratic” society. Merkel (2018b: 360–365), in a summarizing conclusion on a compilation titled Democracy and Crisis on various issues and problems of contemporary democratic systems in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development member countries, sees that gains for gender equality and racial discrimination have been significant in recent decades, while “indifference” to serious socioeconomic inequalities in wealth, income, and life chances has grown. He sees that new social movements that represent ecological, cultural, and cosmopolitan interests and their activists tend to come mainly from the middle classes.…”

“…In order to account for income and wealth differences usual in capitalist societies, a widespread scheme exists, which sees three main social sectors or classes coexisting, understood as thirds of the total population: the higher class, the middle class, and the lower, working or popular class. Merkel (2018b: 357–358) sees that since 1950 there have been two periods of coexistence between democracy and capitalism. The first one existed from then until the 1970s and it was characterized by national and welfare-state regulation, while the second period after that until today could be characterized as one of “neoliberal deregulation.” He sees that capitalism “embedded” in or “coordinated” by the welfare state was and remains more compatible with the principles of democracy than the “neoliberal,” more “Anglo-Saxon” variant.…”

“…Early modernization theories of democracy elaborated in the global North assumed that democratic systems were part of a larger linear model of modernity, which post-colonial countries like those of Latin America should follow in order to “catch up” to the “prosperous” countries of Western Europe and North America. Growing economic inequality as well as democratic “erosion” (Merkel, 2018b: 360–366) in those “model” countries since the 1970s could with good reason make post-colonial countries around the world to desist in that goal of copying exactly those models of democracy in their current state and the theories that support them. It is clear that Lipset as well as the other theorists of modernization of the mid-20th century had in mind the political and economic systems of welfare-state capitalism in Western Europe and North America of their age and not what exists now there.…”

“…A historical-structuralist view of Latin American democracy should also engage in a discussion with the sizable literature on Latin America coming from the point of view of “participatory” and “deliberative” democracy views (Pogrebinschi, 2018). Panageotou (2018: 999) sees that around the world also in those decades a seeming contradictory situation exists where popular mobilizations have spread, while global economic inequality and economic inequality within nation-states have reached “unprecedented proportions.” For Merkel (2018b: 361 and 362), deliberative forums have shown to be able to cover only small political domains and for national-level political decisions those initiatives have shown to be not very relevant when compared to national parties, national parliaments, and elected governments. From that point of view, presenting deliberative democracy, as it has been known in practice, as an effective and credible alternative to “populism” (Guariglia, 2011) or left wing party politics on a national scale for the popular or lower class can be seen as unrealistic.…”