Crisis of efficiency: when the ability to act in the political system decreases

The legitimacy of democracy is no longer a matter of course today, but is in an extremely critical situation. Not only is trust in democratic principles dwindling, but the actual functionality and efficiency of the political systems are also facing enormous challenges. Active governance is becoming increasingly difficult, becauseAdministrative processes are becoming increasingly tedious and complex. It is not uncommon for parliaments, even in wealthy countries, to take up to a decade and a half to decide on individual laws. The formation of new governments is becoming more and more complicated and often takes months, sometimes even years. These developments also affect government stability:They are often less resilient, break down easier and are judged and punished more and more strictly afterwards by the voters. Participation in elections, which has been declining for years, also contributes to increasing inefficiency. Against this background, the author analyzes three central symptoms in his text that illustrate this crisis.

Extended coalition processes and their causes

The first symptom concerns the constantly growing duration of coalition negotiations. These processes are taking longer and longer, especially in countries with complex political landscapes and numerous parties. A clear example is Belgium, which broke all previous records after the June 2010 elections and did not form a government for a year and a half. also in Spain, Italy and GreeceIt turns out that the formation of a government after elections is increasingly difficult. Even in the Netherlands, traditionally a country with comparatively stable coalitions, it is becoming increasingly difficult to reach agreements quickly. Historically, there have been nine coalition negotiations since World War II, which took more than eighty days. Five of these negotiations took place only after1994, which clearly illustrates the trend. The reasons for this development are complex: the main reasons are the increasing expansion and depth of detail of the coalition agreements. It is a strange development: while times are becoming increasingly unpredictable and flexible reactions to acute social problems are in demand, the parties are trying toagreements in advance to the smallest detail. The mistrust between the coalition partners is growing, as is the fear of electoral penalties in the event of any errors or deviations. In order to secure their own position in the political spectrum, the parties want to determine as much as possible in advance. However, this desire for security leads to longer negotiation processes thatdelay the formation of government.

The increasing pressure on governments from voters and criticism

The second symptom concerns the intensified criticism that governing parties today see themselves exposed to. Although comparative analysis by governments is a relatively young research direction, the available results show impressive trends. The so-called “voter reward” in Europe is particularly clear: How is support for governing parties in the elections changing?In the 1950s and 1960s, these parties lost only between 1 and 1.5 percent of their votes in elections. In the 1970s it was about 2%, in the 1980s 3.5%, and in the 1990s it was 6%. Since the turn of the millennium, the loss has risen to 8% or more. Countries like Finland, the Netherlands or Irelandeven record losses of 11%, 15% and up to 27% of their votes. These numbers raise the question: Who would still like to actively govern when the price for government participation is so high? It seems to be a more rational option for many parties at the moment to retreat to the edges of the political spectrum. That means taking as little responsibility as possible toTo secure votes, because the state still pays out the consequences in the form of election losses.

Slowing down government and erosion of national power

The third symptom concerns the slowing pace at which governments can implement their projects. Large infrastructure projects such as the North-South line in Amsterdam, the new station in Stuttgart, the closure of the Antwerper Ring or the planned international airport of Nantes are hardly being realized. The influence and reputation of national governments in Europe aredecreased significantly in recent decades. Instead of sovereign actors, they increasingly appear today as driven by a complex structure of local and supranational interests. Large construction projects used to be considered prestige objects that demonstrated the performance of a government. Today they are often just administrative challenges that are caused by a large number ofactors are made more difficult.

When governments can’t even manage to build simple tunnels or bridges

The glorious time of the large buildings and infrastructure measures such as the Delta plants, the expansion of the TGV network or the sewer tunnel is over. If governments aren’t even able to build simple tunnels or bridges, what else do they have? The answer is: little. Because most projects are now under the pressure of sovereign debt, European legislation,implemented by American rating agencies, multinational companies and international contracts. National sovereignty, once the foundation of the nation state, has become a very relative concept in the course of these developments. The big challenges of our time – climate change, the banking and euro crisis, economic turbulence, offshore fraud, migrationas well as overpopulation – can hardly be managed independently by individual states. Instead, external factors and global influences determine the ability to act.

Powerlessness as a dominant experience

The central buzzword of this era is powerlessness. Both the citizens towards the government, and the governments towards Europe and ultimately Europe towards the world are increasingly powerless. People look at the rubble fields of their own societies and look up – no longer with hope or trust, but with despair and growing anger. theToday’s politics becomes the leader full of cursing, on which the actors are just trying to somehow get to the top without really creating solutions.

From the art of the feasible to the art of the smallest possible

Politics used to be the art of reaching the feasible. Today she has turned into an art that primarily focuses on the microeconomics. The inability to tackle fundamental structural problems goes hand in hand with overemphasizing the trivial. This development is largely fueled by the over-the-top media system, which is mainly due to sensations, conflictsand scandal. It is more important to attract attention in the short term than to present long-term solutions. In times when the media and market logic dominate public discourse, the little stories of the day rule, while the big, complex challenges are neglected. The result is a real madness of the day: The focus is on theShort-term provocation, not on sustainable solutions.

The influence of the media on politics

In order to be able to survive in the upcoming elections, politicians must constantly be in the spotlight and score points. The increasingly commercialized media offer a compliant platform for this. Politics, the media and the economy are caught in a mutual grip – a “Bermuda triangle” that pulls everything down and raises questions: Why is that? How is it that thelogic of the media so strongly influenced politics? The interaction between politics and the media is considered one of the most important factors for increasing incidentalism, i.e. the superficial, accidental and often arbitrary acting in politics. Media is living on news, and incidents often appreciate more than well-founded debates. This leads toIn their public account, politicians rely primarily on scandals and controversies instead of substantial politics.

Incidentalism: When superficiality reigns

The term “incidentalism” aptly describes the phenomenon in which short-term events and scandals dominate political events. The numbers speak for themselves: In recent years, the number of oral and written questions in the Dutch Parliament has increased significantly, as has the number of applications. At the same time, the ratings for political talk shows are increasing,Politicians have to be in the spotlight to reach voters. A Dutch MP noted: “Personal members prefer to be ‘shattered’ every day, “shocked” and “highly unpleasantly surprised”” to remain in the media focus. This profiling addiction has pushed governing into the background: When vote fever and media attention are more important than theActual policy, the parties lose substance. A kind of superficiality emerges that further weakens trust in democracy.

The loss of offspring and the erosion of political culture

If politics is only characterized by self-engraving and short-term success, the motivation of young people to get involved in politics decreases. Parliament is threatened with suffering a shortage of fresh blood: a secondary symptom of the efficiency crisis. The profession of politician has lost a lot of respect; He used to be considered honorable and respected, today he is often consideredmiserable and opportunistic. A Dutch brochure dealing with recruiting new talents was titled “Finding and Holding” – a reference to the difficulties of attracting young, committed people to politics and retaining them in the long term.

The failure of politicians and the danger of exhaustion

Keeping talent is a big challenge: political talents are burning faster today than they used to. A European Council chairman once said that the way democracies work “wears out” people at an alarming pace. It is crucial to ensure that democracy itself does not break down on its own resilience.Ironically, however, it is louder than ever: instead of modestly pointing out its limits, politicians proclaim their own virtues loudly – with a clenched fist and energetic attitude. That should make an impression, but in truth this self-enactment wears out the democratic substance.

The vicious circle of the efficiency and legitimacy crisis

Instead of accepting the changed power relations and looking for new, meaningful forms of governance, the politicians continue the old game – often against the will of the population. This is increasingly tired and alienated. The constant artificial hysteria generated by media and election campaigns does not help to increase confidence in democracyrestore. On the contrary: She creates a spiral of exhaustion and distrust. The consequences are serious: the symptoms of Western democracies are diverse and difficult to grasp. Refusal to vote, migration of members, decline in members in parties, the inability of state authorities and political paralysis show a clear picture: a syndrome is created thatcould be described as “democracy fatigue”. While this syndrome has not yet been fully researched, the signs are unmistakable. Numerous Western societies suffer from it and it is necessary to take a closer look at the existing diagnoses and analyzes in order to understand the causes and possible solutions.