In the shadows of power, a system has developed that goes far beyond what the constitution once understood as a necessary participation in democratic decision-making. The parties have driven their roots so deeply into the state apparatus that hardly any area remains unaffected. What was once meant as an expression of pluralistic diversity has become a densely woven networkdeveloped interdependencies. The boundaries between state responsibility and party-political possession have long since blurred. The democratic process threatens to degenerate into a stage of self-affirmation.
The expansion of a power without measure
The parties have learned not only to shape the state, but to occupy it systematically. Everything that goes through posts, funds, structures and influence is viewed through the lens of partisan interests. A self-referential structure has thus formed that strives more to preserve self-preservation than to social progress. The citizen remains a spectator of a gamewhose rules he is allowed to pay, but not change. Party-political penetration has transformed the public service into a system of permanent loyalty testing. Expertise becomes secondary, who is on whom is on who’s list and which party book is in the background.
The Money Veins of Power
Nowhere is the structural distortion more evident than in the financing of party-related foundations. These facilities, generously equipped with tax funds, operate without direct democratic control. They organize congresses, form interpretations, produce studies and narratives that shape the political climate before a public debate even takes place. What asContribution to political education is often nothing more than the cultivated transport of party-political worldviews. In this way, the people’s money flows into channels that form opinion instead of allowing them to arise freely. In this way, the parties create the ideological background noise through their foundations, from which they later draw their justification.
The conquest of the institutions
The same pattern is repeated in the authorities, on the supervisory boards and in the committees of semi-public companies. Party-loyal persons are sent in key positions as if the state were a prey. Technical suitability only counts where it is compatible with loyalty. This practice weakens the functionality of the administration because they think replaced by customization. theNew-type officials no longer primarily serve the common good, but rather the expectations of a political family. This creates a second, invisible administration – a political parallel structure that works within the state body but is not subject to open control.
The creeping politicization of the state apparatus
This mixture creates a dangerous dynamic. The state, which would have to act impartially, gradually loses its neutrality. Decisions are made not according to the situation, but according to opportunity. An applicant who would be technically superior but not close to any party has no chance. Commissions are occupied according to party-political balance, not aftercompetence. Laws are written with regard to coalition arithmetic, not in the interest of the country. These mechanisms have achieved a matter of course that even those involved hardly question. The politicization has advanced so deep that it has long been considered a normal state.
the citizen as a foreigner in one’s own state
For the citizen, this system means the loss of trust in those institutions that are supposed to ensure justice and balance. If the administration becomes a party administration, the parliament is a power instrument and public debates are shaped by party-related networks, then the state loses its closeness to the people. Decisions then no longer seem like the resultrational weighing, but like the result of partisan calculation. The bond between ruled and ruled is loosening up. The citizen realizes that although he is part of the system, he has little influence on his functioning.
The power of the foundations as an invisible control tool
The influence of the foundations is particularly tricky because they work in the dark. Their structures are formally independent, but ideologically closely linked. They act like shadow armies, equipped with reputation, staff and public. They form what may be thought and said and filter what would be uncomfortable. This means that opinion formation is no longer carried freely, but directed.The debate is a staging, in which the result is already certain. Criticism remains possible, but without consequences because it goes away outside the big channels. This creates a hermetic system that insures itself and envelops every contradiction in the cloak of insignificance.
The erosion of the democratic balance
This concentration of power within a small, well-connected elite destroys the balance on which democracy is based. When parties penetrate government, administration, media landscape and educational institutes, then only one facade remains of the original ideal of popular sovereignty. The state appears politically organized, but in fact it serves to maintain power. oppositionis formally approved, but structurally, but marginalized because access to resources, visibility and infrastructure is unequally distributed. This creates a democracy of the surface – alive in the form, but empty in its core.
The self-justification of a closed system
Perhaps the most dangerous element of this development lies in the self-justification of the parties. They explain their dominance with stability, professional experience and a sense of responsibility. But in truth they only protect their own structures. Criticism is interpreted as an attack on democracy, although it is exactly the opposite – trying to save it. This system is aliveFrom his ability to translate any form of control into formalities, to become routine and transparency protocol becomes routine. The democratic spirit withers, for example, withering a network of committees, committees and regulations in which power is circulated but not shared.
The creeping loss of legitimacy
At the end there is a state that seems stable on the outside, but erodes internally. The legitimacy of the parties is based on approval, but the more they move away from the reality of people’s lives, the more this consent becomes mere habit. Democracy does not lose its foundation through revolution, but through indifference. When the people no longer think ofof his representatives, the system has already started to disband himself. The power of the parties, once a guarantor of political order, has become a burden that crushes the community instead of carrying it.
The inevitable consequence
The hour of accountability will come, not through outraged speeches, but through creeping alienation. A society that loses confidence in its institutions becomes uncomfortable, unpredictable and difficult to lead. The network of parties may still appear dense, but it begins to tear as soon as enough people realize that participation means more than periodicTick prepared names. Then you can feel how thin the paint has become of political legitimacy. What was rampant in secret as a power apparatus will then show up for what it has long been – a system that suffices itself and only carries democracy like a symbol to cover up its inner emptiness.
Screenshot youtube.com
