In the modern-day, the words "Liberal" and "Democracy" are often married together to describe, typically of the Western-style, the liberal democratic system of governance. Yet the relationship between liberalism as an ideology and democracy as a political system does not always accompany each other harmoniously. Therefore, we cannot simply stand by the concept of liberal democracy if we do not recognise how they rub up against each other.
[In this first part, key concepts including “liberalism” and “democracy” with their explanations and ideas will be discussed and contrasted briefly, followed by presenting the issues when combining these two concepts. In the second part, drawing on knowledge and ideas from Carl Schmitt (perhaps best known by his distinction between “friend vs enemy”), his thoughts and complaints towards liberalism and democracy will be explored.]
Liberalism
As an ideology, liberalism is a rather modern phenomenon emerging in the 17th century and became a distinct movement in the Enlightenment Era. Individualism is the heartbeat of liberal thought, especially seen in its argument for the relationship between the individual and the state. “Over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign”, J.S Mill’s famous words highlight the cruciality of an individual existing as a free man.
In addition to being individualistic, it is also a celebration of difference and diversity, thus on a political level, it could be named as the politics of difference. But more than that, liberalism is inherently a form of digestive politics simply with its love of talking. Take parliaments or assemblies, for example, members gather various opinions and get consensus or compromise, or a bare minimum of agreement. If agreements cannot be reached, you keep talking until you do, therefore liberalism is also a way of solving political problems by debate and talking.
Democracy
Democracy is a collectivist idea as it embraces majority rule as if there is only one single voice. It presupposes some kind of homogeneity where there has to be a collective identity to speak with a single voice.
Unlike liberalism, democracy is not primarily about discussion but instead decisions. As a decisive form of politics, the process of decision, voting and choice is thus the essence of democratic politics, which will then create winners and losers. Therefore participation is crucial to democratic politics as not only those who speak may not get their wishes granted, but those who do not speak will not be represented in the decision.
Problems
A common but not significant criticism in my opinion of liberalism is that it can be easily connected to other “ism”s, seen through the fact that almost any thought or idea can have a liberal aspect to it, making it a weak form of politics as it lacks decisiveness. Yet more seriously, another problem with liberalism, despite being paradoxical, is that when it wasn’t too weak, it was too strong. The explanation is that liberalism tends to move out of its introspective mode, and become something aggrandising and totalising.
At its heart, liberalism wants to limit the state and create artificial barriers against the state so that one can retreat and hide from it (One could also understand this as a form of anti-politics). As discussed, liberalism promoters love talking, and so they do not like to create losers and hurt people. However, when these same promoters get into power, the supposed limiting of power has no limits. Every value and opinion is being attempted to be defended, making everything in liberalism potentially political, therefore nobody knows where to stop. If there are no inherent barriers to liberal politics’ expansion, it seems like liberals are more dangerous when they acquire power, despite inclusivity and respect for differing opinions was originally perceived as a good thing.
In contrast, democracy has limits, borders and boundaries, whilst comfortable with the existence of winners and losers. Whereas liberals can never quite confront someone by telling them that something is not their problem, you don’t belong to this group or take the issue somewhere else, these are not problems for democrats. As touched upon, if you are not a part of the group for the decision, you cannot decide, even if you are a part, you may lose. In this sense, for many liberal democratic institutions, perhaps liberalism incorporated too many vetoes into democratic systems.
Comments