Parties and Democracy in the Eastern European Countries - Essay Example

Parties and Democracy in the Eastern European Countries The appearance of self-sufficient, competitive parties and the improvement of party management has been one of the most important aspects of current political transformation in eastern Europe. Political parties emerge as one of the most important institutions of contemporary liberal democracy. Lewis states: “It is hardly possible, in practice, if not in theory, to conceive of a functioning representative democracy without some kind of competitive party system” (Lewis, 2000, p.1). The growth of a variety of practically effective parties is a major indicator of the democratization of the post-communist states and the steps forward they have done towards joining the large European society of recognized democratic nations. Parties help fix the newly established democratic governments in a broader community and influence their stability among the numerous processes of quick social and industrial change. Valuable constitutions and the various processes implicated in the rule of law are reinforced by the possibilities parties put forward for the progress of a more active citizenry and the appearance of a strongly democratic political way of life. “There are also strong reasons to believe such conditions are conductive to stable processes of economic development and the formation of effective market economies” (ibid, p.2). The concentration on electoral activity and the methods parties use to reach administration office are particularly important. To the extent of post-communist eastern Europe it can be stated that involvement in competitive elections is a foremost attribute of party identity development and the advancement of such organizations. Party competition is an important characteristic of the contemporary governments that differentiates them from the single party totalitarianisms of the communist era and offers at the present moment a real focus of attention. The single-party government that existed within the Soviet dictatorship, and afterward reached other parts of Europe and the world, had nothing in common with the experience of democratic competitive party regime. Modern eastern Europe contains most of post-communist countries and main part of former Soviet Union. Lewis gives the following classification of eastern European countries: “east-central Europe: Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic; the Baltic states: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania; the Balkans: Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and the most of the former Yugoslavia (Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia) former Soviet republics: Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine” (ibid, p.5). 1989 was an important year both for the states of eastern Europe and the growth of a democratic Europe in general. Its most outstanding image can be seen in opening wide of the strongly protected gates set in the Berlin Wall and the enthusiasm with which the inhabitants of Berlin set about its destruction, but consequently it was a process of creation that would do most to resolve how long and in which form this recently received liberty would exist. This probably influenced Velvet revolution in the Baltic states with final fall of the Soviet empire. The main part of the process was the construction of new political organizations and the establishment of a variety of parties competent in expressing the viewpoints and objectives of contemporary population. On the other hand, there was a serious problem faced by the number of post-communist countries – the lack of experience of liberal democracy and the comparative limitation of party development after the countries had gained independence. Building of civil society as a main focus of political interest has succeeded during the recent years, since general civil liberties, gained by people, have influenced their outlook and political viewpoints. This is a main characteristic of ‘subunits, capable of opposing and countervailing the state’ (Gellner, 1991, p.500). Totalitarian system have nothing in common with civil society, since it seeks to reduce groups mediating between the person and the state or to be in command of these groups so there is no opposition. And whereas by so doing it might weaken the possibility for organized competition, it also decreases group success in general, and diminishes the training of individuals for inventive political activities. The states of eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union are dealing with the results of the absence of contemporary civil society, an insufficiency which makes it not easy to institutionalize democratic politics. These states have not had the chance to create the civil groups essentially to unite into established political parties, which can effectively set up their programs. So we can speak about following bias: “instead of consolidation, there is fragmentation: 67 parties fought Poland’s general election in 1993, 74 Romania’s, 56 Moldova’s, 28 Ukraine’s” (Economist, 1993a, p. 4). As a result, the former Communists (now ‘socialists’) have been both voted and elected to the parliament. The percentage of socialist representatives in eastern European parliaments varies from 5% to 50%. On the other hand, socialists nowadays offer political programs, which are completely different from communist objectives and propositions: almost in each country socialists concentrate on welfare state building and providing social guarantees for each citizen (Lipset, 1995). Also there is a positive dynamics of party consolidation: for example, in Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Belarus the number of parties decreased to 10-15. On the other hand, 104 parties will be competing for the place in parliament in Ukraine in 2006. Survey, which took place in several eastern European countries 1998, gave following results: 1) 56% of respondents ‘locates themselves on the right of ideological spectrum (Albania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Romania)’ (Torcal, Brussatin, Martin, Kakepaki, 2001, p.16); 2) 61% of respondents ‘prefers freedom to equality (the Czech Republic, Hungary)’ (ibid, p.16); 3) 57% of respondents ‘prefers liberalism to Socialism (Bulgaria, Albania, Romania, the Czech Republic)’ (ibid, p.16). 4) 59% ‘ believes that democracy is most appropriate form of government’ (ibid, p.16) Political parties themselves should be seen as the most significant mediating establishments between the population and the state. And critical condition for firm democracy is that main parties exist and have an almost permanent considerable basis of support. That support should be capable of managing with clear-cut policy collapses by the parties. It is possible to say that competitive party system generates conductive atmosphere for the development of political pluralism, freedom of word and other extremely important civil liberties, which were restricted during the Communist era. One more important characteristic of competitive party political organization is transition to market economy. Democratization in eastern Europe meant a conversion toward market economy. “A peculiarity which leads the researcher to consider and evaluate at the same time two different aspects: first, the change in values and ideology which a replacement of a whole social philosophy brings about and, second, the way each individual coped with economic drawbacks which followed thereafter” (ibid, p.17). That is to say, the influential redefinition of regime-preferences (among the population), which followed the building of a competitive party-system, structured amongst around the conflict between Communists and followers of liberal democracy. The level of its success was diverse according to several additional factors, such as “political culture, legal and constitutional framework, issues of national independence, recent history and future expectations are among these” (ibid, p.17). In eastern Europe it was a great collapse of the entire economic organization and its transition to free market was not only an issue of altered politics. Increased inflation, growing poverty and unemployment were the main part of the agenda after the change, whereas for many the onset of ‘free market’ was a shock. For example, in post-Soviet countries the majority of population lost money from their bank accounts. Once this objective distinction is recognized, it is also to be mentioned that the approval of new liberal and democratic principles by the majority was definitely catalyzed by the participation of the parties which were close-knit to the totalitarian government to free elections and to the open conflict between government and opposition, which in most cases ended with acceptance of Western experience and domination of democratic parties. In eastern European states, where the decrease in living standards was, for the majority, distressing, democratic support has become stronger only a few years ago. Capitalist development is connected with the increase of democracy particularly because it is linked with an alteration of the class structure reinforcing the working class, which might be seen nowadays in the increase of governmental standards (and guarantees) of minimal salary, pensions and allowances in eastern European countries. Lipset and Martin (1994) speak about some biases and problems of eastern European countries, which are relevant nowadays. For instance, ‘the political equality of citizens,… is… possible in societies marked by a high degree of [economic] inequality, the contradiction between political and economic inequality opens the field for tensions, institutional distortions, instability, and recurrent violence….[and may prevent] the consolidation of democracy” (Lipset, Martin, 1994, p.2) Contemporary social scientists have found that greater wealth and higher rates of welfare have been associated with the presence of democratic organizations, so it is possible to predict that the development of democratic society in future will correct economical imperfections and gaps. Some positive steps have already been made in Poland, Hungary and Slovakia, where the quality of life is ‘almost at European level’ (Bajomi-Lazar, 2003, p.12) Lipset also highlights corruption as the main difficulty of governance, which is intrinsic in systems based on poverty. The government should allocate possessions it controls, such as jobs, contracts and assets. When the country is poor, it stressed particularistic, personalistic principles. The abolition of personal ‘systems’ on property controlled or influenced by the government is evidently possible by approving laws and codes to decrease the influence of personal networks. Such legislative base already exists in each eastern European country, and some proceedings related to corruption are well known (such as Lasarenko’s case in Ukraine). Many eastern European governments are now directed to struggling with corruption, the legislative and executive basis is constantly improved and renewed. In spite of all the biases faced by newly created independent states, it is possible to say that competitive party system has possible influences on each state and society of eastern Europe, because each policy and government starts with self-awareness, liberty and consciousness of each citizen. Lewis (2000) and Bajomi-Lazar (2003) underlined similar (to each other) results of competitive party system establishment: 1) Civil liberties (freedom of word, consciousness, religion and outlook), which are the main mover of political progress in eastern European countries; 2) Transition to market economy, which result in life quality improvement which is related to the inhabitants (the most prominent examples are Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, which have experienced great economic growth in recent years and the fact that Poland is already a part of European Union; Berger (1992, p.9): ‘there has been no case of political democracy that has not been a market economy’ 3) Institutionalization of democracy and the growth of political culture among the population (this has already been demonstrated in the survey, 1998) 4) Absence of ideological pressure which was an attribute of totalitarian system: nowadays politics and ideology are separated from each other, and parties mostly concentrate on the interests of population; 5) Availability of social, political, financial and informational international connection contrary to totalitarian Iron Curtain. Bibliography 1) Bajomi-Lazar, P. Freedom of the media in Hungary, 2003. http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:BFBEFAyZ-ZQJ:www.ceu.hu/polsci/dissertations/BajomiThesisEdited.doc++%22post-communist+democracies%22+improvement+for+citizenry&hl=uk 2) Berger, P. The uncertain triumph of democratic capitalism. Journal of Democracy, 1992. March, #3 , pp.7-17 3) Economist. 1993a. Survey on eastern Europe. March, 13, #1, p.22 4) Gellner, E. Civil society in historical context. International Social Science Journal, 1991. #43, pp.495-510 5) Lewis, P. Political parties in post-communist eastern Europe. London: Routledge, 2000 6) Lipset A., Martin, S. The social requisites of democracy revisited, 1994, 3rd edition. http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:bnTIpAEQv9IJ:www.kuwi.euv-frankfurt-o.de/~vgkulsoz/EU%2520Projekt/papers/pp19.pdf++%22post-communist+democracies%22+improvement+for+citizenry&hl=uk 7) Torcal, M; Brussatin, L., Martin, I., Kakepaki, M. Democratic support and the consolidating effect in new democracies, 2001, http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:xROJrLRME3sJ:www.cuhk.edu.hk/gpa/wang_files/Dem03.pdf++%22post-communist+democracies%22+improvement+for+citizenry&hl=uk Read More