The Paradox of Democracy: How Trust Erodes From Within

Is democracy inherently self-destructive? Political theorist Ivan Krastev explores this unsettling question, suggesting that the very forces that have propelled democracy forward over the past half-century have also contributed to its current crisis of trust. This isn't a simple condemnation, but a nuanced look at how progress can inadvertently sow the seeds of its own decline.

The Revolutions That Shaped – and Shook – Democracy

Krastev identifies five key revolutions that have profoundly reshaped our political landscape:

The Cultural and Social Revolution of the 1960s and 70s: This era placed the individual at the heart of politics, championing human rights and non-conformism. However, it also eroded the sense of collective purpose, weakening traditional bonds like nation, class, and family.
The Market Revolution of the 1980s: While promoting choice and challenging the notion of government overreach, this revolution also led to a dramatic increase in inequality. Historically, the spread of democracy coincided with declining inequality, but now, the opposite is true.
The End of Communism in 1989: The fall of the Soviet Union ushered in an era of globalization, but it also weakened the social contract between elites and the people. Elites, now more mobile and less reliant on the populace, became less accountable to voters.
The Internet Revolution: The internet empowered individuals and transformed communication, but it also created echo chambers and political ghettos, making it harder to understand those with differing viewpoints. The digital world, while fostering cooperation, has also contributed to political polarization.
The Revolution in Brain Sciences: This field has provided insights into how people make decisions, but political consultants have used this knowledge to manipulate emotions rather than engage in reasoned debate. Policy and ideas have taken a backseat to emotional appeals.

The Erosion of Trust: A Vicious Cycle

These revolutions, while bringing undeniable progress, have inadvertently fueled a decline in trust towards democratic institutions. Consider these points:

Declining Electoral Turnout: Fewer people are voting, especially those who stand to benefit most from political participation. This apathy reflects a growing belief that the system is unresponsive to their needs.
The Gap Between Policymakers and the Public: A significant majority of citizens feel that their opinions are not reflected in policy decisions. Many believe that they can change governments, but not policies.
Transparency as a Management of Mistrust: The push for transparency, while seemingly beneficial, can inadvertently reinforce mistrust. When politics becomes solely about managing mistrust, it discourages talented individuals from entering public service and incentivizes politicians to cling to rigid positions, even if wrong.

The Perils of Transparency

While transparency is often touted as a solution to restore trust, Krastev cautions against viewing it as a panacea. He argues that:

Transparency can lead to a politics of mistrust, where accountability trumps common sense.
Politicians may become hesitant to change their views, fearing accusations of opportunism.
Governments may become selectively transparent, revealing information that serves their interests while concealing other crucial details.

Navigating the Ambiguity

The core of the issue lies in recognizing that "what went right is also what went wrong." As we seek to revitalize democracy, we must acknowledge the inherent ambiguities and unintended consequences of our progress. We need to find ways to foster trust without sacrificing accountability, and to bridge the divides that have emerged in our increasingly polarized societies. The challenge is to harness the power of transparency and technology without succumbing to a culture of pervasive mistrust.

Democracy's survival hinges on our ability to learn from the past, adapt to the present, and build a future where trust and progress can coexist.