The State of Liberal Democracy: 39 Years After the Gwangju Democratic Uprising
Written by Hyung Jun You
The May 18 Gwangju Democratic Uprising became a symbol of freedom and a kindling light of liberty that guided other cities in Korea and Southeast Asia to realize the virtues of democratic rights. These virtues include the freedoms of speech, press, religion, and movement. They also include a government that respects the political and civil rights of its citizens. Just one generation later, democracy is in retreat due to multiple reasons. These include ever-widening income inequality, weak economic growth, and low faith in political institutions.
Before going into my full-throated defense for liberal democracy, we first need to define it. We know that not all democracies are the same. Many political scientists label Russia’s democracy as illiberal and Norway’s as liberal. Democracy in the Philippines under President Duterte is becoming more illiberal compared to Tunisia, where they have achieved remarkable steps in improving their democratic institutions. So, what makes liberal democracies different from other democracies?
What Exactly Is Liberal Democracy?
Broadly speaking, liberal democracy incorporates four concepts: democracy, the republican principle, constitutionalism, and liberalism.
Democracy is more than just ballot boxes and majoritarian decisions. A democratic government must provide equal political and civil rights for all of its citizens, and citizenship should be inclusive. Therefore, everyone has an equal voice and influence on public matters.
The republican principle, famously championed by John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and expanded upon by Robert Dahl, states that only the people, through popular sovereignty, can rightly and justly form a government.
Constitutionalism, through writings, establishes an enduring structure of formal institutional power. The constitution provides an organized power that brings forth the basis for the conduct of public life, and its “enduring” factor is that it is designed to make any amendments difficult. The constitution also lays out the boundaries of constraining power on political institutions. The constitution also illustrates how the public can limit the government’s reach. How much should the public limit that reach? Liberalism answers that question.
Political scientist William Galston said it best when he said that liberalism is “recognizing and protecting a sphere beyond the rightful reach of government in which individuals can enjoy independence and privacy … If all human beings are endowed with ‘certain unalienable rights’ that governments do not create and individuals may not surrender, then the republican principle can authorize only forms of government that upholds these rights.”
Liberal democracy has the characteristics of majoritarian-style democracy, organized through a constitution, and has a republican principle. It also limits majoritarianism through liberal principles, such as having supermajority requirements to restrict majority power. Liberal order can also use the constitution or the supreme court, which cannot be swayed by public pressure, to make sure the majority does not harm the minority.
The State of Liberal Democracy Under a Populist Movement
Today, liberal democracy is under threat by a populist movement. Populists have a narrow view on democracy, that only the majoritarian opinion rules. In that sense, populists should not be a threat to democracy because they simply want to see their popular preferences translated into public policy. The way they see it, the current political order does not reflect the people’s mindset. The “elites” have taken over important policy decisions concerning immigration, economic, and cultural issues. Therefore, the masses should retake the government from them.
The problem with this view, that populists are not a threat to democracy, is twofold. First, it is extremely divisive. By dividing the country with an “us against them” mentality, it implies that some people do not deserve citizenship because they are not part of the “people.” This goes against the idea of inclusive citizenship, which is the core principle of democracy. Second, the idea that populist movements are unified under one voice and one idea, thereby justifying their actions, is contradictory towards another core democratic principle – equal political and civil rights for every citizen. If populists want to offer liberties, such as freedom of speech and movement, then they have to allow different voices to be heard. People are rarely unified. Different interest groups have varied political and social goals that they want to achieve, and even within interest groups there are divisions on which direction to go. As Robert Dahl suggested decades ago, pluralism defines the people in a democratic society. So, how can we stem the tide of populist movements and properly defend and promote liberal democracies worldwide?
Fighting for Liberal Democracy
First, we need to uphold liberal institutions. This means that the government and its citizens need to be a willing guardian for freedom of the press, an independent judiciary, and the rule of law. These three factors keep a liberal democracy in check and make sure it is not backsliding towards illiberalism. Public institutions across liberal democratic societies should also go through political reforms both to prevent gridlocks that lead to a slow government response and to root out corrupt politicians. We need to follow the advice of Joseph Nye, namely, that if people are losing faith in liberal democracies, we need to be better examples ourselves.
Second, we must differentiate between diverse views on policies and threats to democratic institutions. International organizations and free trade deals such as the World Trade Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement have always been controversial, resulting in diverse opinions. To say that a populist party’s hostility towards established international world order and trade deals is an illiberal act is premature. Even on cultural issues, such as same-sex marriage and immigration, liberal democratic society can have various views while adhering to its democratic creed. Advocating for better border control is not a threat to liberal democracy, nor is championing for more acceptance of refugees who are fleeing from poverty, violence, and war. These are policy disputes among societies, and we should welcome these diverse views and try to raise the level of public debate. A true liberal democratic society is not a united one. This aspect is so important that Seymour Lipset lays it out in the very first page of his acclaimed book, Political Man. He stated that a “stable democracy requires the manifestation of conflict or cleavage so that there will be struggle over ruling positions, challenges to parties in power, and shifts of parties in office.”
Liberal democracy certainly lost some soft power in the past three decades. In the 1970s, democratic countries generated most of the world’s gross domestic product. Now, it has fallen below half and the International Monetary Fund says that it will go down to a third within ten years. Populist parties have exploited this economic stagnation and turned it into a vicious movement that threatens liberal democracies. They have picked scapegoats for their economic problems, like the influx of immigrants or economic liberalization, and say that they can fix all of it by bypassing democratic principles.
Do Not Give Up the Good Fight
The good news is that liberal democracy will not wither away. The best part about liberal democracy, and democracies in general, is its capacity for self-correction. This self-correcting system is what has kept democracies alive throughout centuries of political turmoil.
We have to pick up the baton left by Gwangju protestors and continue fighting for liberal democratic values because we are heirs to that proud legacy of freedom. We must use every democratic right in our arsenal to preserve liberal values by beefing up laws on judicial independence and freedom of the press, voting out politicians who do not adhere to the rule of law, and encouraging diverse public debate. The greatest strength of democracy is its management of complexity rather than providing simple answers to seemingly unsolvable problems.
Do not give up the good fight because we are heirs of those student protestors, mothers, and fathers who fought against armed soldiers. Never forget that.
The Author
Hyung Jun You is a recent graduate from Loyola Marymount University in L.A. majoring in international relations and minoring in journalism. His areas of research are in human rights, democracy promotion, and Southeast/East Asian politics. He has been published in the Cornell International Affairs Review and the SIR Journal of International Relations.