Search Results

Thinking over the empirical results, discussed in the previous chapters, we have to acknowledge that there is no direct intertwining between the freedoms and equalities when checking the domestic and external explanations. At the same time, the immediate and strong tension that also emerges in our analysis of freedoms concerns the contradictory demands of citizens about achieving security to cope with terrorism, with security that comes first. When reflecting on the data presented in the previous chapters, we can single out three patterns. The first is balanced democracy, characterized by the attempt of implementing both freedoms and equalities. The second is protest democracy, where the more substantial attention to equality is complemented by different possible types of protest, of a revendicative kind, a weak rule of law and inter-institutional accountability. The third is unaccountable democracy, where there may be relatively higher equality, complemented by weaker freedoms and above all the absence or the weakening of inter-institutional guardians who were relevant in establishing democracy. Corruption may be present along the lower side of the triangle to reinforce both patterns. The last part of the chapter proposes an overview of the literature about the questions addressed in the book. However, as in the published literature, there is no empirical work that addresses our questions, but works that address similar questions concerning equality only, freedom only or also the entire democratic regime.

This chapter addresses two final questions. First, what are the specific and more general perspectives of the democracies we studied in terms of implementation of the two democratic values? The three patterns developed in Chapter 8 cover almost all the existing empirical possibilities in Europe. Moreover, the external challenges faced by democracies in the early twenty-first century directly affect not only the goods to be delivered (possibly a mix of freedoms and equalities) but also resilience and de-consolidation. We can accept action in defence of rights and institutions and the limits of protest lie in the fact that the related actions cannot violate existing laws. A parallel question is how much the repeal of constraints, legal or of another sort, on the incumbent authorities can be pushed. No doubt, interinstitutional accountability is the necessary cornerstone of a working democracy. Second, what could we do to promote a better, doable, reasonable implementation of the two values? The formula of pursuing broader social cooperation would recall neo-corporatist past solutions, today unfeasible, but still appears as the right social recipe that has not yet been overcome. As seen in Chapter 8, we have to restate that there is a close connection between interinstitutional accountability and protection of freedoms, and, although indirectly, of equalities. Among the rights, the most important one in a democracy is the right to vote, which is grounded on other freedoms that concur to form the voter’s own political opinion. The commitment to combat different forms of disinformation needs to continue in order to provide further meaningfulness to the right to vote. Finally, to craft solid majorities in favour of the strengthening of the welfare state beyond the protection of poverty, we do need to promote a European Union able to complement national and European solidarities.