Ethnic democracy

Ethnic Democracy ( Ethnic Democracy ) is an established Israeli sociologist Sammy Smooha of the model to describe political systems, although work on the democratic principle, but treat a particular ethnic group is particularly preferred.

• 3.1 Civil democracies
• 3.2 Non - democratic models

• 4.1 Israel as an archetype
• 4.2 Estonia and Latvia
• 4.3 Malaysia

Origin of the term

The Israeli sociologist Sammy Smooha coined the term "ethnic democracy " in his publications on the political system of Israel, especially in regard to its treatment of the Arab minority. Although described by Smooha only in English and Hebrew, the term can be easily translated into German as an ethnic democracy. The first draft was published in 1989 in Smoohas monograph Arabs and Jews in Israel, then in 1999 appeared the extended version of the theoretical model, presented at the conference Smooha Multiculturalismus and democracy in divided societies. Israel is used in the development of the model as an archetype of ethnic democracy. Smooha notice that a large number of comparative political science studies treat Israel as a special case, because its political system ties into no known frame. After this finding Smooha recognizes that other countries exist that can not be described with previously conventional analytical models. This realization led Smooha to develop a new model of political order. According to Smooha, one can observe two opposite processes the late 20th and early 21st century. According to Smooha Firstly, in the West than traditionally regarded and the most common types of democracy - understood liberal democracy and the ongoing global concordance democracy through various developments in transition. Due to globalization, regionalization and the concomitant universalisation of minority rights, the Western nation-states transform increasingly becoming multicultural democracies. On the other hand, takes place an opposite development, especially in the Eastern European post-Soviet states. It created nation states, which have more than the well-known Western examples, a strong ethnic characteristics, such as Serbia, Estonia and Latvia, Georgia and Slovakia. Most of these young states are recognized democracies, some now also the EU and NATO members, yet there is a clear predominance of a certain ethnic group. Why you can still speak of democracy, Sammy Smooha, in his model of ethnic democracy.

The model

The model of ethnic democracy is composed of three essential elements: features of ethnic democracy, circumstances ( conditions ) that lead to an ethnic democracy and the conditions that contribute to the stability of ethnic democracy. Smooha also distinguishes the detailed model of a compact mini model, which allows a clear application to different cases.

Comprehensive model

The comprehensive model of ethnic democracy is mainly used for delineation of civil Types of democracy and non-democracies. However, it also describes the circumstances and conditions that contribute to the emergence of an ethnic democracy. In general it can be said that if in a state an ethnic sense of togetherness of democracy goes ahead, this will form more of an ethnic democracy. A democracy without strong ethnic imprinting evolves more likely to civilian democracy, because it is its members defined by nationality, not by ethnicity.

Characteristics of an ethnic democracy

In an ethnic democracy is a reduced form of democracy. Although all residents are given equal individual rights, there are certain limitations for ethnic minorities:

" The political system is democratic. All permanent residents who so wish are granted citizenship, including human, civil, political, cultural and social rights. In addition to individual rights, the minority is accorded some collective rights and sometimes even granted autonomy with Certain limitations. Minority citizens are allowed to conduct on intense struggle for equal rights without facing repression by the state or the Majority. So They are permitted to join coalitions with Majority groups. Democracy is, HOWEVER, diminished by the lack of equality of rights. Non -members of the ethnic nation did enjoy rights are in some way inferior to the rights of members and endure discrimination by the state. Rule of law and quality of democracy are Reduced by state measures Intended to avert the Perceived threat attributed to nonmembers. "

Belonging to the community are not defined in an ethnic democracy by nationality, but by belonging to the core ethnic group. Ethnic minorities get the citizenship and enjoy the right to vote, as well as individual and group rights, yet these groups are systematically disadvantaged. The ethnic majority, however, is treated by the state preferred their interests are superior and their members get much easier political importance and political power. An ethnic democracy follows two contradictory principles: the democratic and ethnic principle. After the democratic principle all citizens are granted the same rights as the ethnic principle an ethnic group clearly prefers the other and this preferential treatment. In an ethnic democracy that is always a balance between the conflicting principles must be found and obtained, so that the political order can persist. In addition to the above features Smooha lists eight characteristics of ethnic democracies, but depending on the case need not all be pronounced to the same degree. In some instances, some features may also be absent, according to Smooha, where one can still speak of an ethnic democracy. The following characteristics of an ethnic democracy Smooha describes in detail in his working paper for the European Centre for Minority Issues:

• The dominant ethnic nationalism specifies that an ethnic nation has the sole right to the land. The presence of ethnic nationalism means that the core ethnic group for the pivotal point of all the happenings in one state will. All political and non- political activities align with the interests of the ethnic group, so a dichotomy arises, which leads to the separation between the core ethnic group and all others: " Ethnic nationalism makes the ethnic nation a center of gravity for the society as a whole - a prime concern, a world interest and a precious asset for most members and leaders of the ethnic nation ".
• The State distinguishes between the affiliation to the core ethnicity and citizenship. Due to the strong focus on ethnicity citizenship moves into the background. The affiliation to the state (and therefore also to the core ethnicity) can thus only be innate and is otherwise very difficult to obtain. Nevertheless, the state is trying actively to restrict citizenship on the core ethnic group, for example, by strict naturalization test or difficult to fulfill conditions for naturalization. But even with the receipt of citizenship are the full rights of an ethnic democracy is not guaranteed if you do not belong to the core ethnic group.
• The core ethnic group dominates and leads the state. Not the citizens but the core ethnic group leads and dominates the state and occupied the important positions of power. The dominance of the state apparatus allows the core ethnic group to protect their members and support, as well as to secure the collective goals of the core ethnic group.

" The state 's official language, religion, culture, institutions, flag, anthem, emblems, stamps, calendar, names of places, heroes, days and sites of collective commemoration, laws (especially Those regula ting naturalization, immigration and ownership of land and businesses ) and policies are biased in favor of the core ethnic nation, and members of the core ethnic nation expect and receive a favored status "

• The state mobilizes the core ethnic group. He cares for and maintains the national identity and asks the members of the core ethnic group on to pursue common national goals. Through continuous reconstruction of ethnic and national identity, the members of the core ethnic group be deterred, to assimilate. Through preferential treatment of the core ethnic group and the cultivation of the national ideas of the state receives its legitimacy. This is accomplished by demarcation and protection against a ( perceived) threat from the outside.
• The State acknowledges ethnic minorities incomplete collective and individual rights. The core ethnic group enjoys a superior status, the individual rights of ethnic minorities may be limited, however, in certain areas. However, all citizens the fundamental rights of democracy will be awarded. In addition, the ethnic minorities receive collective rights, so they can use their own language, to perform their own religious and educational institutions and to make cultural institutions:

" Human rights (search as dignity, physical safety and equality ), social rights (including entitlement to housing, health, employment, income and education ), civil liberties (including freedom of assembly and association, freedom of the press and independent judiciary ) and political rights (including the right to vote and to stand for election, a multi - party system, change of Governments through fair elections and lack of military or foreign intervention in the political process) "

• The state allows ethnic minorities parliamentary and extra - parliamentary struggle for their rights. In an ethnic democracy ethnic minorities is a series of legal democratic means available to fight for their rights: "They are allowed to use the vote, petitions, mass media, courts, political Pressures, interest groups, lobbies, demonstrations, strikes, sit-ins and other legal Means to advance Their status without having to face repression by the state and violence by the core ethnic nation. "
• The state takes the ethnic minorities ( citizens who are not part of the core ethnic group ) perceive as a threat. The danger may be real or suspected, and take various forms. Thus, the State may fear that the ethnic minorities, the population of the core ethnic group exceed that ethnic minorities attain to great political power, could threaten the national culture and the like.
• The state controls the ethnic minorities to a certain extent. It is assumed that members of ethnic minorities can not fully identify with the state, its objectives and the core ethnic group and therefore not entirely loyal are to the state. They represent a potential danger to the state and must therefore be controlled to a certain degree. The continuous discrimination of ethnic minorities can threaten the social order of a state, as it may lead to conflicts between groups. Thus, the state granted the ethnic minorities on the one hand the right to political struggle, on the other hand, he implies, these groups also increased controls.

Circumstances that contribute to the emergence of an ethnic democracy

According to Smooha, there are four factors that can contribute to the development of an ethnic democracy:

• Ethnic dominance precedes the emergence of democracy. If an ethnic group was dominant before the introduction of democracy, ethnic democracy ensures a consistency with the past. It is therefore likely that, rather an ethnic democracy built on a territory that is mainly dominated by one ethnic group.
• Ethnic nationalism is preceded by a Demokartieentstehung. " Ethnic democracy emerges where the ethnic nation rose prior to the formation of the state and founded the state to Ensure its survival, well-being and interests ." The ethnic nationalism sets as its ultimate goal the persistence of ethnicity and the defense of their interests. For this reason, those States will develop in the wake of democratization rather to an ethnic democracy back.
• There is a real danger that requires long-term and broad mobilization. The mobilization by the feeling of togetherness of the core ethnic group can protect the state from danger. It can be threatening the physical, demographic, economic and cultural existence of the core ethnic group. If a state that is created in a hostile environment, the probability is more the case that an ethnic democracy developed.
• Devotion to democracy. The core ethnic group is committed to democratic principles and binds to it voluntarily. However, this liability learns some limitations, since it competes with the objectives of the ethnic principle. Without this voluntary commitment, the ethnic democracy would be endangered.

Conditions that contribute to the stability of the ethnic democracy

The following are some conditions are listed which contribute to the stability of an ethnic democracy. These are neither necessary nor sufficient for the stability of an ethnic democracy, according to Smooha.

• The core ethnic group constitutes a majority of the population; If the dominant group makes up the majority of the population, they can be legitimized democratically and is not as vulnerable to counter-movements. According to Smooha the core ethnic group should make up about 80 percent of the population.
• The ethnic minority ( fringe ) are a significant minority dar. If the edge groups make up less than 10 percent of the population, an ethnic democracy is not necessary to enforce the dominance of the core ethnic group. However, if the number of ethnic minorities exceeds 25 percent of the population, it can undermine the dominance of the core ethnic group by their voters force. Smooha speaks here of benchmarks that can indeed vary according to application.
• The core ethnic group is committed to democratic principles. As described in the conditions for the emergence of the core ethnic group must follow voluntarily the democratic principle, otherwise an ethnic democracy converts to a non- democratic order.
• The core ethnic group is uransässig. The claim to the territory may be justified historically, or by centuries of residency on the territory.
• The marginalized groups (ethnic minorities ) are immigrants. Although the ethnic minorities immigrated several generations ago, they can not make the same claim to the territory, as the uransässige core ethnicity.
• There are several fringe groups (more than one ethnic minority ). Several, not organized minority groups can be controlled more easily than a large single group.
• The core ethnic group has a large diaspora. The protection and naturalization of the diaspora can provide a basis for the preference of the core ethnic group against ethnic minorities.
• Nature of the involvement of countries of origin. If the countries of origin from which the ethnic minorities are migrants, not actively promote minorities, the ethnic democracy will remain rather stable.
• International involvement. If the ethnic democracy is recognized and legitimized by the international community, the ethnic democracy will remain rather stable.

Mini - Model

Since the comprehensive model is too detailed to be suitable for a compact and trenchant analysis, Smooha summarizes the characteristics and the conditions for an ethnic democracy in a compact mini model. In this case, remain the three most important characteristics of an ethnic democracy: the ethnic dominance, perceived risk and the diminished democracy. In order to be characterized as an ethnic democracy, a state should therefore correspond to these three essential characteristics. In an ethnic democracy an ethnic group is significantly preferred to all other ethnicities and preferential treatment, according Smoohas mini model. In addition, the core ethnic group feels a perceived (perceived ) threat from the outside or on the part of ethnic minorities in the state. The third feature of an ethnic democracy is the restriction of some democratic rights on the core ethnic group, the edge groups are deliberately disadvantaged. Nevertheless, the basic rights as human rights, political, social and civil rights of all citizens must be given. The factors that favor the formation of an ethnic democracy, Smooha summarizes in four points ( for a detailed list see section 2.1.2. ): The formation of states must follow in time to the race, so build on an already existing ethnic group, the core ethnicity must be at stake or be perceived as such, the majority of the population must feel committed for ideological or practical reasons of democracy and the percentage of marginalized groups must be low enough so that both democracy and the ethnic dominance of the core ethnic group receive can be. The stability factors of an ethnic democracy shortened Smooha in his mini- model on four key aspects: the majority of the core ethnic group must be preserved permanently, the perceived (perceived ) risk must be always present, the countries of origin of ethnic minority groups ( marginalized groups ) may not be in interfere with state affairs and the international community to legitimize the state order or support even better.

Deferrals to other political models

Smooha developed the model of ethnic democracy, especially in contrast to the widespread in western civilian models of democracy - liberal democracy and Konkodanzdemokratie - and to the non-democratic models as Ethnocracy or master race democracy. An ethnic democracy is loud Smooha to locate it somewhere between liberal democracy and Ethnocracy, but with a clear proximity to democracy. The theoretical models differ significantly in dealing with ethnic minorities, group and individual rights.

Civilian democracies

Civilian democracies define their members by the principle of jus soli - the birthplace principle. A nationality is to all who were born on the territory of the country, the lineage plays no or only a minor role. Liberal democracy and the concordance democracy are the most common and the best known civilian democracy types. Classical representatives of a liberal democracy is the United States: the Indviduum is the focus of attention, ethnic origin is a private matter, the state does not interfere in ethnic conflicts, but calls on nationals of assimilation to the dominant culture, the language and institutions of the country. In a concordance democracy, however, for which Belgium is a good example, the state recognizes the different ethnic groups and tried to mediate between them. In this case, the state remains neutral. The ethnicity is institutionalized, all ethnic groups receive the same treatment. Due to the neutrality of the State, the concordance democracy of ethnic democracy is different. Another important distinction between civilian types of democracy and ethnic democracy is that the latter clearly separates the nationality of belonging to the core ethnic group. It follows the principle of jus sanguinis - principle of descent. Even if one can obtain citizenship as non- members of the core ethnic group, the core ethnic group enjoys a special status. In contrast to liberal democracy citizens learn of an ethnic democracy limitations in their individual rights because of their ethnicity. On the other hand, speaks an ethnic democracy the representatives of the ethnic minority group rights, so that they own cultural, social and educational institutions can build up and can democratic means for your rights fight with. The recognition of group rights brings the ethnic democracy closer to the concordance democracy, where the main difference is in the preferred treatment of an ethnic group. While the state maintains a neutral position in a concordance democracy, the state is in an ethnic democracy clearly on the side of the core ethnic group.

Non - democratic models

The political model that is frequently mentioned in one breath with ethnic democracy, is the master race democracy. Although it carries the term democracy in the title, it is not a democracy in the usual understanding. Are in a master race democracy the individual political, civil, cultural and restricts the fundamental rights of an ethnic group. Other ethnic groups are actively prevented from obtaining such rights. Even if democratic structures are in place and the majority of the population are available, one can not speak of a democracy in a master race democracy. A well-known example of this type of political order is South Africa. On the continuum between the concordance democracy and the master race democracy ethnic democracy can be located in the vicinity of the former. In contrast to non - democratic political models, all residents of an ethnic democracy will enjoy wide individual and collective rights, and legal means to fight for your rights group.

Applications

The model of ethnic democracy does not only apply in the case of Israel, considered the archetype for this type of democracy, but also in the analysis of many other states. Thus, it is often applied to the post- Soviet states have established, for example, Estonia and Latvia, which gained their independence after 1990 and their states mainly after the ethnic principle ( new). However, it remains debatable whether one can speak of ethnic democracies in these political systems because they do not correspond Smoohas model in all respects. Even in the case of Malaysia, one can speak of an ethnic democracy. The following overview considers Israel as the archetype of the model, Estonia and Latvia as controversial research cases and Malaysia as an example of a clear application of the ethnic democracy.

Israel as an archetype

Israel serves Smooha as the archetype of an ethnic democracy. The predominance of the Israelis to the territory and the protection of Israeli culture and religion are clear targets of the Israeli state. Israel complies with all the features above, the ethnic democracy. According to the mini- model, the unique target of the Israeli state is to provide a home for Jews from all over the world. It refers both to its inhabitants, as well as the Diaspora:

" Zionism is de facto the state ideology. Its central objective is to make Israel Jewish in demography, language, culture, institutions, identity and symbols, and to protect Jewish lives and interests all over the world. It accepts the historical development of Jews as to ethnic nation, in Which ethnicity, religion and people hood are intertwined. A member of the Jewish people can not be a member of a non- Judaic religion. "

Israelis also feel three major threats facing the state: the physical and political survival of Israel in the region, living in Israel, Palestinian citizens ( demographic risk ) and the connection to the Palestinians and to a future Palestinian state. Moreover, it is in Israel to a diminished democracy, because although the Arab minority has individual and collective rights, but this effect is limited. The Jewish population enjoys preferential treatment and privileges in some areas. Since the Arab minority the State of Israel was loyal in spite of the described situation and democratic means possess to fight for their rights, Smooha Israel considered an archetype for his model of ethnic democracy.

Estonia and Latvia

Estonia and Latvia can be both historically and regionally regarded as an obvious cases. Your allocation to the model of ethnic democracy is controversial. Both countries declared shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union their independence and founded a state which is mainly reserved for the Estonians / Latvians. In response to the decades- long affiliation with the Russian -dominated Soviet Union, both countries established a government which is to contribute to the protection of the core ethnic group, their language and their culture. The problem, however, is primarily the handling of both Baltic States with the predominantly Russian-speaking minority, which accounts for about 30 percent of the population both in Latvia and in Estonia. Since most of these inhabitants immigrated during the Soviet occupation, it has, according to the laws of the two States not entitled to citizenship. Thus, the Russian-speaking minority in Estonia and Latvia has no political rights such as the right to vote. This fact contradicts Smoohas model, so this also claims:

"In this controversy over classification, I tend to regard Estonia and Latvia as nation states did are slowly Developing into ethnic democracies. They do not exhibit the essential feature of ethnic democracy namely, did permanent residents are enfranchised and able to avail Themselves of democratic procedures in Their fight for change. Estonia and Latvia deny Automatic citizenship to Russian - speakers Despite the fact thatthey are, and They see Themselves as, a permanent part of the state and demand automatic citizenship. In contrast, Israel is an ethnic democracy Because The Arab minority is extended citizenship and the non -citizen Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are not and do not want to be part of Israel. "

Diatchkova looks in their application of the model to Latvia the criteria of ethnic democracy but as a predominantly met. The problem of nationality fits their opinion into the model, and is not noisy Diatchkova ethnic nature. According Diatchkova So everyone can obtain citizenship, the language test historical, geographical and pass the. Thus, the ethnic minorities have the opportunity to become politically involved in the country, according to Diatchkova. An intermediate position is taken in this discourse Järve who claims in his discussion of Estonia, it was on the way to an ethnic democracy, or even a civilian democracy. Since the number of non - citizens (mostly Russian-speaking minority ) decreases steadily, the difference in the political rights of the inhabitants, and thus the basis for discrimination of marginalized groups disappears. All positions Smooha brings in his summing up:

" Järve 's account of Estonia and Latvia Diatchkova 's account of raise two issues: classification of the regime and future trends. Järve Claims did Estonia can already be viewed as to ethnic democracy for the one -seventh of its Russian - speaking population who are citizens. As the proportion of non -citizens (close to one- fifth of the total population in 2000) steadily drops, Estonia as a whole will increasingly qualify as to ethnic democracy. Less critical is Diatchkova who takes it for granted did Latvia is already on ethnic democracy. "

Malaysia

After 1970, Malaysia's original concordance democracy transformed to a restricted ethnic democracy. The Malay majority of the inhabitants became the core ethnic group with a clear dominance over the state apparatus. Malay was introduced as the official language and established Islam as the state religion, also enjoy members of the Malay ethnic group advantages in access to university facilities and offices, and often economic advantages over other ethnic groups. The Chinese and Indian minorities, however, still enjoy collective rights, cultural autonomy and able to enter into coalitions in parliament. The predominance of one ethnic group and the simultaneous Conceding collective and (restricted ) individual rights to the minorities are loud Smooha clear signs of an ethnic democracy.