Dr. Nicole Gallina Einführung in die Politikwissenschaft Sitzung vom 16.11 und 23.11. Einige Bemerkungen zu NG 1

Politische Gewalt Beispiel Ted Gurr Politischer Wandel und politische Gewalt: Beispiel Ungarn (siehe Worddokument auf Gestens)

Was ist Demokratie? Definitionen Lauth: Demokratie ist verfassungsmässige Herrschaft, welche die Selbstbestimmung aller Bürger erlaubt, indem sie an freien und fairen Wahlen oder an politischen Entscheidungen (z.B. via Referendum) teilhaben können.

Typen von Demokratie Unterkategorien von Demokratie: z.B. direkte Demokratie (CH), parlamentarische Demokratie (D, IT, CZ, AT), (Semi-)Präsidialdemokratie (F, USA, PL). Auch hier müssen häufig Differenzierungen vorgenommen werden.

Samuel Huntington: Drei Demokratiewellen: 1. 1828-1926 2. 1943-1962 1974-1991 2011?

Demokratie nach Putin / Medvedev The official definition of democracy from the Kremlin is:   (1) The legal realization of humanitarian values and ideals, giving these values the practical force of law. (2) The ability of the state to ensure and support a high standard of technological development. (3) The ability of the state to defend its citizens from encroachment on the part of criminal societies. (4) A high level of culture, education, means of communication and exchange of information in the country. (5) The conviction of the citizenry that they live in a democratic state. Quelle: Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty: Defining Democracy Down

Krise der Demokratie? „Global freedom suffered its fifth consecutive year of decline in 2010, according to Freedom in the World 2011, Freedom House’s annual assessment of political rights and civil liberties around the world. This represents the longest continuous period of decline in the nearly 40-year history of the survey.” Ukraine and Mexico: “both fell from Free to Partly Free. Mexico’s downgrade was a result of the government’s inability to stem the tide of violence by drug-trafficking groups, while Ukraine suffered from deteriorating levels of press freedom, instances of election fraud, and growing politicization of the judiciary.” http://freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=70&release=1310 / 13. Januar 2011

Einteilungen für Regierungsformen Liberal Democracy Illiberal Democracy Authoritarian Regime Freedom House: Free Partly Free Not Free Gleichzeitig Klären: normativ, hermeneutisch…

Freedom House Beispiel/Versuch verschiedene Regime zu „messen“ Bürgerfreiheiten anhand der Menschenrechtserklärung (siehe http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=351&ana_page=363&year=2010) Einteilung von Freedom House: Liberale Demokratie = free Illiberale Demokratie = partly free Authoritarian Regime = not free Siehe auch Map of Freedom: http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=363&year=2011 Flashmap

Allgemeine Menschenrechtserklärung Fundamentale Rechte festgelegt, Vereinte Nationen, 10. Dezember 1948, siehe: http://www.un.org/depts/german/grunddok/ar217a3.html

Freedom House I: The survey does not rate governments or government performance per se, but rather the real-world rights and freedoms enjoyed by individuals. Thus, while Freedom House considers the presence of legal rights, it places a greater emphasis on whether these rights are implemented in practice. Furthermore, freedoms can be affected by government officials, as well as by nonstate actors, including insurgents and other armed groups.

Freedom House II: Freedom House does not maintain a culture-bound view of freedom. The methodology of the survey is grounded in basic standards of political rights and civil liberties, derived in large measure from relevant portions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These standards apply to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographical location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development. The survey operates from the assumption that freedom for all peoples is best achieved in liberal democratic societies.

Freedom House: Not Free Political Rights Score: 7 Civil Liberties Score: 7 The President of Turkmenistan Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov appeared more interested in diversifying his country’s natural gas exports in 2009 than in political and economic reforms at home. Progress away from the repressive legacy of former president Saparmurat Niyazov, who died in 2006, remained slow, producing token improvements rather than systemic change. http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&country=7938&year=2010 Beispiel für Führerkult: http://www.videoportal.sf.tv/video?id=da196157-f8da-460d-9e07-dfdfa0f2ff28

Freedom House: Partly Free Political Rights Score: 5 Civil Liberties Score: 4 Ratings Change Venezuela’s political rights rating declined from 4 to 5 due to the adoption of laws designed to further marginalize the political opposition, including provisions that were rejected by referendum voters in December 2007. In February 2009, referendum voters approved reforms backed by President Hugo Chavez Frias that abolished term limits for the presidency and other elected offices. Nevertheless, a weak economy, continued political polarization, and problems with the provision of key public services led to increased street protests during the year. Meanwhile, new laws threatened to further marginalize the political opposition, and tensions with Colombia increased the risk of armed conflict. http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=363&year=2010&country=7948

Freedom House: Free Political Rights Score: 1 Civil Liberties Score: 1 President Barack Obama’s first year in office was dominated by efforts to revive the economy and enact a series of sweeping domestic reforms. While the administration succeeded in passing a major spending package to stimulate the economy, other proposals—such as an overhaul of the country’s health insurance system—encountered significant obstacles in Congress. Also during the year, Obama made important changes to the counterterrorism programs inherited from his predecessor, George W. Bush, but he left many elements of previous policy in place. http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2010&country=7944

Was bedingt also free and partly free Liberal vs. Electoral democracy / Map Freedom in the World: http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=363&year=2011 Reports: Overview und Political Rights and Civil Liberties. Checklist: http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=351&ana_page=364&year=2010

Akademische Einteilungen Vanhanen: Wettbewerb und Partizipation http://books.google.ch/books?id=GIzbBYPo-LkC&pg=PA196&lpg=PA196&dq=einteilung+demokratie&source=bl&ots=wzR2lDls0i&sig=vTt3pa27u623cAeDpTwqYQTnKxg&hl=de&ei=2orLTuyfIKPd4QT-0b1C&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=einteilung%20demokratie&f=false Merkel: Defekte Demokratie http://user.phil-fak.uni-duesseldorf.de/~bandelow/Klede05.PDF Wichtig: Nicht eine Seitenlange Diskussion von Konzepten! Greifen Sie einen Punkt heraus: z.B. Eingeschränktes Wahlrecht (beispielsweise bei Merkel und Freedom House)

Vorgehen: Vorschlag Einleitung (1 Seite) Freedom House vs. Merkel --- Bsp. Was für Kategorien gibt es bei beiden (2-3 Seiten). (Wahlen, Parteien, Minderheiten) – sind die Konzepte gleich, oder was ist jeweils anders? Zwei Länder als Beispiel (nach Freedom House !) Länder: Können unterschiedliche Einteilungen und Regionen sein, besser aber gleiche, d.h., zwei Not Free oder zwei Partly Free, oder zwei Free). Ein (Unter)Punkt aus der Freedom House Checkliste auswählen! Warum ist das Land Not Free was beispielsweise Wahlen angeht? (je 1 Seite) Was sind die Unterschiede zwischen beiden? Oder ist das gleich? (2-3 Seiten) Abschlussdiskussion (1-2 Seiten) Literatur --------------------------Tipp: Konzentieren Sie sich auf einen aktuellen Zeitraum, letzte Wahlen und konsultieren Sie ausser Freedom House auch andere Literatur zum Thema.