The Principle of a Defensive Democracy in Action

Essay from the year 2014 in the subject Politics - General and Theories of International Politics, grade: 10 (System NL) = 1.0, Tilburg University, language: English, abstract: Democracy is defined as 'government by the people'. It grants equality and freedoms to all citizens and the fact that a stable democracy is one of the Copenhagen Criteria required by the EU from possible accession candidates shows the agreement and broad acceptance of democracy as the most just form of government we currently can think of. Democracy stands out through the freedom and the possibility to actively engage in politics which it grants to all citizens. But this generosity comes with a price: Besides fostering the political dialogue it also gives space and opportunity to extreme and even anti-democratic powers which might misuse their rights granted by the system to actually abolish the same. Do we have to accept this misuse as a side effect of democratic freedom or should we draw a line somewhere? Do we maybe even have a responsibility to protect our system? The struggle between a solution to effectively protect the democratic system from misusing powers and the danger to actually undermine it ourselves by limiting the personal freedoms and rights which are at the core of it, is centralized in the ongoing debate about the idea of a 'defensive democracy'. The question on how much freedom a democracy can bear and how much security it needs is no recent dispute and certainly a perpetual one. But with an eye on the current rise of right-wing parties in many European countries, the importance and pertinence of the discussion becomes clear. In this paper I want to depict the concept of 'defensive democracy' by comparing the examples of Germany and Turkey, both states with existing safety provisions in their constitutions. I will start with outlining the historical background of the current arrangements and a description of relevant cases of the past for each of them. I will furthermore compare the two approaches and finally end with a personal evaluation of the justification of bereaving individuals of their democratic freedoms in order to protect those rights for everyone else.