| Description |
In Patterns of Democracy, Arend Lijphart (1999) not only contends that democratic institutions cluster in two distinct forms, but also that consensus democracies—when contrasted with majoritarian arrangements—are “kinder, gentler” types of institutional settings (Lijphart 1999: 301-302). the present article reveals that Lijphart’s two dimensional map of democracy, although applicable to established democracies, does not apply equally well to post-communist countries. Nevertheless, multivariate empirical verification reveals that some elements included in the consensus democracy framework should be introduced in new constitutions, but perhaps not as the monolithic cluster of basic laws of constitutions originally suggested by Lijphart. Hence the present study casts a shadow on the relevance of the majoritarian versus consensus classification of democratic regimes.
|
ICAR Research Data Repository for Knowledge Management