Eli is Democ acy o Libe al Democ acy?
Schumpe e Re isi ed
Fe an REQUEJO
Uni e si a Pompeu Fab a
Wo king Pape n.42
Ba celona 1991
The 1980's b ough abou a e i al o Poli ical Theo y, and wi hin
ha , o he Theo y o Democ acy. F om a ious di e en in e es s and
pe spec i es, desc ip i e and p esc ip i e ques ions ela ed o basic alues,
empi ical phenomena o he mos in luencial ac o s in he ansi ion owa ds
libe al democ a ic poli ical sys ems ha e been s udied wi h a enewed
emphasis. Ob iously, he collapse o he socialis s a es o Eas e n Eu ope
has ein o ced e en mo e he e-eme gence o he Theo y o Democ acy, up
o he poin we can say ha oday i has become one o he mos impo an
issues wi hin he ield o Poli ical Science.
Wi hou going in o me a heo e ical ques ions abou he easons ha ha e
caused his phenomenon -such as he eloca ion o he wel a e s a e since he
1970's, he de elopmen s o pa icula neo-ma xis heo ies, he li e a u e
conce ning neoco po a ism o poli ical pa ies and social mo emen s, he
in luence o se e al au ho s wi h a s ong e hical pe spec i e (Rawls,
Habe mas, Foucaul , e c.)-, in his pape I would like o highligh he
con enience o enewing he classic con as be ween he libe al ideas and
p ac ices wi h espec o democ a ic ideas and p ac ices wi hin he libe al
democ a ic pa adigm. Con enience ha has as much heo e ical meaning as
p ac ical, ha is o say, e e ing as much o he analy ical cla i ica ion and
accu acy o he main concep s and alues used by he di e en heo ies o
democ acy, as e e ing o he esul o empi ical poli ical p ocesses.
Wi h his objec i e in mind I will ake he wo k o Schumpe e as
"lei mo i " o he discussion o he Theo y o Democ acy. Almos i y yea s
a e he publica ion o Capi alism, Socialism and Democ acy (1942) his wo k
con inues o be a equi ed e e ence o he a o emen ioned heo y. Al hough i
is only conside ed as a highly in elligen "a e -dinne cha ", as Jon Els e
commen s ollowing Robbins (Els e 1983), i would con inue being a "classic"
a e -dinne cha , a leas when p esen ing some cul u al aspec s o he c isis
o capi alism o in analysing he limi s and possibili ies o he di e en heo ies
o Democ acy.
In Schumpe e 's wo k we a e in e es ed abo e all in wo cen al
ideas: he heo y ha capi alism has s uc u al componen s ha make i he
ic im o i s own success, and his no ion o "ano he heo y" o Democ acy,
mo e ecen ly i led in di e en ways -compe i i e heo y, economic o eli is
heo y, e c.- and i s con aposi ion o a supposed "classical doc ine" o
Democ acy.
In he i s sec ion o his pape I will e e o he ques ion o whe he
he schumpe e ian analysis commi s o no some allacies in i s a gumen s,
such as he allacy pa s p o o o in ela ion o no ions o capi alism and
mode niza ion, he allacy o he has y gene aliza ion, o wha we can desc ibe
as he allacy o abs ac ion: a heo e ical a i ude implici in some o he
poli ical philosophical s udies. A he same ime, I will ques ion e y b ie ly he
Schumpe e ian no ion o socialism.
In he second sec ion we will discuss, on he one hand, whe he he
con as alluded o be ween he "classical" and he "o he " heo y o
Democ acy is cu en ly adequa e. I will highligh his con as om he
webe ian pe spec i e o poli ical heo y connec ed wi h he concep ions o
Schumpe e . On he o he hand, I would like o e e o he con enience o
p esen ing p esen day libe al democ acies as his o ical p oduc s in which
he e a e h ee dis inc dimensions, each one endowed wi h an au onomous
logic in con as o he o he s.
I. CAPITALISM, MODERNIZATION AND DISCOURSE FALLACIES
Wi hin he a ea o social sciences, as well as poli ical philosophy,
h ee dis inc allacies o en appea in he a gumen s: he classic allacies pa s
p o o o and he has y gene aliza ion, and wha we cha ac e ise as he allacy
o abs ac ion.
By allacy pa s p o o o we unde s and an a gumen ha a ibu es
exclusi e esponsibili y o some consequences o he somewha complex
economic o social phenomena, o example capi alism, which in eali y,
howe e , a e sha ed wi h o he phenomena o he same kind, socialism o
example. Tha is o say, o unde s and one pa o a gene al phenomena as i
i is he whole.
The second allacy, o i s pa , consis s o he in e ence o a
gene aliza ion ha is oo excessi e, o ounded on a e y small sample. Bo h
allacies a e s udied in he a ea o classical logic (1).
Finally, he allacy o abs ac ion e e s o he supposi ion, explici o
implici , ha a heo y possesses a g ea e explana o y powe acco ding o he
deg ee o abs ac ion o he ca ego ies used in i s analysis, wi hou e e ing o
he eal empi ical wo ld in mo e han an in ui i e o impo e ished mode. I is a
mo e gene al allacy han he p e ious ones because i e e s o he
explana ion claims o he discussion and no o a pa icula a gumen wi hin i .
In he poli ical ield i is a cha ac e is ic ha a ec s abo e all he analyses
p oduced by he philosophical adi ion (Foucaul 's wo k abou "powe " is
possibly a ecen example o his. McCa hy 1990).
Benjamin Ba be w i es:
"Whe e poli ical science a oided poli ics wi hou achie ing
science, poli ical philosophy a oids poli ics by achie ing
philosophy" (Ba be 1988:5)
We can b ie ly see now i we can a ibu e o no hese allacies o
Schumpe e when he analyzes some o he “cul u al con adic ions o
capi alism", con adic ions which imply i s u u e subs i u ion by a Socialis
economic o ganiza ion (I.1). Subsequen ly, we no e one b ie conside a ion
abou he concep o Socialism used by Schumpe e (1.2).
(I.1)
Schumpe e 's e lec ions abou " he cul u al con adic ions o
capi alism" ha e a ce ain connec ion wi h he la e wo k o D. Bell. The
e olu ion o his economic sys em would ha e b ough wi h i he up u e o
ce ain elemen s ha we e he o igin o i s e iciency and s abili y. In his way,
a kind o ancien g eek hyb is would ha e been p oduced, an excess ha
would unde mine he agen s o con ol, hose ha ac as he soph osyne o he
sys em (2).
Bu Schumpe e is basically an economis . He does no p oduce any
syn hesis o a sociocul u al na u e, conce ning he p ocess o mode niza ion o
Wes e n socie ies, bu he limi s himsel o ema king some o he
consequences o he "obse able endencies" in he economic sys em o he
p ocess. Ou in en ion in his sec ion is o commen he equi ocal use ha is
made o he e m "capi alism", some imes unde s ood in i s s ic economic
sense and some imes in a much wide cul u al sense nea e o wha Webe
unde s ands by mode niza ion. This use should no be c i isized in i sel bu i
can easily lead o e oneous conclusions. In o de o discuss his ques ion i
would be use ul o de e mine wo b ie cha ac e iza ions, mo e han de ini ions,
o wha we unde s and by capi alism and mode niza ion.
By capi alism we unde s and an economic sys em based on he
p oduc ion o indi iduals, g oups o o ganiza ions o a ma ke in o de o
ob ain bene i s (Be ge 1986). Mo e han "p ope y", whose legal and poli ical
egula ion has subs an ially changed om he beginning o he libe al e a, he
main ai o his sys em is, hen, he exis ence o an e ec i e ma ke .
Mode niza ion is a mo e comp ehensi e concep and hus mo e
di icul o cha ac e ize wi hou c ea ing ambigui ies. In a gene al sense, i
consis s in a p ocess ollowed by Wes e n socie ies in he las wo cen u ies, in
which he e ha e been p oduced mul idimensional a icula ions and causal
in e ela ions be ween, a leas , ou di e en a eas: economic g ow h
unknown up o hen, he ins i u ionaliza ion o poli ical and legal p ocesses ha
ha e as a basic co e he o ganiza ional p inciples o poli ical libe alism, he
cul u al changes associa ed wi h he de elopmen o he illus a ed concep o
eason, and, abo e all, he echnological e olu ion a he hea o he
p ocesses o indus ializa ion. Thus one is dealing wi h a complex
phenomenon o g ea ex en , and ha in s ic sense a ec s only some o he
coun ies o he wo ld linked o he Eu opean cul u al adi ion.
Cha ac e ising bo h e ms in his sense, capi alism, as an economic
sys em, is one pa o mode niza ion. Bu he e could also be mode niza ion
wi h o he economic o ganiza ions in socie y (e.g. socialism). And om a
linguis ic poin o iew, we can conclude ha no all wha is ela ed o he
global phenomena can be ela ed o each o i s componen s. No ice e sa.
The analysis o social sciences can delimi hose phenomena ha mus be
associa ed o he global p ocess as an a icula ed his o ical p oduc
(mode niza ion), and hose which mus be associa ed o one o i s componen s
(capi alism). To a ibu e o he la e he esponsibili y o a phenomena ha
ac ually co esponds o he o me would be o all in o he pa s p o o o
allacy. (This is wha a ious Ma xis s schools, o example, ha e o en done
when hey ha e associa ed indi idualism, social anomie, o e i o ial
imbalance o he capi alis mode o p oduc ion, wi hou conside ing, howe e ,
he possible ela ion o hese phenomena o socialism).
In Schumpe e 's a gumen s abou capi alism and i s e olu ion we
ind his allacy, and on occasions, unning he isk o in e ing excessi e
ex apola ions abou he u u e o capi alism -o abou he absence o i s
u u e- om wha he conside s i s "obse able endencies". Wi hou a emp ing
o be exhaus i e, and a oiding s ic economic science a gumen s, some o
he aspec s ha , acco ding o Schumpe e , a ec he "cul u al con adic ions o
capi alism" a e:
1) The P ocess o C ea i e Des uc ion. Capi alism canno be
s a iona y. I e olu ionizes he economic s uc u e " om wi hin", des oying
wha wen be o e h ough a p ocess o compe i ion ha a ec s cos s as much
as quali y. C ea i i y in consume goods, me hods o anspo , o p oduc ion,
sys ems o o ganiza ion, sea ch o ma ke s and echnology. I is a p ocess
ha unde mines adi ional suppo s exis ing a a gi en momen , weakening i s
own sys em. Mo eo e , capi alism de i alizes he idea o "p ope y" ( he
exis ence o g ea and small sha eholde s).
II) Ra ionali y. Capi alism encou ages a ionali y in beha iou .
Ra ionali y in ol es, on he one hand, he "maximiza ion" o pa icula in e es s

o indi iduals and g oups, he use o he ins umen al means in a cohe en
o m, and in he same way a se ies o eadap a ions empi ically con olled by a
p ocedu e o lawed- es ing. On he o he hand, a ionaliza ion ushes in o bo h
p i a e li e and cul u al o ms. Child en a e no now economic asse s,
hedonism and consump ion ha e subs i u ed sa ing and he p e ious "wo ldly
asce ism" (Webe ). Consump ion wins agains accumula ion, diminishing he
desi eabili y o incomes abo e a ce ain le el.
A he same ime, howe e , when he b eaks o ce ain alues
associa ed wi h e hical o eligious adi ion ail ( he soph osyne), i a ional
componen s o beha iou ha a e c i ical o capi alism eme ge and can no be
e u ed wi h a ional a gumen s, especially when based on long e m
conside a ions.
III) The Obsolescence o he En ep eneu ial Func ion. Inc easing
di icul ies o he classical unc ion o managemen . Inc easing impo ance o
specialized g oups. The con ex , mo eo e , has been accus omed o change
and each ime a g ea e numbe o ac o s a e calculable. The success o
business ends up in emo ing he owne s.
IV) P o ec ing S a a. In he mode n e a he e was a symbiosis
be ween he nobili y and he p oduc i e sec o s. The o me occupied he
S a e o ganiza ion, guided poli ical decisions and supplied o icials o he
a my ( he bou geoisie was only some imes in cha ge o local adminis a ion). I
was a sec o ha su i ed he social and echnical condi ions ha p oduced i .
In conclusion: he bou geoisie is poli ically de enceless wi hou he p o ec ion
o non-bou geoisie sec o s, bu capi alism, howe e , encou ages he b eaking
up o he p ecapi alis amewo k o socie y.
V) In ellec uals. Cha ac e ized as hose who exe cise he powe o
he spoken and w i en wo d, hey a e used o no ha ing any di ec
esponsibili y in p ac ical ma e s and hus, hey lack a di ec knowledge o
expe ience. They encou age sel -concei ed a i udes as "c i ical", mo e om a
logic o opposi ion, we could say, han om a logic o go e nmen (Simila o
he ole o he demagogues in he A henian Assembly a he end o V C.b.C.).
The e exis s a pa allel be ween educa ion and he scale o mo al alues in he
in ellec ual sec o s and he adminis a i e o bu eauc a ic sec o s agains he
alues and echnical c i e ia o he economic sys em as i ope a es.
In Schumpe e 's wo k hese i e a gumen s suppo ing he concep
o he p ocess o sel -des uc ion o capi alism a e pu in he shadow o he
easible subs i u ion by socialism. P esumibly, he same phenomena would
ha e been ea ed in a di e en way i one con empla ed he eali y o
"emp iness", ha Schumpe e ejec s, o i one main ained ha he e was no
o he al e na i e o capi alism han capi alism i sel . In his las case, o
example, he p ocess o C ea i e Des uc ion could ans o m a handicap in o
a i ue. I wha is changed is he ype o capi alism mo e han he ype o
economic sys em he ques ion would no consis so much in seeing whe he
his p ocess occu s, bu in seeing o wha poin i is capable o inding
ins umen s o adap o social eali y. And i seems beyond all easonable
doub ha capi alis sys ems ind hese ins umen s mo e easily han socialis
sys ems do. To sum up, he nega ion o a pa icula ype o capi alism does
no imply he nega ion o capi alism as a sys em. He e Schumpe e 's
a gumen s all in o he allacy o has y gene aliza ion.
On he one hand, i also seems a li le pa ial o main ain ha i is
capi alism which p omo es " a ionali y" in beha iou . Ra he i is an a i ude
linked o mode niza ion and i s echnical componen s, whose consequences
mus be seen wi hin he inhe en ambigui ies ha mode niza ion p esen s om
an emancipa o y poin o iew. I is unde s ood ha he mo al alues ha
in luence a p ocess o emancipa ion unde mine a he same ime he ideas
and alues ha ensu ed sociopoli ical s abili y. (Some hing simila happened
in he p ocess o A henian "Enligh enmen " in he V C.b.C.). Bu cu en ly his
is a phenomenon ela ed mo e o pos mode ni y han o pos capi alism.
On he o he hand, om he c isis o he g ea ideologies ha
claimed o ha e global explana ions o social eali y, and o he app op ia e
he apies o i s main p oblems, we can ag ee ha oday we ind ou sel es
imme sed in a new p ocess o indi idualiza ion. We know ha he i s mode n
Enligh enmen subs i u ed eligious ai h wi h ano he ai h, he ai h o eason
(scien i ic, his o ical, poli ical, e c.), bu in he second hal o he p esen
cen u y we a e wi nessing ano he u n o he sc ew in his p ocess. The e
cu en ly exis s g ea e e hical au onomy -and, hus, a g ea e diso ien a ion-
wi h espec o he secula guidelines o ha i s mode n emancipa ing
mo emen . Today he indi idual no longe has o conside a aining a li e a e
dea h bu nei he does he see a no ma i e e hic ahead ha ies o assis in
he ad en o some “new man" (o wha e e ype).
In his way, he allacy pa s p o o o glides cons an ly in he
Schumpe e ian a gumen s abou a ionaliza ion, conside ing i in i s echnical
meaning as well as e hical. Howe e , he a en ion he pays o he
ex a- a ional componen s o beha iou esul s in a good an ido e o he isks
o he use o he allacy o abs ac ion o emind us ha hese componen s can
be balanced wi h di icul y h ough a ional a gumen s. I should be added ha
hose pe iods in which he e ec i i y o hese ideas and alues ha “cemen "
sociopoli ical o ganiza ion con inue o be ques ioned. Tha is o say, in hose
pe iods in which cul u al con adic ions o he p esen sys em appea .
Some hing simila could be said o he analysis o he en ep eneu ial
unc ion p esen ed by Schumpe e . The capi alis e olu ion has e ec i ely
dislodged a kind o "old" manage in some p oduc i e sec o s. Howe e ,
Schumpe e 's conclusion esul s in an excessi ely wide applica ion. Mo e han
acing he allacy o pa s p o o o we a e acing a has y gene aliza ion o an
"in ui i e" cha ac e , based on li le e idence. I is a unc ional e-adap a ion
a he han a decline.
Ano he alid in ui ion o Schumpe e (bu again he goes beyond
wha seems concep ually and empi ically easonable) is ha o seeing which
di e ences be ween libe al logic, on he one hand, and democ a ic and social
logic on he o he , in capi alism's ela ions wi h he adi ional p o ec ing s a a,
in ellec uals and Adminis a ion. Indeed, nei he bu eauc acies no in ellec uals
(in a g ea e sense) a e p esided o e by he logic o he i s economic
libe alism, which unde s ood he social coexis ence om he indi idualis
pe spec i e o p i a e p ope y and eedom o he ma ke and which
ad oca ed, mo eo e , a ha mony be ween p i a e in e es s and gene al
wel a e. I is unde s ood ha social pe spec i e uni es he ollowe s o
ideologically e y di e en posi ions, such as Conse a i es and Socialis s, in
he c i icism o he p ac ical consequences o he capi alis p ocess as pu
o wa d by libe al p emises. Howe e , also in e e ence o his poin , he
Scumpe e ian conclusions appea a he e y leas exagge a ed, i no
un ocused. One hing o be said is ha in ellec ual logic is simila o he classic
demagogue ( o example, ha o he A henian Clio in he Wa o he
Peloponesus na a ed by Thucydides), his logic being based on he
maximiza ion o speci ic alues and in e es s wi hou conside ing any c i e ia
o echnical applica ion and p ac ical incompa ibili y o o he alues and c i e ia
ha a e also desi able. And ano he hing one can conclude is ha
in ellec uals mus necessa ily unde mine he basis o he economic sys em
(Al hough many o he in ellec uals ind hemsel es wo king ou side he ambi
o he ma ke , o example in public Adminis a ion, a posi ion ha acili a es
hei abili y o p esen hemsel es as de ende s o he "public in e es "). In
wha e e case, his is a ques ion ha mus be emi ed o de ailed s udies o
an empi ical na u e like hose ha ha e been ca ied ou in ela ion o
decision-making p ocesses and implemen a ion o public policies du ing he
1980s (3).
To sum up, in Schumpe e 's a gumen s we obse e he exis ence o
he pa s p o o o allacy in ela ion o he p ocesses o a ionaliza ion and
des uc ion o p o ec ing s a a, while in he analysis o he p ocess o "c ea i e
des uc ion", o he obsolescence o he en ep eneu ial unc ion and he ole
o he "in ellec uals" and he bu eauc acy, he allacy o he has y
gene aliza ion is p esen .
Anyway, i is impo an o emembe ha Schumpe e 's a gumen s
abou capi alism do no acili a e he easoning ha we ha e cha ac e ized as
allacy o abs ac ion, wi h he possible excep ion o some aspec s o he
p ocess o c ea i e des uc ion. When he deals wi h economic o cul u al
ques ions his concep ion possesses a clea me hodological oca ion ha
connec s i wi h he empi ical wo ld. His ca ego ies a e no inclined o
o e - heo ising on e hical o philosophical e ms ha y o be mo e
explana o y as well as mo e abs ac , and which, lacking empi ical and
p ac ical sense in many cases cause i o ha e p ac ically no in o ma i e
alue. Schumpe e 's wo k implici ly claims he c i e ia o Poppe ian alsabili y
in o de ha some o i s cen al heses can be e u ed (as has happened on
a ious occasions).
The ollowing able is a summa y e iew o Schumpe e 's a gumen s:
Table1
(1.2)
F om Schumpe e 's e lec ions abou socialism we only wan o no e
he e wo aspec s and a inal conside a ion. Fi s ly, he ine i able
o e - heo ising ha his "in ui ions" ca y abou he supposed sys emic
in eg a ion and social in eg a ion o he socialis economic o ganiza ion. I
would seem ha once a ce ain le el o indus ial de elopmen is achie ed and
once he inhe en p oblems o he pe iod o ansi ion a e o e come he
alleged economic e iciency o socialism and i s g ea e le el o unc ional
a ionali y would be imposed by a ype o immanen logic o he his o ical
e olu ion. The sudden ups and downs o capi alism could be a oided, he
cen al planning would comple e he p ocess o he manage ial concen a ion
o he g ea p oduc i e uni s, i would no longe be acing he con adic ions
be ween he public and p i a e ields, e c.
Mo eo e i would hope ully, acco ding o Schumpe e , esul in a
g ea e e hical loyal y on behal o he ci izens and he in ellec uals han in he
p e ious p oduc i e sys em (4). The hegemonic eli es would ha e a g ea e
numbe o ins umen s wi h which o ca y ou policies o an au ho i a ian s yle
and o " a ionalize" he in es men s o p i a e sa ings, and e en Schumpe e
does no concei e g ea di icul ies a he ime o inse ing elemen s o a
bou geois o igin -as indi idual ini ia i e- in socialis bu eauc acy. This
bu eauc acy is concei ed, howe e , as an eno mous and ine i able
no ma i e han anali ical posi ion. C. Pa eman 1970) (8).
Schumpe e ejec s he "e hicis " p e ensions o he classic heo y o
democ acy, bu he con inues o alk abou a con as be ween he classic
democ acy and a compe i i e and ep esen a i e democ acy. This makes
possible he in e p e a ion o he la e as an "impe ec " democ acy, because i
does no allow an e ec i e pa icipa ion o he ci izens in he decisions in
which hey a e in ol ed. Acco ding o he p elibe al ousseaunian e sion o
he classic concep ion, he ac ha ci izens a e ou side o he decisional
p ocesses has o be based only on echnical conside a ions, bu no on he
libe al app oach o he con enien independence o he poli ical eli es espec
o he ci izens (o he cons i uen s).
On he g ounds o his law in Schumpe e 's heo y can ind he
opposi e posi ion - e y widesp ead bu , acco ding o my iew, e oneous
his o ically and concep ually-be ween a "di ec democ acy" and a
" ep esen a i e (o indi ec ) democ acy", bo h p esen ed as wo di e en
e sions o he same class o poli ical o ganiza ion.
In ac , he hea o he wes e n poli ical o ganiza ions has no been
democ a ic bu libe al du ing he las wo cen u ies. The ep esen a i e
go e nmen , which has g own om poli ical libe alism, does no cons i u e and
"indi ec " o “impe ec " o m o he "sel -go e nmen o he people”. E en
ecen ly when some democ a ic elemen s (uni e sal su age igh s o
associa ion pa ies o masses e c.) ha e been g a ed on i s o ganiza ional
p inciples he ins i u ional and decisional logic o he ep esen a i e
go e nmen con inues o be ex emely di e en om a poli ical sys em based
on a so-called "popula -will". In his poin he Madison's lucidi y -in hinking o
he ep esen a i e go e nmen as some hing ex emely di e en and mo e
desi able han democ acy (Fede alis 10)- seems clea e and concep ually
be e han Schumpe e 's app oach.
(11.2)
F om he o egoing, I belie e i is con enien o e u n o he mo e
"classic" compa ison be ween a p elibe al and a libe al heo y o democ acy as
wo dis inc pa adigms (in a Kuhnian sense) in which di e en p og ammes o
esea ch (in a Laka os sense) a e de eloped (9).
Na u ally, he poli ical, economic, and cul u al con ex o p esen day
democ acies is e y di e en om ha o he pe iod o Cons an and
Tocque ille. Howe e , he powe ul idea o he dis inc ion be ween ancien and

mode n libe y con inues o be one o he basic c i e ia o dema ca ion o he
pa adigms o democ acy (10). B ie ly, and as has been no ed many imes,
om he dis inc no ion o libe y ha we adop we ob ain di e en democ acies
(Be lin 1988, Sa o i 1987, Bobbio 1984).
Di e en e hical dimensions wi hin libe al democ acies
I is in his way ha cu en libe al democ acies can be unde s ood
as his o ical p oduc s o an equilib ium be ween a ious au onomous
dimensions o componen s: libe al, s ic ly democ a ic, and social dimensions
ha a e ound con olled by di e en kinds o logic bu whose a icula ion has
demons a ed a pa icula s abili y in he empi ical sphe e. (This a gumen
inds i sel a emo ed om he p elibe al heo y o democ acy which does no
dis inguish be ween hese componen s and i s di e en in e nal logic). This
a icula ion has been p oduced howe e om he libe al co e o he
o ganiza ion o poli ical powe (nega i e libe ies, sepa a ion o powe s,
p inciple o legali y, e c.). And i is om his libe al co e ha we can unde s and
he possibili ies and bounda ies o democ acies ha assume his as hei main
o ganiza ional basis.
In he same way ha he i s poli ical libe alism was non-
democ a ic, e en an i-democ a ic, he logic o he posi i e libe ies o he
democ a ic dimension based s ic ly on he alues o equali y and ci izen
pa icipa ion is o eign o libe al p inciples. Nei he nega i e libe y no
sepa a ion o powe s no he p inciple o legali y a e in a s ic sense aspec s
o he democ a ic a i ude. (Fo example, he ac ha ci izens ha e o ely on
p o ec i e measu es wi h espec o wha social majo i ies can decide in a
pa icula momen is a equi emen ha pe ains o he libe al dimension and
ha is, howe e , o eign o he s ic democ a ic dimension).
So, we can s a e ha libe al democ acies ha e no oca ion o
become poli ical democ acies, ha is o say, sys ems ha y o maximize hei
s ic ly democ a ic dimension. Libe al democ acy is a he es ablished as an
al e na i e sys em o all he o he a emp s o cons uc a " ue poli ical
democ acy". And i is based on he a icula ion -his o ically and empi ically ull
o ensions- be ween di e en kinds o logic (ini ially be ween wo unique ypes
o logic, he libe al and he democ a ic). And we mus b ing ou sel es back o
he p ac ical g ound o see how he alues and ules o bo h dimensions a e
going o a icula e hemsel es in such a way ha nei he cancels ou he o he
(11).
And he e Schumpe e eappea s. As well as he libe al democ acies
o he indus ialized coun ies canno p e en hemsel es om being eli is and
compe i i e. Because o his Schumpe e is co ec in c i icizing he “classical
doc ine" unde s ood as a democ a ic heo y o a non-libe al na u e. Tha is o
say, as a heo y based on he alues and o ganiza ional p inciples o he
s ic ly democ a ic dimension and which lea es aside he libe al pe spec i e.
Some hing simila happens when he libe al and democ a ic
dimensions agg ega e hemsel es in o a new dimension, he social (abo e all
in he pos wa pe iod). Al hough mo e ela ed o he democ a ic dimension
han o he libe al, he social componen is endowed wi h an au onomous logic
i educible om he la e wo (Requejo 1990). I ep esen s he hi d elemen
o he p esen concep o ci izenship in Eu opean libe al democ acies
(Ba bale 1988) and a new s ep in he p ocess o mode niza ion o Wes e n
socie ies. Based on he alues o socioeconomic equali y secu i y associa ed
wi h he di use concep o wel a e i is, as is unde s ood, one componen
whose ins i u ional o igins can be ound in he ac ions o ce ain Eu opean
s a es du ing he las yea s o he XIX cen u y, s a es ha did no ely on a eal
libe al o ganiza ion (Ge many). Bu i is, a he same ime, he key dimension
o he con empo a y socialis adi ion. And om bo h pe spec i es, his
dimension in ades he o ganiza ion p inciples o libe al democ acies.
To ma k he au onomy o he social dimension wi h espec o he
libe al and s ic ly democ a ic dimensions means ha such non social aspec s
o he i s libe al democ acies and he non libe al democ a ic aspec s o he
social componen should be conside ed (O e-P euss 1989). And i also
means conside ing he di icul y o inding an op imum o he h ee basic
e hical dimensions in he speci ic policies as a s uc u al handicap. None o
hese dimensions can be ound maximized.
Facing his mul idimensionali y we can see, on he one hand, how in
he a ea o poli ical science in he pos -wa pe iod he adi ional plu alis
models did no pick up his dimension p o oundly. On he o he hand, in he
empi ical ield one canno deny he poli ical incidence o he con using
language o he non-libe al concep ions o democ acy, especially in an
au ho i a ian con ex ha ies o impose a libe al democ a ic sys em. As is
es ablished in he classical s udy coo dina ed by O'Donnell, Schmi e and
Whi ehead, he claim o maximizing he di e en componen s wo ks owa ds
he b eakdown o an au ho i a ian sys em e en i subsequen ly i wo ks in
a ou o an ine i able "desencan o" (Schmi e -O'Donnell 1986) (12).
The no ma i e e hical basis o he componen s o Wes e n libe al
democ acies can be exp essed in he ollowing way (13):
Table2
Conside a ion o libe al democ acies as a his o ical p oduc based on
h ee dis inc componen s, which p esen ly need each o he bu espond o
di e en p emises and no ma i e in e es s, seems con enien when we
analyse bo h he desc ip i e and p esc ip i e aspec s o he e-loca ion o
Wes e n wel a e s a es since he 1970s (14). The g owing in e na ionaliza ion
o decision-making p ocesses, he incidence o new echnologies, he
necessa y adap a ion o public in e en ion in ma ke mechanisms, he
eme gence o mo e "mic o" in e en ions in compa ison wi h he pe iod o
pos -wa expansion (1950-1975), he new dis ibu i e c i e ia, he policies o
mone a ism and es uc u ing ine icien p oduc i e sec o s, he changes in he
p ocesses o a ionaliza ion o public adminis a ions, e c, in Schumpe e 's
pe spec i e, un he isk o being analysed only as "no ma i e" ques ions o a
echnical na u e wi hin he main p og ammes o esea ch o p esen day
poli ical science (plu alis , eli is , "new igh ", coope a is , e c) lea ing aside he
no ma i e aspec s o a mo e e hical na u e.
Unde s anding ambigui ies
Specially om he 1980s, he s a e can no longe be seen as he
only a ional decision-make . The Webe ian a ionali y seems o ha e dilu ed a
complexi y in which he adminis a i e eli es canno be conside ed as playing a
subo dina e and passi e ole. Today he e a e mo e p oblems o sol e, mo e
a iables o conside , a g ea e numbe o p i a e and adminis a i e le els
in ol ed, a g ea e accele a ion in decision-making and i is mo e di icul o
es ablish a a pa icula ime wha he "public in e es " means. A e he
eme gence o hese phenomena i is di icul no o accep ha he p ac ical
p ocesses o poli ical decision-making a e mo e hidden and au onomous han
wha he adi ional he o ic o libe al democ a ic s a es used o accep (o he
plu alis "p og am o esea ch" o he 1950s and 1960s). And his changes he
meaning o he concep o a ionali y e en when one ques ions, om di e en
pe spec i es, ha i s concep has emained apped in i s echnoc a ic aspec .
I seems con enien no o sepa a e i om his sense when we alk o
emancipa i e o "communica i e" a ionali ies (Habe mas 1981), i we do no
wish o emain apped in he con a y pe spec i e, ha is, he one ha ies o
claim an e hical a ionali y conside ed in di ec con as o he echnoc a ic o
ins umen al a ionali y.
In my iew, poli ical science and in pa icula he policy analysis will
ha e o show in he 1990s he use ul sense o a concep o e hical a ionali y
buil om (in s ead o being in con as o) he ins umen al a ionali y. As well
as wha happened wi h he democ a ic ambigui y o he g owing p ocess o
bu eauc a iza ion -an ambigui y ha made his p ocess a imes an obs acle o
he democ a iza ion p ocess and an essen ial condi ion o he ex ension o he
"democ a iza ion" wel a e policies'-, he p ocess o g owing echnoc a ic
conside a ion also possesses simila ambigui ies in ela ion o some poli ical
sys ems ha a emp o a icula e he libe al, democ a ic and social
componen s in he mos cohe en s uc u e possible.
Schumpe e 's heo y encou ages o jump o conclusions abou he
a ional cha ac e o he e hical alues (in spi e o he e hical backg ound o his
own concep ion). The ecen eme gence o poli ical heo ies wi h a s ong
no ma i e componen -especially since Rawls's wo k- seems o e u e ha
conclusion. Howe e , I hink i con inues o be an impo an poin o e e ence
a he momen o unde s and he ambigui ies o he "e hical" and " unc ional"
shadows ha wha e e poli ical p ac ice a e ca ied away (uni e sal su age
appeals o sel ish mo i es, pa icipa ion appeals o manipula ion, e c).
These ambigui ies and shadows o be ma ginalised, o ins ance, by
he con empo a y e hics o communica ion, in spi e o i s sensi i i y owa ds
p agma ic conside a ions and he accep ance o dissension. This app oach
used o pick up mo e he linguis ic aspec o p agma ism han he poli ical
aspec (Apel 1988). This app oach leads o he a emp o each an impossible
syn hesis be ween he classic democ acy and he "o he democ acy" which
Schumpe e was hinking abou . Following he communica i e line we can only
a i e a he claim o a “pa icipa o y" democ acy, in con as wi h he desi able
bounda ies o libe al democ acies.
F om my poin o iew, he ques ion is o ind legi ima e c i e ia in
libe al democ acies om bo h, deon ological and consequen ialis , bu wi h an
explici conside a ion o he bounda ies imposed on he ins umen al
a ionali y. In his poin I hink ha Rawls goes u he han Apel and Habe mas
(15).
I is he same concep o he ule o law ha mus be econside ed in
he1990s (Gau hie 1990). E en i we assume he concep o be an "ideal
ype", he changes in he social condi ions eloca e he e ec i e limi s and
possibili ies o his "ideal ype", especially om he in asion o he social
dimension in he s uc u es and decision-making p oceses o libe al
democ acies. Bu while he libe al co e is main ained in he ule o law I do no
hink ha we a e jus i ied in supposing ha he pa adigm has changed, despi e
he e o s o he co po a is s and pa icipa ionis s.
Technoc a ic and bu eauc a ic p ocesses ha e consolida ed he
au onomy o s a e in ela ion o socie y and o he decision-make s wi h ega d
o ep esen a i e poli ics. And hese p ocesses ha e ep esen ed some clea
limi s o he expansion o he s ic democ a ic dimension wi hin libe al
democ acies and o he possibili ies o i s e ec i e e o m (Dahl 1982), as
Schumpe e al eady suspec ed. To alk, o example, o "economic
democ acy" as a key aspec o he ho ough de elopmen o democ acy is
some hing esidual in he cu en p ac ice o libe al democ acies. In wha e e
case i is some hing ha emains dis an om any al e na i e o hese
democ acies (Adamson 1990) (16). Bu a he same ime, he inco po a ion o
he social dimension has ein o ced he p ac ical uses o he con empo a y
ule o law.
The knowledge ha we ha e abou he new decision-making
p ocesses is no e y p ecise. Nei he is ou knowledge o he poli ical impac
o new echnology no o go e nmen agencies and he o ganiza ions o
in e es s. Bu ou knowledge o possible a icula ions be ween e hical
no ma i e alues and p inciples and echnical c i e ia is smalle s ill.
Some imes bo h ha e been ea ed, in ui i ely, as wo sepa a ed eali ies,
e en con adic o y, wi h no connec ion (Lozano 1990). As i a e c i icizing he
Webe ian app oaches we mus ine i ably go back o hem (17).
Poli ical heo y is eadap ing i sel o he pe iod o cul u al
"pos mode ni y" a he end o his cen u y. We a e wi nessing he
agmen a ion o a ionali ies which does no seem con adic o y, howe e , o a
mo e comp ehensi e in e disciplina y discussion. Libe al democ acies a e
necessa y and pa adoxically ins umen al ends. And i is he pe manen
p essu e in he p ocess o compa ibili y o measu es and objec i es which
con e he mos open cha ac e o he e o m o hese democ acies. I seems
ha we mus look o he ou come o libe al democ acies wi hin hemsel es.
And in his sense, i seems con enien o a oid he ealiza ion o u opian
models o an e hical na u e which do no e lec i s ope a i e applicabili y as
well as a esigned a i ude which explains e e y hing in e ms o he " a ionali y
o he sys em". (And i would be a eme i y o conside libe al democ acies as
some hing i e e sible -a leas in he Sou he n Eu opean coun ies in a
his o ical ime when hei echnological de elopmen could mean he
inexis ence o second oppo uni ies).
Schumpe e 's wo k cons i u es an in i a ion o wo k wi h g ea e
empi ical accu acy bu wi hou enouncing o a poli ical heo y ha is as
comp ehensi e as possible. And I hink ha in o de o upda e he no ma i e
-e hical and echnical- ounda ion o libe al democ acies i would be
con enien o keep he Schumpe e ian " one" o his "a e -dinne cha ".

Table1
Table2
NOTES
(1) A igo ous and eadable in oduc ion o he analysis o logic, whose i s pa is w i en in
he s yle o a h ille wi h She lock Holmes as he main cha ac e , Neble 1985.
(2) I is unde s ood ha in ancien G eece he concep o hyb is (excess) e ol ed om being
associa ed wi h he demos du ing he Home ic pe iod un il i was associa ed wi h he
concep o " y anny" in he ollowing cen u ies. Fo i s pa , he soph osyne was an ideal o
a ional measu emen o sel -con ol, as opposed o he hyb is, which in he poli ical sphe e
was exp essed in he cons i u ion o Solon (594 B.C.). A Cons i u ion ha was he i s o
se e al e o ms which ended in he poli ical sys em o Cleis henes, Ephial es and Pe icles,
called demok a ia by He odi us.
(3) In hese s udies i has been no ed, o example, he con enience o in oducing changes in
public bu eauc acies in o de o ans o m he adi ional adminis a i e model in o one
which encou ages he ollowing c i e ia: 1) igo in o mula ing and implemen ing policies
and con ol o he esul s ob ained; 2) lexibili y in he in e nal o ganiza ion which allows he
maximiza ion o ini ia i e and he i “en ep eneu ial spi i " in le els o adminis a ion; 3)
abili y o lea n om si ua ions which change mo e and mo e apidly. All his ends in he
in oduc ion o manage ial c i e ia in o he conduc o public bu eauc acies, a ques ion ha
lea es us a om Schumpe e 's posi ion o wo almos i econcilable wo lds. A i s
e alua ion o he c i e ia in oduced in adminis a ion in Wes e n coun ies du ing he
1980s, in he Re ue F ançaise d'Adminis a ion Publique, n. 51, Pa is 1989.
(4) Samuel Bowles and He be Gin is insis on he possibili ies o loyal y and accoun abili y on
he pa o wo ke s in an “…economic democ acy": "economic democ acy, by p o iding an
al e na i e o unaccoun able hie a chical au ho i y in in es men and p oduc ion, can
p omo e loyal y, commi men and accoun abili y on he pa o wo ke s and hose who
con ol in es ible esou ces" (Bowles-Gin is 1986:211).
(5) In his a ea he allacies o abs ac ion and has y gene aliza ion a e de eloped wi hou
hind ance, and he p elimina y obse a ion o Schumpe e abou he isks o compa ing a
eal sys em (capi alism) wi h a men al image canno be conside ed as mi iga ion. (The
concep ion o socialism is pe haps he pa o his wo k which bes illus a es he
cha ac e iza ion o Schumpe e 's wo k by Els e as an "in elligen a e -dinne cha ").
(6) A ecen a emp o o e come as much he Webe ian pessimism as his c i ics - o example,
Lukacs and he i s F ank u School which in ac did no o e come ha pessimism’s he
wo k o he "second Habe mas". As is unde s ood, his Theo ie des Kommunika i en
Handelns ies o de end a heo y o a ionali y based on he pos -Wi gens enian
concep ions o language ha makes possible a new no ma i e ounda ion o he p ac ical
wo ld (e hical and poli ical) ha a oids he selec i e pa iali ies o he p ocess o
a ionaliza ion o Wes e n socie ies denounced by Webe , as much as he ine ec i eness
o he abyss be ween heo y and p ac ice ha show Ado no's and Ho kheime 's
concep ions and he adi ional Ma xism, espec i ely. In my iew, he ambi ious app oach
o Habe mas and he exhaus i e and e ined anali ical ma e ial employed is in con as o
he esul s inally ob ained (Requejo 1991).
(7) In his sense we can see, o ins ance, J. Bu heims's concep o "dema chy" as an
al e na i e model o "democ acy" (" ha does no exis in p ac ice"). This “dema chy" is
cha ac e ised by: 1) A "s a is ical ep esen a ion" whose ep esen a i es a e no elec ed by
people. Mo e o less as in he ancien G eek p ac ice o leade ship selec ion (I is no clea
how ep esen ed can con ol hei ep esen a i es); 2) Decision-making is composed o
se e al au onomous bodies, and no o a cen alized go e nmen (I is no clea , hen, how
he p oblems o a necessa y coo dina ion can be sol ed); 3) The ambi s o decision-making
a e c ea ed by unc ional a he han e i o ial c i e ia.
(8) A mo e ecen example: he exis ence o a p e ended “pos libe al democ acy" (Bowles-
Gin is 1986).
(9) We do no use he e he mo e es ic i e meaning o he concep o poli ical pa adigm
employed by Raschke, B and and O e, which allows a dis inc ion be ween an "old" and a
"new" pa adigm in libe al democ acies om he in asion o he "new social mo emen s". In
he wo ds o O e: "A poli ical pa adigm pe mi s answe s o in e ela ed ques ions such as:
a) Wha a e he main con en s and hemes o collec i e ac ion?; b) Who a e he ac o s and
in wha way do hey become collec i e ac o s?; c) Wha a e he app op ia e p ocesses,
ac ics and ins i u ional me hods o dealing wi h con lic ?" (O e 1988:243 n. 1. T ansla ed
by he au ho ).
I hink he dis inc ion be ween pa adigm and p og am o esea ch pe mi s a be e
classi ica ion o di e en "models" o democ acy om a poli ical science poin o iew. I
allows, o example, he sepa a ion o he nine di e en models a gued by D. Held as
sub ypes o wo basic pa adigms: a pa icipa ion p elibe al pa adigm (models I, IIIa, IV,
VIII), and a ep esen a i e libe al pa adigm (models II, IIIb, V, VI, and VII) (Held 1987).
(10) In his amous con e ence o 1819, Cons an a gued: "Bu as he libe y ha we need is
di e en om ha o he ancien G eeks, his libe y equi es a di e en , o ganiza ion om
ha which was sui able o he ancien libe y. In his he mo e ime and he mo e ene gy
ha man dedica ed o he exe cise o his poli ical igh s, he mo e ee he belie ed he was.
In he ype o libe y ha co esponds o us, his will be mo e p ecious when he exe cise o
poli ical igh s lea es mo e ime o pu sue p i a e a ai s" (T ansla ed by he au ho ).
(11) In his way, he acilla ions o Tocque ille a e unde s andable a he poin o
comp ehending "democ acy" as compa ible o no wi h "libe y" (wi h he libe al idea o
libe y). Only when socialism appea s as a i al in he poli ical o ganiza ion o he Eu opean
coun ies does i main ain a possible compa ibili y o "democ acy" and "libe y", e ising his
p e ious opinion de ended in De la Democ a ie en Ame ique (1835). Bu in ac he
a icula ion be ween libe al and democ a ic dimensions his o ically ein o ced he ule o
law in he libe al democ a ic sys ems (Sa o i 1987).
(12) This e m comes om he analysis o he Spanish ansi ion in he 1970s, con ained in he
s udy coo dina ed by O'Donnell, Schmi e and Whi ehead (1986).
(13) I ha e de eloped his poin in a ecen book (Requejo 1990).
(14) F om he 1980s i could be a gued ha he e exis s a ou h dimension, he
Pos ma e ialis , a icula ed a ound he alues o au onomy and c i ical solida i y. I is also a
dimension dis inc om he p e ious ones ha comes associa ed wi h he "new social
mo emen s" (ecological, paci is , eminis , e c) de ending a clea an i-au ho i a ian
componen in he concep o "ci izenship" and o indi idual emancipa ion. Following he
Ame ican and Eu opean mo emen s o he la e 1960s, a c i ical a i ude in he ace o
uncon olled p oduc ion, he echnoc a ic eason and he bu eauc a iza ion p ocess, an
a i ude ha b eaks some o he basic p ecep s o he "socie y o labou " (Habe mas)
implici ly admi ed by he conse a i e, libe al, social-democ a ic and Ma xis o ganiza ions.
The poli ical economy is no longe he emancipa i e science. In his dimension, he cul u al
elemen s displace he cen ali y occupied by he s ic ly economic o poli ical elemen s. I is
no so much i claims wha we wan o li e bu how we wan o li e. In his sense, i is a
change wi h ega d o how he quali y o li e should be unde s ood. Anyway, he
weaknesses o hese mo emen s can be desc ibed as ollows: hei link o a s ic logic o
opposi ion a ound a single claim conside ed "non nego iable" (O e), he anali ical
de iciences in which he allacy o abs ac ion is e y o en p esen , an a i ude o
"e hicali y" ha ma ginalizes he echnoc a ic aspec o a ionali y. All his makes he
pos ma e ialis dimension appea o be su ounded by di icul ies a he poin o in luencing
he policies o he h ee “classical" componen s o libe al democ acies since he Second
Wo ld Wa .
(15) In his sense I hink ha Apel's p e ensions o making a “ a ional econs uc ion o he
uni e sal ounda ions o e hics" (in a kan ian pe spec i e) has sense -in spi e o some
"pos mode n" posi ions-, howe e in he s ic poli ical sphe e his heo y has inhe en
limi a ions. He needs o pu oge he wo di e en a ional logics, he ins umen al and