The paradox of democratic regimes: Fragility and transformability

In most of the vast scholarly literature on constitutional-democratic regim es, the major emphasis has been on the broader social, economic, or cultura l conditions conducive to their development, breakdown, or consolidation an d continuity (Diamond 1993b; Diamond, Lint, and Lipset 1989, 1990). The maj or thesis of this essay is that fragility and instability are inherent in t he very constitution of modem constitutional-democratic regimes, and are ro oted in (I) the tensions between the different conceptions of democracy (es pecially between constitutional and participatory democracy) and (2) the ce ntral aspects of the political and cultural program of modernity. The commo n core of these premises is the openness of the political process (particul arly with regard to protest) and the concomitant tendency toward continual redefinition of the political realm. Openness is an important contributor t o the fragility of modern democratic regimes; paradoxically, it also allows for their continuity. The key question, then, is how and under what condit ions non-zero-sum conceptions of the "game" of politics develop. The second part of this essay takes up this question, with special emphasis on the de velopment and reproduction of trust among different sectors of society, the relationships between such sectors and the centers of society, and the con struction of different types of collective identity.