Introduction: Consensus Lost? Disenchanted Democracy in Switzerland

Over the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the Swiss political system became firmly anchored in three principles of governance: sovereignty, proximity of decision-makers and citizens, and elite consensus. The contributions to this special issue of the Swiss Political Science Review explore to what extent these three principles still adequately describe the functioning and political culture of this country. In our introduction, we discuss the forces that challenge the Swiss political system on all three principles, as well as their consequences in terms of a new, less “enchanted” mode of governance that characterizes Swiss Politics at the beginning of the 21st century. How and in what forms have the three principles of sovereignty, proximity of politics and citizens, and elite consensus developed over time? The modern Swiss state of 1848, transformed from a previously loose confederation, has put a strong emphasis on federalism and subsidiarity, guaranteeing sovereignty and political autonomy of the cantons towards the center. Similarly, Swiss foreign politics after the WWII has been connected to the image of full-fledged sovereignty. Both within Switzerland, as well as in its embedment in the international system, we find the prevalence of state and politics proximate to the citizens. The small scale-societies (Kleingesellschaften) of the cantons and municipalities remained comparatively weak states, with an even weaker bureaucracy, and largely depended on extended voluntary self-administration, and on private associations (Linder 1999, 32-6). This found its reflection in the principle that Swiss politics is not professionalized, and offices held by volunteers or part-time MPs (the Milizsystem). Towards the turn of the 20th century, the development of extended direct democratic rights also at the federal level just reinforced this tight and direct link between citizens and policy-makers. Institutionally, numerous veto points – especially the enhanced use of direct democracy at the federal level since the late 19th century – imposed constraints for political moderation and elite-accommodation in the form of inclusive decision-making structures. The gradual political inclusion of the opposition has culminated - in the second half of the 20th century - in a system that was addressed as consociational democracy (Lijphart 1968; Lehmbruch 1967) with corporatist decision-making (Katzenstein 1985; Kriesi 1980). In Switzerland itself, the Zauberformel (“magic formula”) for the government composition became the symbol for political inclusion. This model of Swiss democracy, and its three “enchanted principles” – sovereignty, proximity to the citizens, and elite consensus – has enjoyed very high popular legitimacy ever since, and provided for stability. This special issue deals with the changes, which the Swiss model of democracy has experienced since the late 20th century. Have these three principles become ‘disenchanted’? What are the main features of Swiss democracy at the beginning of the 21st century? Why have things changed and what consequences should we expect from the changes we observe? With regards to sovereignty, the contributions by Eggenberger and Emmenegger and by Jenni provide striking accounts of an increase of political interdependence, which puts in question the uncompromised national sovereignty. While Swiss federalism is today characterized by intense cooperation between the cantons, Wasserfallen argues that cantons still strongly compete in fiscal matters. Regarding proximity to citizens, we argue that this aspect still is highly present in Swiss politics, as testified by the increasing use and continuing popularity of direct democracy. Three reservations are in order, however: first, part-time politicians and volunteers have given way to professionalized elites (as shown by Bailer and Bütikofer). Second, mediatization has increased (Udris, Lucht and Schneider) and third, direct democracy (see the contribution by Leemann) tends to become undermined by an increase of popular initiatives that result from electoral competition. Finally, elite consensus is examined by Afonso and Papadopoulos, Beste, Wyss and Bächtiger, Bochsler and Bousbah, Bornschier, Leemann, and Traber. They all clearly show that conflict has strongly increased in the Swiss political system. Alliances in parliament have become both more diverse and less inclusive and, in particular, the SVP has changed the tone in the political discourse in parliament. Even though Switzerland still displays the institutions of consociational democracy, the political practice in this country matches the picture of an ideal-typical consociation much less than thirty years ago. What have been the main factors driving political change in the last 40 years? Beyond technological and demographic change and mediatization, we consider two factors to be the main drivers for change of Swiss democracy: polarization and integration. By polarization, we mean strong divergence among political parties on the key political questions. Polarization in Switzerland has increased as a result of the pluralization of political parties and economic interest groups. In the 1970s and 1980s, new social movements and new parties entered the political scene with a libertarian-progressive agenda. They deeply changed the left by adding a socio-cultural agenda to the traditionally state-interventionist program of the left (Kitschelt 1994). And – as shown by Bornschier and Leemann in this volume – they triggered a reaction on the right: new political parties on the radical right side were founded in the early 1990s, and the Swiss People's Party (SVP) started its transformation into a more radical, national-conservative right-wing populist party. These dynamics have broken the traditional alliance of the moderate right-wing parties on which the Swiss government coalition was built, while political-economic changes (internationalization and deindustrialization) have weakened the political cohesiveness of the economic interest groups (Mach 1999). The fragmentation of the right both among parties and economic interest groups has unravelled the stable alliance of right-wing parties and business (Bürgerblock) that had dominated Swiss Politics for a long time. Several contributions in this volume (see e.g. Leemann, Bornschier and Afonso and Papadopoulos) and in other places (e.g. Vatter 2014, 147) (Ladner 2014, 372) emphasize the increase in party polarization as the key factor that has thrown a spanner in the works of the Swiss political system. Yet, it is primarily when locating current Swiss party polarization in the international context that the extent of deviation from a moderate, consensus-oriented political system becomes strikingly visible (see also Armingeon and Engler 2015). To this effect, we show in Figure 1 the extent of party polarization in Switzerland and all other European democracies regarding the two main axes of political conflict in Europe, the economic and the socio-cultural dimension1. We rely on expert survey data for this purpose, and calculate the weighted standard deviation of the distribution of parties on each axis (Dalton 2008, 906).2 Figure 1 shows that Switzerland is among the most polarized party systems in Europe, not only regarding economic issues, but also regarding socio-cultural policies. Party polarization on economic and socio-cultural issues Figure 2 complements this first impression by providing the mean location of the main Swiss parties (over 5% vote share in the 2011 elections) compared to the mean location of the other main parties of Western Europe. The size of the circles is proportional to the vote share this party reached in the last parliamentary national election before August 2015. What distinguishes Switzerland (parties marked in bold font) from other countries is that the strongest parties are also the most polarized ones: the Green Party and the Social Democrats are at opposite poles of the Swiss People's Party both on economic and on cultural issues. Party positions in the two-dimensional political space Longitudinal analyses (Hug & Schulz 2007) indeed show that polarization, measured on a single left-right dimension, has increased over the last thirty years. Bornschier (2015) shows that the shift in polarization has substantially improved the issue congruence between parties and voters, especially regarding cultural issues. With his work, Bornschier extends the understanding of recent research: By looking at general preferences, Armingeon and Engler (2015) argue that voters are less polarized than the elites. Bornschier looks at actual policy preferences regarding cultural and economic policies and finds that both, the elite and the electorate are polarized. People seem to prefer moderate positions in general and distinguish more in the specific proposals. Furthermore, the increased polarization – together with commercialization – has also left its footprint regarding the mediatization of politics (Udris et al. 2015), and the functioning of the Swiss institutions (in particular Bochsler and Bousbah, Traber, Afonso and Papadopoulos 2015), and altered the political culture (Beste et al., 2015). The second main driver of change in the Swiss political system is integration. Integration refers to the fact that political problems or issues increasingly transcend sub-national or national borders, that problems have become more complex, and political unities have – in the wake of these processes - become more interdependent. Economically, interdependence is nothing new for Switzerland. It has always been a “small open economy” (Katzenstein 1985), with foreign trade shares above the OECD-average already in the 1960s, but the share has steadily increased over time (see Figure 3). Total trade and as of in Switzerland and Western countries In terms of this the is by the most trade for Switzerland. to countries for of to all other in the And this is economic political The countries have become much more strongly both and over the In Switzerland, a increase in and with the (see Jenni this to the increased interdependence Swiss politics is to and has to The to the political in other international as the which strongly and Swiss politics (see Eggenberger and Emmenegger in this In this we discuss in more polarization and have and changed the key of Swiss politics in terms of sovereignty, proximity between decision-makers and citizens, and elite consensus. the second half of the 20th century, the Swiss elites have the country as a with political sovereignty. highly the Swiss were to of political and 2008, the sub-national the Swiss cantons their strong political Kriesi and 2008, and their traditional and the principle of the picture of the political sovereignty – both at the national and – It is by the of the international system after the the European but also by With the of and with parties their the cantons also their political Bochsler and this special issue the cantons were at as in their autonomy the federal state and the European as the federal state was its international The contribution by Wasserfallen analyses the interdependence of policies between the Swiss compete with each other on issues, for the Wasserfallen shows that between cantons in by between the cantons and the federal In of with the federal the cantons put on and in to their the federal only to the have social and economic increasingly and to the at between the cantons becomes a of federalism in Switzerland. While their the cantons to in to with a single towards the federal and the European but also in to in which increasingly borders, to a increase of over the course of the last (see Bochsler This between political sovereignty, but is even more to traditional Swiss democracy in the of integration. Jenni has the of into the Swiss The most visible are the which Switzerland has on with the Jenni shows that the of the European in party politics has become a for of have become more and of national and to both less by the and of party but clearly of a in sovereignty. This is also in the of two of decision-making in In the of the most decision-making only (the trade on with the was 1980). by et al. (2015) finds thirty years over a of the most decision-making processes by the were In a that an also for Switzerland as a Switzerland is more on and with its international Similarly, the in the provide an of the between international and political In their Eggenberger and Emmenegger the reaction of Switzerland and to new international regarding policies and after the of the economic between economic the Swiss business associations to on a to the towards the Swiss a politics to the to a on the a the Swiss towards international remained much more and as the much more than the reaction by The between international and politics also in direct democracy a or an with international (Linder 2014, the contributions to our volume that with the question of sovereignty show that as between cantons and between Switzerland and the works well but they to cooperation becomes or not for of they provide a striking picture of regarding national and sub-national a long two have provided for a high proximity of Swiss citizens to their political the of a of direct democratic and the principle that political offices are voluntary or part-time elites to in their after political While both principles have in the 21st century, they have changed their the use of popular initiatives has increased at the national since the shows that the use of initiatives has been largely by electoral and by in terms of to the size of the The actual use of the right the that direct democracy is in the of the citizens. parties government and politicians increasingly use direct democratic rights as a for electoral competition. Leemann this is a reflection of increased electoral the of the second of conflict in Swiss politics, and it to a in which direct democracy is an for parties and politicians to for electoral – and this is a second regarding the of direct democracy in proximity between citizens and elites - with the of popular initiatives at the since the 1990s, even by the only at they are in conflict with international or the of Swiss direct democracy with the parliamentary which has previously a popular to it into These two regarding the extent to which direct democracy still even parties increasingly use direct democratic for this not conflict with the that direct democracy politics to the citizens an of on Swiss et al. The use of direct democracy by the elites to a long among the to have their in policy still to and This their at the and voters to issue a on these issues. political issues are to the citizens have for and for an of citizens to the political changes, the proximity of elites and citizens, from an increasing of Swiss In the MPs their as a small part-time have largely this of Bailer and an increasing of the party by the increased polarization of Swiss not only rely on more and a more and but they also to a more in the parliament. This the autonomy of single – in a system – were their as citizens and the link to citizens. In the proximity of citizens to decision-makers has in the parliamentary While direct democracy is still an more by political elites than groups of citizens, its use still tight between citizens and Over the 20th century, Switzerland became not only of the main of a consociational democracy but it has remained a country which – still in the early 21st century – the of a consociational democracy at the level of with to the of political elites and citizens, the model of Swiss politics has changes, to polarization and pluralization in The Swiss party system to be strong social and much than in most European political parties were in a of cantons with systems was a stable alliance of right-wing parties and business associations With the new cultural conflict in Swiss politics, the party system has become more and but at the Swiss politics has also become much more an of since the 1990s, political parties compete for and they in the electoral While this has polarized the of both parties and voters in the national it also has improved the between the issue positions and their as Bornschier political parties the composition of their electorate on the left-right and on the new cultural much since the than in the in the of politics, the corporatist system of associations of business and has given way to a pluralization of and the side of trade it was not much but a in a more economic context and a reinforced parliament that its and inclusion in Swiss decision-making processes et al. et al. 2015). was a more of change among business as in the the dominated alliance of business (the in the as a of increasing international and a more political of the and their main a associations of small business or were increasingly less in decision-making processes and (Mach et al. 2015). With the increase in party polarization, between parties and associations became more and more Both the and the of the corporatist of decision-making have over the two et al. et al. 2015). within the stable Swiss of a consociational and corporatist system, Swiss politics has become more and as a less regarding both and the key of the consociational are Both at the and the federal they have become more and (Udris, Lucht and and much more in government the stable and inclusive government have given way to competition. the parties form stable the of these is more are not an but more of or are also Several contributions in this issue show this has also altered decision-making in the national parliament. between all government as they were very in the 1980s, have become much less and they way to more and more between policy Both the Social Party and the Swiss People's Party – the main of polarization in the Swiss party system – in policy in which are less in their party while in which they emphasize in the electoral competition. This is also in the of the in the national on issues, Beste, Wyss and show that MPs of the Swiss People's Party – the main of polarization on this issue – have indeed to more less of political polarization not the of the in the national as these characterized by a than parliamentary in Even on the issue of - of the issues for the transformation of the Swiss party system (see Bornschier – the high the and of a consociational system. Swiss politics in the 21st century which are for the of and consensus democracies in a It an picture of the functioning of consociational political institutions in polarized The Swiss system by veto which for The (Lijphart expect that these institutions an of the polarization and of elites to a characterized by and political (Lijphart Vatter 2014, The Swiss at this is more Even more by than by have in most cantons and at the federal level and And the of elite the pluralization of and the of the second political have only in though highly policy as social policy and European and In the of policy and policy we which have started on a but the early consensus to be as the parliament. the of these their development be as of the of the Swiss decision-making processes in a polarized While the is still on the of the current Swiss political system in the of the of elite has clearly the of the Swiss political system to to the international as by Eggenberger and Emmenegger regarding This is an since consociational democracies were to use their in to the international context as a economic (Katzenstein With of the Swiss business corporatist consensus and the increasing use of veto direct democracy, is increasingly but not the of elite consensus also had consequences in terms of the of democracy: While in the “enchanted” of consensus democracy, political was among a of to the main economic associations and the parties of the Swiss politics in the 21st century is more has from corporatist interest groups to political and it is more this et al. 2015). the contributions to this special we a picture of both and political change in the Swiss political system. have remained largely and both and still in a more inclusive way than in most other European is and and direct democracy is more popular and than these of we also towards an increasingly political system in the proximity of decision-making and decision-makers to the is weakened the of the system of and the increased to the traditional in which are largely from popular Regarding direct democracy, a use of the between political as well as the increasing of the political system to regarding the other two principles of the traditional Swiss political system is even more Regarding elite a traditional of government by inclusive moderate party and politics has given way to party polarization and Finally, the picture of a and but and country has become in a of – still – highly political regarding the of the with the and policies. These both with political sovereignty and with economic and question the traditional functioning of Swiss politics developed this of the Swiss political system from an increasing between polarized political parties and interest groups on the and an that moderation and for decision-making on the other In we to discuss the consequences and of this of and constraints for Swiss politics and for Switzerland in an increasingly The of institutions and – – polarized elite is not as we to recent Both in and the countries with strong consociational decision-making in the coalition became more to political and In the parties were to form a coalition government in in the and the country political The weak parliament has experienced an increase in and with stable parliamentary in and and to the Swiss In in the early – also a strong electoral – had become to as all government were for in the two of parliament. the by a coalition of and While this has opposition it has also weakened the strong between these two Switzerland, has had a coalition of all political parties for the increasing polarization and between political parties and between interest groups has while the institutions that are to elite consensus coalition and were firmly in Switzerland indeed in a between increasingly polarized elite and institutions that moderation and to policy We are not the first to an increasing between what and what institutions in Switzerland (e.g. Vatter 2014, Kriesi this What are the and to this In the and political two for the Swiss political system are to the institutions to the of the elites and to the of the elites to the What this the institutions to the of the elites from a coalition and to a more model on government of or a model of democratic decision-making an government program and improved democratic The main in Switzerland has always been that the opposition parties use direct democratic to the political (as the left for in the given the increase in the use of initiatives and by government this largely as inclusion in the government not seem to a on these parties the to a system of is highly in Switzerland the coalition still among the as it is of the key features of the Swiss political system of its citizens The other – – way be to the of to the in other to moderation and In the current this mean the poles of the polarized party system (the SVP and the more strongly in an inclusion be to as was with the Social Democrats in the and always it is highly to the poles of the party system indeed to a to moderate party polarization, for three first, polarization has increased while parties were in Second, pluralization and polarization mean that parties increasingly to more than the and third, after two of party polarization, Swiss citizens have become strongly polarized as well (see the contribution by Bornschier 2015). we that both of the between elite and constraints are The most of Swiss politics for the years to is the current pluralization and polarization in a This most consequences for the of the Swiss political system in terms of is a for both and be enhanced have become more and In the more polarized even clearly or at in parliament a more in a system that was traditionally characterized by small and the the of is clearly both political parties and interest groups consider not by government of their in or to They more to and electoral than to in their of they also increasingly to use their veto by to direct democratic The increasingly international context to this of as polarization in the way of and policy this it is early for an of the policy of the current political in Switzerland, but of the Swiss is already while the of has policy have become more more and – given the of party political of the government on the and on the other - And this in is a change from the traditional model of Swiss democracy. Bochsler is of at the of for of is at the of and of the of for is of Political Science at the of for of 40