On March 24, 2007, the MediaTek International Lecture Series, jointly organized by the Lung Yingtai Cultural Foundation and CommonWealth magazine, was launched. The forum's first speaker was Julian Nida-Rumelin, Germany's former Minister of Culture and current chair professor for political theory and philosophy at the University of Munich. Well known author Lung Ying-tai describes him as “a philosopher with the pronounced quality of a European intellectual.” He has represented Germany at a European Union conference on the cultural mission of the EU. And recently, he has accepted an invitation to serve as short-term lecturer at Soochow University in Taipei.

In his lecture titled “Democracy: Normative Constituents, Present Challenges and Future Prospects,” Dr. Nida-Rumelin explored the challenges of democracy from a philosopher's perspective, offering an in-depth analysis of whether democracy is a universal value or an asset within a specific cultural context. He also pondered the future direction that democracy may take.

In the following exclusive interview with CommonWealth, which Dr. Nida-Rumelin gave prior to his arrival in Taiwan, he shared some of his thoughts and observations:

Q: What is the meaning of democracy in the 21st century? What is its biggest challenge, and how can people handle it?

A: The biggest challenge is a side effect of economic globalization. The competition of nations to offer the best conditions for capital investment changes the inner balances between capital and workfare. Worldwide taxation of capital is reduced considerably and this stresses public budgets and makes social policy difficult. But without a developed social state, democracy becomes less attractive and less stable. Democracy depends on a common sense of justice and its realization by state action.

Q: Can you give us some good examples of methods that solve or reduce this kind of dilemma?

A: The Scandinavian States – Sweden, Denmark, Norway and also Finland – show that it is possible to be highly competitive and at the same time develop a social citizenship that is financed by taxes including everybody and based on a common sense of justice that the major political parties also share – not only the social-democratic, but also the conservative and liberal ones.

Q: As for the struggle of Taiwan's democracy, how should the Taiwanese people and government deal with the situation in which the two main parties constantly oppose each other? Is there any example that we can use for reference? What's your suggestion?

A: International comparisons show that democracies with majority voting systems have the advantage of stable governments, but the disadvantage of bipartisan structures (e.g., the USA, Britain). Proportional voting systems produce a bigger variety of political parties and representatives (e.g., Germany, Switzerland). In any case, it is essential for democracy to develop a common basis of norms and values that all democratic parties embrace.

Q: We understand, however, that people here in Taiwan really suffer from the ongoing, fierce bipartisan battle. It seems that no one benefits from this, except unreasonable politicians. Can you explain this issue in greater depth?

A: No, because I am not a Taiwanese citizen, only a guest who enjoys the hospitality of the university, the German Cultural Center and the citizenship of Taipei.

Q: What role do you think citizens can play for democracy to mature? If you were to give us three pieces of advice, what would they be?

A: First, in a mature democracy citizens do not just delegate politics to institutions, but engage themselves. Second, in a mature democracy citizens are tolerant because they are respectful regarding the opinions of other citizens. Third, in a mature democracy citizens are immune to ideological campaigns, because they have their own well-considered judgement.

Q: How do you see the development of democracy in Europe/Germany? What kinds of issues concern people the most? What can we learn from these experiences?

A: The project of European Integration originated out of the disaster of the Second World War. It aimed at establishing a peaceful order that makes wars between European nations impossible. In this respect the project of European Integration proved highly successful. Presently, the conditions of the project of European Integration have changed. Globalization makes politics within the nation state less effective. Transnational cooperation is needed, but this requires democratic decision structures that are not well developed on the European level. This is presently the major challenge for the project of European Integration.

Q: With the influence of globalization, how do Europeans/Germans make your cultural identity more solid? What kind of values or methods are crucial to this goal?

A: Without the “presence of the past,” as I call it, a firm cultural and citizens' identity cannot develop. State institutions for the arts, history, education and scholarship are more important in the age of globalization.

Q: Do you think that the European countries/people can finally form a European identity? Why? And what will that be?

A: There are empirical findings that most citizens in the European Community have both a national (often also a regional) and a European identity. But till now the EC has not developed a coherent cultural policy.

Q: In your opinion, what is the future of the European Union? What effect will it bring to the world? Why?

A: This is difficult to judge for the moment. There are the optimists, mostly liberal US intellectuals, but also French, German, Italian etc. intellectuals, politicians and citizens, who hope that the EC can become a model for transnational cooperation, combing efficient market structures with a developed social state and cultural diversity. There are the pessimists, many of them in the new member states (strangely enough), but also in Britain, who expect – or hope? – that the project of genuine political and social integration will fail and the EC will be transformed into a free-trade zone similar to other international organisations, like ASEAN. 

Chinese Version: 民主的根基是社會正義，不是自由