Trust in Transition: Culturalist and Institutionalist Debate Reflected in the Democratization Process in the Czech Republic, 1991–2008

Abstract

Democracy is more than just a well-built institutional system. Even a democracy which relies on functional institutions and on good systemic conditions, such as rule of law, a working bureaucracy and economic performance, would be merely an empty shell if citizens did not believe in the democratic regime and actively support it. At the beginning of the 1990s, Ralf Dahrendorf outlined the timeline for the transition to democracy and freedom for postcommunist countries as follows: political or constitutional changes can be made in 6 months, economic reforms over 6 years, and solid democratic foundations, in the form of an active civil society in 60 years (Dahrendorf 1991: 92). This has come under much criticism from various sides – from those pointing to an excessively long period of civil society formation to those who have denied the importance of civil society for the functioning of the democratic system. Over a quarter of a century later, we are privileged to be able to take a look at this “laboratory of democracy” and, in the case of one of the post-communist countries, assess the state of democracy, focusing primarily on the roots of support for the regime and its stability, and on the functioning of civil society. The democratic transition in Central and Eastern European countries has again raised the question of establishing a democratic system and of the conditions necessary for its stable functioning. On the one hand, there are those who claim that democracy is primarily a system of institutions. By introducing institutions, adopted from advanced democracies, democracy can be created