Juin wrote:What European country you have in mind? The two European countries, bogged down in endless elections that yield no stable governments, that come to my mind are Greece and Italy. With the exception of Berluscuoni Italy cannot boast a stable government since WWII.
In Greece, in almost every election cycle parties have attempted to change the thresholds and seat allocation, after several attempts to stabilise the situation, a consensus eventually forms. The same principle applies to ideologies confronting each other on the field.
Greece has had 3 periods of constitutional crises. The 1850-1906 period when Greece had, I don't know a stupid number of governments perhaps over 100 in total. Then another crisis between 1922-1950 and again between 2010-2015. Every time progress happens until eventually the landscape stabilises and politicians learn to work with each other instead of just politicking.
I think the natural evolution way is the best way to achieve this...
In these complicated questions that have to do with power-sharing essentially there are only 2 ways to go about doing it.
1) Impose an 'excellent' constitution from the top emulating the best practices of the times from other countries. This sounds good in theory(and it is essentially what Greece did in 1828, 1850 and 1906) but in practise it always fails because a national community is an organic living thing, it does not like casts however perfect they may be. Especially in our 2 countries where there are different sub-ethnic-groups of the same ethnicity. Greece like Israel had to deal with over half of its population being a refugee(from various and distant places) for several decades, it is a feat to integrate them and their political opinions.
2) The staggered approach, maintain the status quo and make minor adjustments permitting some rope and laxity for a consensus to develop and an arrangement to grow out of the infighting, after 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 or more cycles a consensus does develop eventually and this is a more solid foundation than simply going for a constitutional re-arrangement.
Edit: One thing that can be helpful from the Greek experience is that during the electoral deadlocks the government that forms is a 'national unity' government and the PM is usually the highest judge in the country or another person of gleaming and widespread authority that all parties must consent to and they do without much hassle. The time limit of that national unity government is also prescribed.
This arrangement is pretty awesome for many reasons:
1) The public, media and the state get a break from the infighting which is healing.
2) The parties vying for power, lose their power which gives them an incentive to work together to go back to power.
Lastly, I would not worry too much about the deadlocks, governance is hardly affected and if anything they prove that democracy is working by pushing the constitution to its limits. That is regular and healthy. It is when things are sterile and too perfect that you need to start worrying.
EN EL ED EM ON
...take your common sense with you, and leave your prejudices behind...