"Democratic theory should account for diverse democratic practices happening worldwide. At a closer look, this deceptively simple proposition leaves contemporary democratic theory with a range of conceptual and methodological puzzles. How can we acknowledge plural forms of democracy in our normative and empirical endeavours? How can we gain a more comprehensive picture of diverse understandings of democracy in the first place?"
These are the words of Dannica Fleuss from Fleuss's essay here: https://theloop.ecpr.eu/gagnons-data-mountain-a-lookout-point-for-revolutions-to-come/
The puzzle of accounting for diverse democratic practices is, it seems to me, made up of philosophical and methodological challenges.
Philosophically: what is democracy? who constructs it? where? with what justification? would a specimen of it "count" as a "valid" democracy if, for example, that specimen falls more into the authoritarian family of resemblance than the democracy family?
Methodologically: what tools do we use to detect democratic practices when meaning is so variable? how can this work be done affordably? where is the data kept? who is overseeing that the benefit of this work goes to, e.g., marginalised scholars & practitioners (if not one and the same)?
Are there any emphases you would like to add to the puzzle or questions to its philosophical or methodological aspects?
https://theloop.ecpr.eu/gagnons-data-mountain-a-lookout-point-for-revolutions-to-come/
In fact, and the reality of people, there is no democracy. The latter was brought by the West to overthrow the regimes hostile to it. America does not apply democracy. France does the same (and the best evidence for the yellow vest demonstrations) is that it wants an Assyrian regime that I look for in real Islam, not political Islam.
Democracies are perpetually plagued with riots, demonstrations and disagreements. Contrary to popular (and rather naive) opinion, these are the strengths and not the weaknesses of democracy
Democracies create chambers like "congress" and "parliaments", to debate. This indicates to us that this is a society of multiple opinions and many factions. Whenever we hear calls for politicians to "do the right thing" or "why can't we all just agree" we immediately understand that these people do not grasp the nature of democracy.
If there was only one right correct opinion needed, we'd not require a congress ... we'd simply have a dictatorship.
From the book Our Human Herds:
It is common in democratic governments to imagine that our political leaders bicker, fight, argue, and create moral conflicts to simply further their own careers or for no good reason at all. We further imagine that if only they would all just agree to do the right thing, the entire nation would be better off. This error is common because we mistakenly imagine that there is “one right moral way” to look at the world – our way. So, therefore, when we all finally get around to thinking that way, in the same agreed-upon and proper way, we will solve all our outstanding problems.
From a methodological point of view, I propose 4 actions. First, I would take democratic as a variable, consider it a spectrum, where you can have more and less degree of it. This gives more room to include some forms of democracy that a binary or any discrete classification would exclude. Second, I would examine the degree of "democraticness" in different dimensions of governance. This adds more variability as some governance modes might be more democratic in some areas, not so much in others. Third, there would not only be one spectrum, but multiple spectra, as you could break down democraticness into components: degree of transparency, opportunities to assert interests, state domination, etc. Fourth, I would detach the measure of democraticness from the way a certain governance mode or state achieves this. Different institutional or process designs might reach similar degress of democracy. All in all, this creates a descriptive analytic framework that does not make normative judgements and allows variability you might need to escape dogmatism.
التحول الديمقراطي كمقاربة نظرية لبناء الديمقراطية وفق مناهج تدخلية لفواعل رسمية وغير رسمية يضع دول العالم الثالث في مأزق التحول بين مكوناته السياسية والاجتماعية والثقافية والاقتصادية ومطالب القوى الخارجية ذات التاثير المزدوج لمصالح الدول ومؤسسات اقتصاد العولمة
تختلف الديمقراطية بين ما هو نظري وتطبيقي في الممارسة حسب انظمة الحكم لكل دولة ما يخلق فجوة بينهما تستدعي اعادة النظر في مفاهيم عدة وضبط اطار نظري للحوكمة الديمقراطية يستحيب لخصوصية كل بيئة
تختلف البيئة السياسية الداخلية للدول عن بعضها البعض ما يؤدي الى انظمة سياسية مختلفة من حيث المبادئ والمناهج هذه الخصوصية تستدعي انظمة حكم لها القدرة على الاستجابة الفورية للتغيرات وفق معادلة تاخذ بعين الاعتبار رهانات العمل المحلي وتحديات التفكير العالمي
I think that one additional emphasis to the puzzle of accounting for diverse democratic practices is the importance of understanding the historical context of these practices and the ways in which they have evolved over time. This includes understanding how different political ideologies, economic systems, and social movements have shaped the development of democracy in different contexts. Additionally, we should also consider how these practices may be shaped by the specific regional or cultural context in which they are practiced. This could involve examining how local customs or religious beliefs inform or influence the practice of democracy. By examining the historical, political, economic, and social contexts of diverse democratic practices, we can gain a deeper understanding of their origins and the ways in which they have changed over time.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Petroleum Engineering
- Oil