https://theloop.ecpr.eu/for-a-more-critical-study-of-democracy/
In her essay (linked above), Marta Wojciechowska argues against the view that "not all meanings of democracy are worth the effort [of studying them]". And this is because there is a grave, and long-standing, power-imbalance as regards who gets to publish, advocate for, or otherwise record meanings of democracy and who does not. This has implications for democratic politics today.
As Wojciechowska writes,
"to counter authoritarianism, I urge the field of democratic studies to be more critical and also more self-reflective. We need to be sensitive to the questions of who can conceptualise and publish meanings of democracy, and whose voice we strengthen in doing so. Such sensitivity will enable us, democratic theorists, to diversify our vocabulary of democracy. It will also allow us to counter the domination of power and privilege within our field. Only then we will be ready to counter an increasingly authoritarian world."
I very much agree with Wojciechowska's argument. At the same time, I hear Ramon van der Does' warning that there are not enough democratic theorists in existence to do this work comprehensively.
It would seem that the way through this is to try being more selective, as best we can within our available resources, about what we study so that we are strengthening marginalized voices.
What do you think?
https://theloop.ecpr.eu/for-a-more-critical-study-of-democracy/
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science
- International History and Politics
- Globalization