The report about the future of democracy in Europe is coordinated by Schmitter and Trechsel with contribution by many authurs from various European countries. Therefore the paper can be regarded as relatively representative to European communities. It has contributors from Hungary, Sweden, UK, Norway, Switzerland, France, Malta, Germany, Italy and Poland. Beside that there are others from different organisations for instance; President of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe. Every individuals is member of an European institute. The paper is divided into three main parts; part I under the header “Challenges and opportunities”, covering variose area from; Globalisation, European integration, Inter-cultural migration, Demographic trends, Economic performance, Technological change, State capacity, Individuation, Mediatisation and Sense of insecurity.
While in the Part II “processes and actors”, the paper is dealing with issues like; citizenship, political discontent, cultural identity and protest, representation, political parties, civil society, decision making, “guarding the guardians”, inter-level accountability and mechanisms for direct citizen consultation. the last part of the paper which is Part III, highlightes Recommendations for reform. This part is the most important part of the paper, in which they introduce a guidline and a list of a tweentyeight “wish list” recommended reforms.
The report starts with an optimism which is the impossibility of “Mal governo”, “in this part of the world” i.e. Europe. Mal governo is “regimes that are not responsive to needs, that engage in corrupt practices, that defraud the electoral process, that restrict
or manipulate basic freedoms and that refuse to be accountable to their citizens” (p13).
The guiding hypothesis throughout the paper is that “the future of democracy in Europe lies less in fortifying and perpetuating existing formal institutions and informal practices than in changing them” (p15). As paper puts it democracy is a present time process, “Whatever form it takes, the democracy of our successors will not and cannot be the democracy of our predecessors” (Robert Dahl). Ergo for democracy to sustain and insure its continuity it has to be dynamic and go through perpetual changes and reforms throughout time.
According to the report “democracy has undergone several major transformations in the past in order to re-affirm its central principles: the sovereignty of equal citizens and the accountability of unequal rulers. It increased in scale from the city- to the nation-state; it expanded its citizenry from a narrow male oligarchy to a mass public of men and women; it enlarged its scope from defence against aggressors and the administration of justice to the whole panoply of policies associated with the welfare state” (p15). This progressive view which has a root in the idea of Enlightenment establishes an image that democracy like any other social and political concepts it only grows toward better or maturity. The paper summarise their tasks into three main areas:
–“identify the challenges and opportunities posed to contemporary European democracy.
– specify the processes and actors in both the formal institutions and informal practices that are being affected by these external challenges and opportunities, as well as by internal trends that are intrinsic to democracy itself;
– propose potential and desirable reforms that would improve the quality of democratic institutions in Europe” (p16).
Democracy is a frame. It has no particular shape or size; it is as large to contain all and as small to embrace an oligarch. Democracy’s history is confirming this trend more than anything else. But the challenge is how to enlarge it to contain all. In the other word how to make it such a soft cuddly place that every members of society desire to dwell in it, including children. This challenge has many folds.
The main aim of the Part I of the report is to “defines the major external challenges and opportunities facing democracy in Europe” (p4). The report interprets these challenges through the analytical device of rival hypotheses. For each there is a potentially negative impact and a potentially positive one. In other words, democracy could be strengthened or weakened, depending on the reaction of existing political forces and their willingness or resistance to reform.
One of the main external force faces the process of democracy is globalisation. It has weakened the authority and capacity of the national state to solve problems, particularly those involving economic regulation, but it has also provided non-state and trans-national actors with increased resources to pressure for more effective
regulation across national borders. Globalisation is a process in its embryonic age; it will change radically the style of democracy not only in Europe but throughout the planet earth.
If the purpose of the state (beside muscular purposes like defence, justice and economy) is to provide various type of services to its citizens and organise the community. Globalisation reducing this function to make space for an institution called corporations, which they are not only strange to democracy but in the best way they are obstacle to the process of democracy. This is occurring in the age that citizens are better-educated and differently employed which has brought with it greater “individuation” in the way in which they conceive interests and passions.
These interests and passions, in the age of capitalism, are more directed toward material and goods rather than concepts or spirits (the concept used merely in Hegelian way i.e. realisation of freedom). Ergo one can see more “citizens” in the shop malls and markets rather than cultural or spiritual places. This, in turn, has undermined the collectivist spirit that once belonged to trade unions, political parties and comprehensive social movements.
“But these changes have brought with them a personalised and intense conception of political action that demands more flexible and participatory structures that cut across the previous categories of class and ideology”. This in itself indicates that the society is not cemented and citizens are not linked to each others. The absence of class or ideology is a sign that citizens are not related to each others neither in idea nor in a
style of life. They are basically individual living in their cocoon. This scenario means citizens do not trust each others, let alone the authority. End of trust is end of politics.
Another huge challenge in front of the future of democracy is the phenomena of migration. The paper deals with this issue as every other issue in a neutral way. In one fold attempts to show who Inter-cultural migration may trigger xenophobic reactions from certain segments of the “native population”, thereby adding fuel to ultra-nationalist political parties. On the other fold, in the longer run, however, citizens in multi-cultural societies acquire a broader outlook and a greater tolerance for diversity. This point is nothing more than a wishful thinking. So far, there is no an empirical evidence, what so ever, that European society becoming more multicultural or tolerant. The machine of capitalism requires materials and energy. Human beings are a sort of energies; as they were the main source of energy during the time of slavery. With that legacy in mind, capitalism nowadays still looks at human beings from the point of need. Migrant are not needed as human they are needed as a (cheap if not free) work force. Therefore in the most of European countries they are living in a semi ghetto apart from the rest. This situation is very familiar to European history. Others are always been present in Europe, in the other word the process of otherness is part of Europe’s politics and culture. This is due mostly to the domination of the culture of hatred. This phenomena like a plague contaminating every single European countries. It is represented in the emergence of far right politics; those whom at the end after elimination of their imaginary enemy they will turn to their own fellow citizens.
“Part II of the Green Paper analyses the democratic “actors and processes” in relation to the extrinsic “challenges and opportunities” and to the intrinsic tendencies of the practice of “real-existing democracy”. Organising their discussion around “citizenship”, “representation” and “decision making”, the authors reveal trends, examine how the polities and citizens have responded and discuss experimental initiatives” (p4).
Citizens’ disaffection and discontent, as reflected in falling voter turnout and rising distrust of political institutions and politicians, is a strand that runs throughout this Green Paper (p5). “Today, one of the most striking features of European democracies is an apparently widespread feeling of political discontent, disaffection, scepticism, dissatisfaction and cynicism among citizens. These reactions are not, or not only, focused on a given political party, government or public policy. They are the result of critical and even hostile perceptions of politicians, political parties, elections, parliaments and governments in general – that is across the political spectrum” (p25).
For example, based on trends over the past thirty years, the authors project that if voter turnout continues to fall at its current rate, abstention in national parliamentary elections could be as high as 45% in Central and Eastern Europe, and 65% in Western Europe by 2020. This could very well compromise the legitimacy of decisions taken by parliament (p5).
Why to participate? However it is becoming almost cliché that is if one is not taking a part in politics she or he will live under a government against her wish. In the post-modern world it is illusion to measure the legitimacy of a government through the participation of people. With the development of science human beings are always in every different ways being fooled. They are not themselves. The paper acknowledges that by suggesting adding the choice of “none of the above”, which simply means not having or feeling being represented. This is too simple solution for such a huge matter.
Namely the tyranny of virtual over actual is the problem. The paper tends to blame citizens rather than the process: “Citizens tend to direct their criticism towards individual politicians of whatever ideological or programmatic orientation and to focus on their increasingly similar promises and ineffectual programmes. These attitudes can be linked to social status and education levels, and range from an ill-articulated feeling of general discontent among the poor and less educated to a more focused and informed criticism emanating from well-off, better-educated and more politically knowledgeable groups in society” (p5).
These insults as represented in towards working class and poor people are a form of racism. As the paper clearly states it: “these attitudes can be linked to social status and education levels, and range from an ill-articulated feeling of general discontent among the poor and less educated to a more focused and informed criticism emanating from well-off, better-educated and more politically knowledgeable groups in society” (p5).
Politics in nutshell is protecting your interests and status. Therefore those who have interests and status are keen to participate and those who have nether of them finding it hard to justifying it. After the fall of Berlin wall and the end of history, poor everywhere in the world are increasingly under pressure to be silent and happy servant in nowadays Dickensian world. Democracy is not requiring so called knowledge. It is directly linked to the human instincts; everyone has desire to protect his or her status and interests, but when people are striped of them they feel alienated toward whole entire process. Politics and economy are directly linked. Hence political equality has no meaning in a society dominated by economical inequality.
While there are some merit in the argument that lower class people might be not interested in politics; because of the ever increasing the complexity of the process. These citizens they have a “rather low (but somewhat unequal) level of education, social status, political information and sophistication, and a feeling of personal political incompetence. They are rather unable to perceive differences between politicians and parties. Lack of competence. Arguing that politics does not deserve their attention. Narrow vision of politics” (p28).
At the same time other express more sophisticated feelings of discontent. They say, for instance, that “there are not many differences among political parties nowadays”, “left- and right-wing parties are presently very similar; they pursue and drive the same policies”, “politics is increasingly lukewarm”, “it's no longer important, it's economics that matter now”, “nation-states can't do much against firms' decisions to relocate”, or that “the EU decides on everything”. These opinions are held by people who add that they used to be, but are presently much less, interested in politics (p28).
The authors also put the reader on guard against the decline of democratic decision making in certain public and private institutions. This tendency to “replace citizens
rather than represent them” is one of the intrinsic dangers of democracy when it relies increasingly on a technocracy of experts and specialised knowledge. Operating outside the realm of public scrutiny, such guardian institutions are not accountable to citizens for their decisions, even though they do have a substantial impact on the life opportunities of citizens and were previously in the domain of the public good (p5-6).
Part III proposes a list of twenty-nine institutional reforms that are aimed at enhancing citizen participation in decision-making and at making rulers more accountable. Among them; universal citizenship, discretionary voting, lotteries for electors, shared mandates, specialised elected councils, democracy kiosks. Intresting proposal like a “yellow card” provision for legislatures. It is worth mesioning most of the proposals are novel.
In this part the focus is upon doing democracy differently, rather than upon improving what is already in place. By acknowledging that “democracy did not only resolve problems; it also created them” (p83). Taking this “Madison’s advice into account” (p83) and taking the effect of the mass media on the contemporary democracy: newspapers, radio and especially, television, have effectively transformed democracy into a “public spectacle”” (p84).
The implementation of the wish lists might make the process of democracy more democratic and also more fun. The fun side of the process is more stressed on it in the report; this suggestion might be risky and controversial. “Some of these proposals, or at least aspects of them, are similar to those already being tried out in Europe and
could be transferred to other countries. The authors stress, however, that reforms do not always have the same effect in different places, should always be considered as experimental, and should be adapted to different situations in different European states. The reforms were drafted taking into account the following guidelines: impartiality, feasibility level of application, strategy, time horizon and selection criteria.
The authors of the Green Paper believe that liberal political democracy, as presently practised in Europe, is not “the end of history” (p116). Democracy as a political process has to be in perpetual progress: not only can it be improved, it must be”. And only through change can retain the legitimate respect of its citizens. This is not imposable democracy “has done this several times in the past in response to emerging challenges and opportunities, and there is no reason to believe that it cannot do so in the present”.
According to the report there are reforms “should be considered most urgently. It is our collective judgement that the major generic problem of contemporary European democracy concerns declining citizen trust in political institutions and participation in democratic processes. Therefore, those reforms that promise to increase voter turnout, stimulate membership in political parties, associations and movements and improve citizen confidence in the role of politicians as representatives and legislators deserve prior consideration, especially in those cases where they also make politics more
entertaining. The second most important problem concerns the increasing number of foreign residents and the political status of denizens in almost all European democracies. Measures to incorporate these non-citizens within the political process should also be given a high priority” (p117). The paper believes following reforms could be introduced in most member states by ordinary legislation, should produce immediate, if marginal, improvements in the quality of democracy:
– Lotteries for electors
– Specialised elected councils
- Democracy kiosks
- Education for political participation
- Voting rights for denizens
- Council of Denizens
- Incompatibility of mandates
- Electronic support for candidates and parliament (“smart voting”)
- Electronic monitoring and online deliberation systems
– An agent for promotion of democratic reform
The report “The Future of Democracy in Europe: Trends, Analyses and Reforms” is written to the members of the Council of Europe. In overall the report is eligible. It concerns the machine of democracy rather than the meaning and the effect of democracy. Despite that the report is written specifically for a particular group it can
easily be useful for almost all those who are involved in the political process. The report is novel in many of its suggestions and recommendations.
The report is also can be criticised in many ways. The problem that faces democracy is not merely lies in its technicality; for instance the decline of voting. It goes deeper than that; it is directly related to the social and political circumstances. Inequality in economical opportunity leads to disenchantment and alienation. Those who are not participating in the process they don’t have the feeling of belonging. Belonging to community, space, others, state and nation requires a bond. It is duty of politics to establish that bond. Human beings essentially are social animals, what is required on politics is to bring about an atmosphere human beings feel their essentiality and at the end their belonging.
Sardar Aziz
4Sawmill Lane
Sawmill Street
Cork
Tel: +353(0)86-3565692
E-mail: aziz.sardar@gmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education:
Ireland
2003 - Present University College Cork, BSc Government & Public Policy (4 year degree), currently in final year
Core subjects: ■ Economics
■ Managing Conflict; Ethnically Divided Society
■ Public Management
■ International relations
■ Human Rights
■ Local Government
■Work placement for four months in Cork County Council Housing Department
■ 10.000 word dissertation on American relationship, from an Orientalism point of view
2002 European Computer Driving License (ECDL), Cork
2001 Intermediate Cambridge Certificate in English, UCC
1991 - 1993 Diploma in Public Health Sulaimanya Technical College, Iraq
1990 - 1991 Leaving Certificate (equivalent) Iraq
Employment:
2006 - Present ■ Part time employee with ESRI
■ Freelance Interpreter, Word Perfect Company Dublin
2004 - Present ■ Journalist
Kurdistan: Ireland: freelance
Hawlati, Iraq Evening Echo, Cork
Awene, Iraq College Express
Rojhalat, Iran
On net: www.dangakan.com, Kurdish
www.Kurdishmedia.com, English
Blog: namoy.blogspot.com
Summer 2006 ■ Census Enumerator with CSO
■ Housing Officer, Cork County Council
2004 – 2005 ■ Freelance Interpreter, Access Translation & Euro translation Cork
2003 ■ Assistant, John Smith, University College
Cork UCC
1999 - 2002 ■ Waiting for residency permission in Ireland
1993 - 1999 ■ Managing family business (Iraq)
Volunteer:
2002 - 2005 ■ Cork Campus Radio, shows: “Europe” (national award), “Diversity” and “Think Tank”
2004 - 2005 ■ Establishment of The Mesopotamia Society, UCC: which promotes the culture and politics of the Middle East
Languages: ■ Kurdish: native language
■ Arabic: excellent
■ English: excellent
Skills: ■ Communication skills: public speaking, debating & negotiation
■ Analytical skills: Awareness and understanding of intricate
International political issues
■ Computer skills: Word processing, Spreadsheets and Internet
Additional Information:
Creative writing (short stories, film scripts), Kurdish and English published
§ Cinema: courses in filmmaking and Italian neo-realism, Cork Film Centre
Study trips to European Union, NATO (Brussels/Luxembourg), United Nations (Vienna) etc.
Widely travelled in Meddle-East closely observing the cultural, social and political life of the region
Playing soccer with a number of teams
Referees:
Professor Neil Collins Bernard Allen TD
Department of GovernmentUniversity College CorkCorkIreland
Sardar Aziz
4Sawmill Lane
Sawmill Street
Cork
Tel: +353(0)86-3565692
E-mail: aziz.sardar@gmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education:
Ireland
2003 - Present University College Cork, BSc Government & Public Policy (4 year degree), currently in final year
Core subjects: ■ Economics
■ Managing Conflict; Ethnically Divided Society
■ Public Management
■ International relations
■ Human Rights
■ Local Government
■Work placement for four months in Cork County Council Housing Department
■ 10.000 word dissertation on American relationship, from an Orientalism point of view
2002 European Computer Driving License (ECDL), Cork
2001 Intermediate Cambridge Certificate in English, UCC
1991 - 1993 Diploma in Public Health Sulaimanya Technical College, Iraq
1990 - 1991 Leaving Certificate (equivalent) Iraq
Employment:
2006 - Present ■ Part time employee with ESRI
■ Freelance Interpreter, Word Perfect Company Dublin
2004 - Present ■ Journalist
Kurdistan: Ireland: freelance
Hawlati, Iraq Evening Echo, Cork
Awene, Iraq College Express
Rojhalat, Iran
On net: www.dangakan.com, Kurdish
www.Kurdishmedia.com, English
Blog: namoy.blogspot.com
Summer 2006 ■ Census Enumerator with CSO
■ Housing Officer, Cork County Council
2004 – 2005 ■ Freelance Interpreter, Access Translation & Euro translation Cork
2003 ■ Assistant, John Smith, University College
Cork UCC
1999 - 2002 ■ Waiting for residency permission in Ireland
1993 - 1999 ■ Managing family business (Iraq)
Volunteer:
2002 - 2005 ■ Cork Campus Radio, shows: “Europe” (national award), “Diversity” and “Think Tank”
2004 - 2005 ■ Establishment of The Mesopotamia Society, UCC: which promotes the culture and politics of the Middle East
Languages: ■ Kurdish: native language
■ Arabic: excellent
■ English: excellent
Skills: ■ Communication skills: public speaking, debating & negotiation
■ Analytical skills: Awareness and understanding of intricate
International political issues
■ Computer skills: Word processing, Spreadsheets and Internet
Additional Information:
Creative writing (short stories, film scripts), Kurdish and English published
§ Cinema: courses in filmmaking and Italian neo-realism, Cork Film Centre
Study trips to European Union, NATO (Brussels/Luxembourg), United Nations (Vienna) etc.
Widely travelled in Meddle-East closely observing the cultural, social and political life of the region
Playing soccer with a number of teams
Referees:
Professor Neil Collins Bernard Allen TD
Department of GovernmentUniversity College CorkCorkIreland
Sardar Aziz
4Sawmill Lane
Sawmill Street
Cork
Tel: +353(0)86-3565692
E-mail: aziz.sardar@gmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education:
Ireland
2003 - Present University College Cork, BSc Government & Public Policy (4 year degree), currently in final year
Core subjects: ■ Economics
■ Managing Conflict; Ethnically Divided Society
■ Public Management
■ International relations
■ Human Rights
■ Local Government
■Work placement for four months in Cork County Council Housing Department
■ 10.000 word dissertation on American relationship, from an Orientalism point of view
2002 European Computer Driving License (ECDL), Cork
2001 Intermediate Cambridge Certificate in English, UCC
1991 - 1993 Diploma in Public Health Sulaimanya Technical College, Iraq
1990 - 1991 Leaving Certificate (equivalent) Iraq
Employment:
2006 - Present ■ Part time employee with ESRI
■ Freelance Interpreter, Word Perfect Company Dublin
2004 - Present ■ Journalist
Kurdistan: Ireland: freelance
Hawlati, Iraq Evening Echo, Cork
Awene, Iraq College Express
Rojhalat, Iran
On net: www.dangakan.com, Kurdish
www.Kurdishmedia.com, English
Blog: namoy.blogspot.com
Summer 2006 ■ Census Enumerator with CSO
■ Housing Officer, Cork County Council
2004 – 2005 ■ Freelance Interpreter, Access Translation & Euro translation Cork
2003 ■ Assistant, John Smith, University College
Cork UCC
1999 - 2002 ■ Waiting for residency permission in Ireland
1993 - 1999 ■ Managing family business (Iraq)
Volunteer:
2002 - 2005 ■ Cork Campus Radio, shows: “Europe” (national award), “Diversity” and “Think Tank”
2004 - 2005 ■ Establishment of The Mesopotamia Society, UCC: which promotes the culture and politics of the Middle East
Languages: ■ Kurdish: native language
■ Arabic: excellent
■ English: excellent
Skills: ■ Communication skills: public speaking, debating & negotiation
■ Analytical skills: Awareness and understanding of intricate
International political issues
■ Computer skills: Word processing, Spreadsheets and Internet
Additional Information:
Creative writing (short stories, film scripts), Kurdish and English published
§ Cinema: courses in filmmaking and Italian neo-realism, Cork Film Centre
Study trips to European Union, NATO (Brussels/Luxembourg), United Nations (Vienna) etc.
Widely travelled in Meddle-East closely observing the cultural, social and political life of the region
Playing soccer with a number of teams
Referees:
Professor Neil Collins Bernard Allen TD
Department of GovernmentUniversity College CorkCorkIreland
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment