Democracy 1.0
(version 1.1)
4. Representative democracy is in crisis. A crisis produced from above, by international financial markets, rating agencies, private think tanks and corporate media. But the credibility of democracy is also questioned from below. To talk about democracy is to (re)appropriate and to (re)invent a common sense of democracy. The guarantee of rights to the commons, of the transformation of citizenship, of equality, freedom, peace, autonomy and collectivity.
5. The 2011 uprisings across the world have rescued the living meanings of democracy. When we claim democracy in Europe we do not aim to restore the luster of the old national constitutional democracies, bur rather to invent the institutions that can catch up with the cry of "They don't represent us" spread by those uprisings. We want to claim back our belief in the self-government of the 'demos'. Hold on to this concept. Hold on to its reinvention. Hold on to its transformation".
6. We are experiencing a post-democratic turn in Europe. Our liberal constitutions are being used for private interests when the Troika imposes budgetary decisions as well as social policies without democratic legitimation. [DISCUSSION NEEDED AROUND THIS SENTENCE!!] Security, in a similar way, has become a central process in the emptying of significance and performance of democratic institutions. Austerity and security are prefiguring a general transformation of the role of institutions on the global level, that is rendering democracy impossible.
7. The constitution of the people is what is at stake for us in what we term democracy. How can we re-think a democratic self-governance in pluralist and participatory experimental ways? How can we learn from the democratic practices on the squares around the globe and think of them as re-invention of participatory processes in the assembly of the many, in order to give ourselves our own rules, laws and rights? How can this process be pluralist, federalist, based on networks and assemblages, movements and relations instead of identities, functions and roles? We envision here something beyond the juridical form of democracy bound to a national sovereign. We are opening up this concept, to spread democratic practices into the social, the everyday, into production and reproduction of life. The state needs to be under scrutiny, challenged by the diffusion of radical inclusion and the invention of democratic tools from below
9. Democracy in Europe means for us a two-sided process in which both "democracy" and "Europe" are intertwined, (re)appropriated and reinvented on the basis of the transnational social and political struggles of the many. Democracy as a practice. Democracy for Europe.
Proposed modifications
A. I think there is a need to qualify the "collective desires" mentioned in paragraph 4. Just adding "of liberation" would not probably be enough, but it is a possible (short) way to go. WE DELETED THE TEXT
B. Regarding the reference to the people, should we not say something more here, keeping in mind the section on "citizenship and borders"? Should not we say that the very constitution of the people is what is at stake for us in what we term democracy? I think we should. WE ADD The very constitution of the people is what is at stake for us in what we term democracy IN PARAGRAPH 7
C. On the budgetary decisions of the Troika, I am not particularly convinced by the phrase "bypassing sovereign entitlements of any kind". I think it is too close to a certain "leftist" nationalist rhetoric, which presents neo-liberal policies as imposed "from above" on "reluctant" sovereign states. I think it would be more effective to point to the deep transformations of sovereignty we have been experiencing in Europe (and elsewhere in the world) over the last two decades. WE DELETED THE TEXT AND PROPOSED MODIFICATION "E"
D. I further ask myself whether the phrase "nuestra Europa" does not need some more specification: maybe it would be the occasion to say something (very concisely of course) about the question of Europe and the world.
E. On paragraph 6 we propose the following [REWRITE: Our liberal constitutions are being used for private interests and have to be redesigned urgently in order to be instruments in the hands of the many. On the one hand the Troika imposes budgetary decisions as well as social policies without democratic legitimation] PROPOSAL from ROME [Fabio put it before saturday 1pm]. [REWRITE: Security, in a similar way, has become a central process in the emptying of significance and performance of democratic institutions] PROPOSAL FROM GAVIN [...].
F. We propose to introduce the question of security-peace in the part of governance
proposals from Isabell hopefully I do not add or correct things you already changed/discussed...
concerning PREAMBLE 1.0: 1. Para. I would delete "among our communities", because 'communities' implies always exclusion, and add on "transnational" levels; insead of "in 2011" I suggest "since 2011". "... as well as experiences of craetive politrical work on municipal, national and transnational levels. .... across the world since 2011."
2. Para. The second sentence sounds as if the EU once had been democratic, but is was always mainly an economic union. nowadays it is obvious that it has to become democratic. and to focus only on the "constitutional framework" in transformation is too small. a correction could be: "We have faced a radical transformation of the EU which now has become clearly the expression and articulation of capitalist and financial command." As well, I have some problems with the next sentence, but I don't know how to reformulate it. It sounds as if the problem of the nation state in the crisis would be, that it doesn't protect anymore, that there is no "defence against the violence of the crisis". But the crisis is not something that comes (only) from outside, each nation state is involved in it.... and in the last sentence of this paragraph we should not forget: antisemitism, antifeminism, homophobia....
3. Para. we can delete "This charter aims to open up" just of reasons of the fluidity of the text: "We want to initiate ... across the european space, a process towards ..."
"people are protagonists of there own lives" seams not enough, we should add: "on the basis of social and political rights". What when people want to be protagonists in processes of separation ... ?
concerning DEMOCRACY 1.0:
4. Para.
I agree to delete the first sentence "The crisis ... cries out loud." Then the (now) second sentence should start: "A double movement is happening. A crisis of democracy produced from above..." I think there is no "common sense of democracy", it is in an (infinite) constituent process: I suggest: "To talk about democracy means to (re)appropriate and (re)invent a common sence of democracy." perhaps it could help to add to "collective desire" not only "of liberation" but as well "and of democratic self-government": "collective desire of liberation and democratic self-governement". I would delete "geronocracy". Imagine Renzi, Valls or the foreign minister of Austria...
5. Para.
I would shorten the last sentence in: "We want to claim back our belief to this old concept of the self-government of the 'demos'."
6. Para.
Concerning the first sentence: Representative democracy as we know it is constitutive to "our liberal constitutions". I think the reinvention of democracy we are talking about in this charter is much more than the redesign of a deformed liberal democracy. Liberal democracy is - in the one way or the other - always "used" for private interests... I agree to the changes made above in point C and E.
7. Para.
I would not use very prominent the term "participation" because the existing democracies ARE based on specific forms of participation and the whole practices of Governance ARE based on participation of people to get them involved in decision-making processes to legitimize at the end existing domination relations. participation as well as pluralism are not automatically practices of 'emancipation'. Second point: What does it mean THE or ONE "assembly of the many"? what is the difference between the traditional representative national assembly (to implement the constitution)? who takes part etc.? We would change the first sentences of this paragraph in: "How can we re-think a democratic self-government in experimental ways? How can we learn from the domocratic practices ... and think of them as reinvention of radically inclusive processes, in order to give ourselves our own rules, laws and rights? How can this process be inclusive, based on networks ..." The last sentence can be shortend like this: "The state needs to be under scrutiny, challenged by the diffusion of radical inclusion and the invention of democratic tools from below."
8. Para.
As many have commented already: as well for me it is not clear, what this "Nuestra Europa" should mean and why it is needed. I suggest to end this paragraph with "... autonomy and collectivity."
9. Para.
It is not necessary to introduce the tensions of the charter at the end of the democracy-part. We would delete this and change the phrase "democracy must be a new word" in "democracy must become a new word". The whole paragraph would end with "... democratic multitudinous uprisings."
