"Democracy is not just a vote urn. In the complexity of the contemporary world, the democratic life is off-center, giving rise to a variety of actions and institutions beyond the only universal suffrage. " This is the conclusion reached by Pierre Rosanvallon, the French scholar who teaches at the College de France and considered one of the most influential intellectuals beyond the Alps. He explains it in a book just published in France, La légimité démocratique (Seuil, pp. 380, 21 €), which follows a more dense essay entitled "The era of political distrust, about to be published in Italy by City open, thus adding to the unobtainable before the people (Princeton) and The Politico, history of a concept (Rubettino). "The disenchantment with democracy is now a fact. The citizens vote less than in the past and especially in a different way, "says Rosanvallon, who also created the République des idées, an important space for reflection, with a website and a series of books.
"Today's vote is no longer a moment of identification with a social group, a territory or a political party. The vote has changed its nature. In the past it was the manifestation of a social identity, individual expresses an opinion now. This transformation is accompanied by a growing disaffection with the political parties and the crisis of the state understood as the common administration. "
The disenchantment with democracy fosters disregard for the public good?
I do not think, as citizens demonstrate their involvement in community life in other ways. Between elections, the democratic vitality takes other forms, that the book policy in the era of mistrust I have designated a "controdemocrazia," a loaded term and deliberately ambiguous. "
What is this?
"The 'controdemocrazia" consists from all the activities that are not intended to involve the citizen the exercise of power, but to organize its control over those who govern. It 's impossible that all directly involved in political decisions, but everyone can express critical opinions and participate in civic vigilance in respect of power. Of course, these activities may be many, starting with the monitoring, validation and notation of democratic procedures. It is of a more or less formally constituted, which may be players' associations, the press or individuals on the Internet. "
She also speaks of negative sovereignty ...
"It's what, citizens rejecting some government decisions. The early theorists of democracy thought that democracy is essentially based on the silent consent of the citizens, but today we realize that democratic in the activity, close to consensus, plays an essential role dissent. Even Montesquieu pointed out the asymmetry between right and power to act to prevent, in a democracy. And 'in fact much easier to measure the results achieved on the side of the disagreement on that of constructive proposal. If you can block a decision of power, the results are seen immediately, while promoting a law often takes years before you see results. "
What other forms of controdemocrazia?
"Another important component is the exercise that seeks to impeach the power. The model of the process, escaping from justice, has spread throughout society. The adversarial attitude was once the center of the role of the parliamentary opposition, but over time has spread throughout society, becoming a collective heritage. "
opposing the building, civil society chooses sometimes forms that feed the anti-politics. It is not a risk?
"It is indeed a risk now widespread. Activities that call controdemocratiche have always ambiguous. On the one hand, they may be useful to strengthen democracy, stimulating positive, and secondly, they can also weaken, fueling anti-politics. The controdemocrazia submits positive evidence that the power to force him to better achieve its mission to serve society. Supervision and critical constraints in fact create virtuous. The negative controdemocrazia instead digs a deeper furrow between power and society, widening the gap between citizens and politicians. The paradox of anti-power is that it makes more distant and therefore untouchable. His criticism does not produce radical social appropriation, but a situation where citizens are increasingly dispossessed of democratic processes. That gives rise to populism "from below", whose forms are different from traditional populism of the nineteenth century. "
controdemocrazia This ambivalence is new today?
"No, its ambiguity was evident during the French Revolution. At that time, the great theorist of surveillance power is Condorcet, for which those who govern must be held continuously. For him, there is a power of good in itself because was democratically elected. Democracy exists only in the interaction between the continuous governing institutions and procedures that regulate and control its activities. In addition to Condorcet, however, does Marat, the friend of the people, who continuously decries the politics, transforming those who govern in an embodiment of evil from which society can never expect anything good. "
In Italy, populism traditional and born of the controdemocrazia now seem to coexist ...
"When these two forms of populism overlap, there is a risk of triggering a dangerous mechanism of tissue breakdown Democrat. Democracy should be a movement of social appropriation of collective decisions, populism, however, always expropriate the people of those decisions. Often those who criticize the party believes that civil society can be self-sufficient, but it is an illusion to think that democracy can only be reduced to the civil society. Democracy is always a face-off between the government and society, decisions and consensus. "
In his new book, the legitimacy démocratique, she argues that universal suffrage is not enough to legitimate democracy. What other forms of democratic legitimacy?
'In past - in a social, economic, ideological and more stable - it was easier to imagine the continuity between the vote and policies that would follow. Today, the elections have become a simple nomination process which anticipates even fewer choices to come. Once he was voting for a project today for a man. Consequently, universal suffrage attorney legitimacy only instrumental, which is certainly very important - because ultimately, the truth is that arithmetic decide - but no longer viable. It 's a legitimacy that must constantly be put to the test and find support from other forms of legitimacy. "
In How?
"A process of legitimation of power is produced from the impartiality guaranteed by independent authorities to ensure that you avoid some of the institutions approprino so partisan. Then there is the legitimacy derived from the constitutional courts that guarantee equal rights and protect democracy from the whim of the moment. Finally, there is a form of legitimacy that comes from the closeness of those who govern the citizens, who are asking the government to respect the society and to listen to their suffering. If the democracies in the past have focused mainly on institutions, is now back at enhancing behaviors. We need behavior of a democracy. And this is a sign of the transformation and enlargement of the concept of democracy. "
The various figures and institutions of democratic reality is given once and for all?
"No, democracy is never given once and forever. It must be continually subjected to a process of appropriation, from the activities of civil society, institutions and permanent interaction between power and society. We must take possession of continuous democracy. Tocqueville believed that democracy simplify increasingly political life, in reality the reverse is true. The development of democracy makes politics more complex. But this is the condition to prevent a few of particular interest to confiscate for his own benefit. "
of Fabio Gambaro from the Republic of December 15, 2008
0 comments:
Post a Comment