Some
democracies lose their ability to give all citizens equal power over their
lives. If you feel you live in such a society, there are many concrete things
that allow you to reclaim your democracy. These concrete actions may differ some,
depending on the type of society in which you find yourself. Yet there is also
significant overlap across different settings when acting to revive democracy.
Those
who live under dictatorships have been successful in strengthening democratic
social structures as a step towards overthrow of autocratic rule. The recent success
of Tunisia in such a transformation is only one of a long history of
countries that have reclaimed their governance practices from centralized
authoritarianism. These successes have been analyzed by Gene Sharp
and other commentators and organizers.
Success at decentralizing power
often seem to come from a careful, strategic effort to revitalize local
organizations and dislodge centralized power. These efforts can come from
coordinated work to strengthen social institutions while gradually beginning to
challenge the authority of centralized power structures. This work may take the
simple form of religious organizations, cultural associations, sports clubs,
trade unions, student associations, village councils, neighborhood associations,
gardening clubs, human rights organizations, musical groups and literary
societies, and other bodies. (Sharp, 4th ed., 22)
So reclaiming decentralized power
can start with the widespread revitalization of community bodies that provide a
structural base for governing community affairs. Some of these organizations
may attract the attention of authoritarian elites, such as trade unions or
human rights organizations, but many others may operate freely for a long time
without such attention.
In nations where electoral democracy
is seemingly alive and well, even if power inequalities remain widespread, many
concrete actions will contribute to increased control over social relations. In
the United States after President Trump was
elected, for example, many feared that their status as a democracy might be
at risk. As is the case when normalized ideas of what keeps a democracy alive
are threatened in other electoral nation-states, there may be a temporary rush
to strengthen important institutional supports for electoral democracy.
One group of organizations that
often receives support in times when electoral democracy seems threatened are
press and media organizations. Organizations like investigative journalism sites and the Committee to Protect Journalists or the Alexia Foundation and PEN
or sites that leak government secrets often receive
support when governments attempt to limit information and the available range
of viewpoints. If human rights still seem like they might strengthen democracy,
then civil liberties or constitutional rights or women’s rights organizations may appear to be
an effective approach. For those who believe in equality, questions about wealth inequality or racism
or xenophobia
motivate some to turn to identity-based organizations to fight inequality. For
those who trust elected officials and expert
policy makers, they may turn to these
leaders to strengthen democracy. For those who believe that election funding
has made accountability to all impossible for elected leaders, they may attempt
to reclaim government from corporations and lobbyists. Others may attempt to hold elected
leaders accountable to voters by investigating their voting records and writing letters and emails or calling elected
representatives, or even attending town hall meetings.
If you have grown to distrust
electoral democracies as a way to achieve equality, then you may put your
efforts into reviving democratic practices that redistribute power more
equally. There are two key ways to decentralize power for those interested in democracy
beyond elections and other practices that produce inequality. First are
those structures that protect the general interest. Common examples of these
structures are mass assemblies, village or town meetings, and other occasions where
all community members are present. These structures confront those who pursue
their own narrow interests with the assembled multitudes who may pursue policies and practices that
serve the general interest.
Second are practices that produce
consensus. Rather than marginalizing a minority, they bring all parties together
to encourage them to find solutions that satisfy all. By taking consensus at
their center, rather than elections, these practices teach participants how to
work across disagreement and difference constructively.
There are many approaches to
building consensus and many aspects to transforming habits and expectations needed
to make consensus possible. Many have accepted as normal those competitive
efforts that defeat opponents rather than build constructive group relations. So
consensus depends on changing goals and
general objectives. Consensus also depends on all present clearing room
in discussions so that all may speak, rather than assuming that only the
highly educated or the wealthy or men will dominate discussion. Many
organizations have produced helpful guides to practicing consensus in meetings
as well, from small
meetings to large
gatherings, such as the mass
meetings in large urban plazas in Spain or in other settings.
For some, democracy is only possible when
elections have been left behind and other forms of democratic practices take
center stage. For others, electoral democracy as found in the European-style modern
nation-state is the only possible form of democracy. But all have work to do if
they wish to strengthen democracy in practice, whether in Tunisia or the United
States or in social spaces where a lack of democracy produces political
urgency.
No comments:
Post a Comment