Broken Democracy: On the Revolution of Governance

Author: (French) Pierre Calame
Translator: Gao Linghan
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-01-01
Features:
Author's Statement: The fundamental issue of collaborative governance is how society can achieve common prosperity while ensuring peace, without damaging ecological resources. The people of the world must jointly govern our planet. If we continue to think and act based on the hegemonic logic of superpowers, such as the old views from the 17th and 19th centuries, we will face destruction. — Pierre Calame
Excerpt:
Introduction
Entering the 21st century means not only entering a new millennium but also a shift in the times. The acceleration of technological and economic development, along with the dramatic changes in interdependence among societies, between humanity and its environment, are shaking ideological systems and historical mechanisms, which, however, have served necessary management and regulatory functions. This turning point has led to unbridled and unguided development of scientific and technological innovation and commodity relations. Our traditional spiritual, moral, and political identities have eroded, and traditional solidarity and mutual assistance have weakened. Yet, globally, no alternative principles or mechanisms have been found to replace them.
In this context, the primary issue of the 21st century is not the development of science and technology, at least not the way we see it today, nor the continuation of the expansion of commodity relations. The primary issue is to establish a common ethical foundation on which people around the world can manage their interdependencies, formulate, implement, and enforce new rules, and provide a soul, meaning, rules, fairness, and a future for the global village we must all inhabit. Guided by democratic principles, every individual should have a voice in local governance and participate in shaping the common future. However, this democratic principle has experienced a rather ironic fate in recent decades. On the surface, the model of representative democracy, where citizens freely elect their representatives to manage society on their behalf, has surpassed all opposing systems and occupies the most important position. If not entirely in fact, at least theoretically, this is the case. However, the exercise of political power, in terms of its scale and operation, no longer allows ordinary citizens to truly influence state affairs—now global affairs. The fact that a few thousand Florida voters, through a controversial election with limited participation, can gradually determine the war and peace in the Middle East is far removed from democratic ideals.
Today, everything that guides our future, especially major decisions in science and technology, has moved beyond public discussion. Even political debates, the exercise of power by elected representatives, who are periodically entrusted with managing it, no longer align with society's technological and cultural conditions. Large multinational economic and financial entities have become disconnected from control and oversight. The divisions exposed in televised debates by political candidates responsible for public office, before an increasingly awakened public, fail to hide their short-sightedness and the limitations of their actions. The result—as consistent surveys have shown—is the erosion of the credibility and prestige of elected politicians in the eyes of the public. In many established democracies, the rise in voter abstention is inevitable.
Democracy is triumphant, but it is broken. For two centuries, the space of the state and the nation, for better or worse, has been the main framework of public, political, and social norms. The development of public services, the expansion of redistributive systems, the establishment of welfare states, and the improvement of macroeconomic regulation reached their peak in Western Europe, forming a regulatory system that dates back to the 17th century, the product of ideological development and social struggles. After World War II, nationalism became the central slogan of independence struggles, and the state became the best advocate for development in the 1960s, providing the primary guarantee and most reliable impetus. But after the peak, there was an equally rapid decline. The scope of the state and national policies no longer fit the scale of global interdependence. The state is too autocratic and bureaucratic, almost closed off from reality and social dynamics, sometimes rigidly applying models from other societies that are often corrupt. It is seen as a source of all evil after receiving various accolades. Attempts at reform, however weak and superficial, have all failed, indicating the inability of public institutions to renew themselves, leaving only disintegration as a future, no other path. The historical collapse of the planned economy has made matters worse. This situation has provided fertile ground for the rise and development of so-called neoliberal revolutions. The state has been undermined by two movements. On one hand, the redistribution of public functions has shifted toward smaller institutions—this is the widespread movement of decentralization—or larger institutions—limited national integration movements or the increasing number of international conventions. On the other hand, the contradiction between the shrinking scope of the public sphere and the state's goals and functions, as well as the privatization of the public sector, has weakened public action. Almost everywhere, those in charge of public action are on the defensive, focusing more on resistance than innovation.
Yet, this is indeed the irreversible trend of globalization, the various forms of interdependence on a global scale, and development, which, in the 21st century, have become the most decisive structural factor, posing a fatal challenge to the role of the state as we know it before World War II. The devastation of war led to the establishment of a new system to regulate the "international society" after 1945, including the United Nations and its numerous specialized agencies, the so-called Bretton Woods institutions (Bretton Woods)—the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund—as well as the later World Trade Organization (WTO) through multilateral trade agreements—the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)...