|
39yrs • M •
A CTL of 1 means that wittgensteins is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
|
|
Democracy Disrobed |
It is a curiosity of history that no sacred text as per democracy exists. There are histories (potted or comprehensive) and there are theoretical tomes, but none (so far as I can see) which serve as manifestoes in the same way Rawls's works did for Liberalism; or Nozick's for Libertarianism; or Burke's for Conservatism. And so on. Reasons proffered for this phenomenon are legion. For one, it has been suggested, democracy is not an ideology or world-view: it is simply a method for resolving conflict by peaceful means. It is a Modus Vivendi, a set of institutional arrangements whereby free and equal citizens come together to agree on the (mutual) conditions of their existence. As such, it is a precondition of politics, not an offshoot of it. Second, democracy is what Gallie called an 'essentially contested concept': it is open to an infinity, or at least a plurality, of meanings. It is whatever one chooses it to mean. Connectedly, everyone now claims to be a democrat. It is, as Crick announces, 'everybody's mistress'. So reducing democracy to a definition which everyone will assent to is perilous in the extreme. There is a second curiosity concerning democracy. It is that just at the moment it has triumphed all over the world, cynicism about it merits amongst citizens of democracies has multiplied. This is not, perhaps, altogether surprising – it is not, and never could be, the lodestar which guides its pilgrims to broad sunlit uplands and everlasting happiness. Scholars like Bell, Fukuyama and Mandelbaum insist that liberal democracy has the won the day because of its intrinsic superiority over its rivals (namely fascism and communism) and predict (notwithstanding the Lee thesis) that the tide of democracy will, in the fullness of time, roil all harbours. The question that I want to ask is: what it is the future of democracy? Are we entering a new phase of 'monitory democracy' (as Keane says)?; is it more rational than its rivals?; is it separable from Liberalism?; and is it the panacea to the world's ills that it is cracked up to be?
|
|