By Marie Cécile Naves, sociologist and political scientist research director at the’Institute for International and Strategic Relations (IRIS) and François Taddei, Director of the’Learning Planet Institute, researcher at ‘INSERM, professor at’University of Paris, next book Game Changing: Together Solving the Challenges of our Time, published by Calmann-Lévy, January 2022.
The pandemic has indeed been a great equalizer in that it has brought everyone back to square one. Let's seize the opportunity to reimagine the organization of our societies and the way we coexist, and let's continue to raise public awareness of the need to reinvent ourselves. Whether we're dealing with the political choices of the past or preparing for those of the future, the world we're rebuilding will require more sharing, more dialogue and more space for citizen conventions to inform the decision-making process. Visit French philosopher Michel Serre reminds us that the word authority comes from the Latin augere which means to grow, and that the most authoritative debates are those that help us to grow.
Unfortunately, as the French presidential election approaches, substance is gradually disappearing from public political debate. Instead, we're witnessing a surfeit of stagecraft, with candidates brandishing division, pessimism and national nostalgia as tokens of good faith. Questions about the great challenges of our time are overshadowed by attempts at diversion and entertainment. The increasingly pressing needs of those left behind in the wake of pandemics and the looming ecological crisis are treated with a simple shrug of the shoulders. Advocates of authoritarianism continue to erode the balance of power and undermine evidence-based knowledge and science. Positions of power are contested with increasingly hot blood. The pulse of democratic debate weakens, succumbing to scandal, insults and lies.
The French philosopher Sandra Laugier aptly describes democracy as a “form of life” When we know how deadly it can be to silence the other, we understand the need to fight to preserve spaces for dialogue and defend traditions that encourage mutual listening between people with diverse expertise. The learning society is the model for this, i.e. the construction of a common program for the common good through dialogue with individuals and the grassroots. It enables everyone to contribute to the enrichment of debate and the establishment of expertise.
In recent history, democracy has progressed thanks to strong popular movements and advances in science. The home and the classroom are becoming more egalitarian spaces. Our lifestyles have become associated with issues of pressing social and political importance. The political sphere has been enriched by an ever-increasing diversity of viewpoints, experiences, expertise and histories. There's no turning back now. We all deserve to be treated as full members of democratic society, whatever our age. The blueprint for civic participation in democratic institutions needs rethinking, as does democracy itself.
Democracy in the age of fractals
Fractals are a mathematical phenomenon discovered by the Franco-American mathematician Benoît Mandelbrot. These are essentially identical structures at all scales. What if we could shape democracy to be fractal? It would be a democracy that functioned in the same way whatever the scale - local, municipal, regional, national or international. Fortunately, democracy is already partly fractal, simply by accident of the history of its development. Initially, it could only extend to the city limits of Athens, but over time it has continued to expand, emancipating ever wider swathes of the population.
Many people see a cause-and-effect relationship between the evolution of communication technologies and the growth of democracy. The more quickly and widely information and laws could circulate, the more democracy could expand. Yet, until recently, political debate was still hampered by the need to bring people together physically. Debates first took place in agoras, then in universities, courts, salons, academies, councils, clubs and so on. But today, thanks to the Internet, we can, for the first time in history, free ourselves from physical limitations and organize global debates without anyone having to leave their homes.
The creation of European citizenship was a crucial step in demonstrating the possibilities of transnational democracy. The granting of the rights set out in the European Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights to all European citizens gives us an idea of what global citizenship might look like. Many people consider themselves global citizens, but this status carries no rights in itself, and it is not possible to vote in elections to a global governing body. The institutions of global governance closest to us are the United Nations, the IMF, the WTO and others, which have no elected bodies or citizens' assemblies. Nevertheless, these bodies make decisions on major economic and global issues, without any direct democratic participation. It's high time to redesign global governance to incorporate forms of direct citizenship and direct expression of the people, i.e. everyone.
First of all, we need more citizens' assemblies ad hoc . France experimented with its first such assembly in late 2019 and early 2020, the Citizens“ Convention on Climate Change. One hundred and fifty French citizens were drawn by lot to represent French society in a debate lasting several months, the result of which was some 146 petitions on climate change proposed directly to the French executive. These petitions were then presented to Congress and ratified into French law in the form of Resolution 2021-1104 on combating climate change and building resilience to environmental degradation. According to an assessment, some 78 of the 146 petitions were ”partially" taken into account, while 18 were fully taken into account. Hélène Landemore, professor of political science at Yale University and an expert in deliberative democracy, attended the convention and commented on its success. Not only were 150 French citizens able to make ambitious proposals directly to the government, but the convention helped raise awareness of climate issues among the population at large. Some 70 % of French people said they were more aware of climate issues as a result of the meeting. If we could conceive of a global citizens' convention on climate change, what kind of momentum would that create among the world's population?
The second step is to integrate more civic technologies. These are digital platforms that enable public authorities at all levels to poll public opinion in real time on public policy decisions. In short, they catalyze direct democracy, but to be effective, they must be transparent, i.e. open source. Platforms such as allourideas or pol.is are very easy to use and are already in use around the world. Allourideas has hosted tens of thousands of surveys and generated over 42 million votes on surveys published by the United Nations on sustainable development, the OECD on education, the City of Calgary (Canada) on budgeting, and even New York City on the environment. Pol.is is a civic technology popularized by Audrey Tang, a Taiwanese “citizen hacker” and former leader of the 2014 Taiwan Sunflower Movement. She is now the country's Minister of Digital Affairs, and has deployed a range of polling and deliberation tools within government that have become an integral part of the country's democratic life. She explains how it works in her TED Talk: “People are free to express their ideas, and rate other people's ideas up or down.... [but] everyone actually agrees with most things, with most of their neighbors on most subjects. That's what we call the social mandate.”
The third step is less about technology than about mindset, what the Finns have called “humble government”. Essentially, it's about abandoning top-down government management in favor of a network model. Four “conditions” must be met for humble government to work. The first is to achieve what is known as a “thin consensus” on the general objectives surrounding public policy, i.e. to establish the values underpinning policy across the population as a whole. The second condition is to delegate action to “key players” or highly qualified individuals who personally oversee the implementation of reforms. The third condition is to establish feedback loops enabling key players to learn from each other what has worked and what hasn't as they implement a policy, whatever its scale. The fourth and final condition is to allow for constant revision of overall objectives in the light of new information and changing times.
Making Enlightenment more inclusive
If technology can't solve the problem of stifled voices in democratic debate, it can, when used correctly, help to combat it. The established system of representative democracy, whereby an elected official spends a few years in power to implement an agenda, will never change, but many issues can and should be consulted and investigated at more regular intervals. The new Enlightenment ofXXIst century must renew the great legacy of the old Enlightenment, making it more egalitarian and taking into account two things that didn't exist in the 18th century: the dizzying speed of the industrialized world (and in turn that of the planet's decomposition), and the globalization and interconnection of all human experience. In short, the new Enlightenment must move from a mentality of having to a mentality of being.
There's no shortage of great ideas out there, just waiting to be heard. To connect each potential big idea with the right organizations and groups to turn ideas into game-changing initiatives, we need to create more “intermediary” spaces where small- and large-scale actors can meet; more “massive open online debates” (MOOD) where ideas can become actions, and where people from diverse backgrounds can work together to build a healthier future. On the occasion of the UNESCO International Education Day, the “Et si l'apprentissage était une fête" festival. In recent years, more and more voters have abstained from taking part in elections, but this doesn't mean that potential voters are losing interest in democracy. They're simply expressing their democratic voice differently - by joining grassroots movements and bringing about real change. Anyone seeking political office can no longer afford to ignore new ways of doing things.
This article was published by The Conversation.
