Jump to Navigation
Home

Main menu

  • Home
  • News
  • Markets Map
  • Sentiments
  • Topics
  • Data
  • Comments
  • Images
  • Blog
  • About

Secondary menu

  • Latest News
  • Top Rated
  • Most Popular
  • Archive
  • Discussions
  • JPM Emerging Markets Income trust to slash performance fee
  • Canada’s financial community facing changing of the guard
  • 3 Rules Poor Teens Should Do Follow To Make It To The...
  • Taco Bell Sends Bizarre Love Letters And Rings To Models...
  • Steep Slide in Japan's Yen is 'Very, Very...
  • The Incredible Story Of America's Boom, Crash, And...
  • ESPN cutting workforce, 'smartly managing costs'
  • Guest Post: Centralization And Sociopathology
  • Somebody Is Scalping A Planet Money T-Shirt For $350
  • Denso executives to plead guilty to price fixing in...

    Occupy, & democracies

    Fri, 10/21/2011 - 09:14 EDT - Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Comments

    Liberty, said John Stuart Mill, “is often granted where it should be withheld, as well as withheld where it should be granted.” I’ve often thought that the same could be said for democracy. And this is how we should interpret the Occupy movements.
    What I mean is that if we think of democracy as an information-gathering device, it is used where it shouldn’t be and not used where it should. Most of us are either uninformed or actively misinformed about national policies, but democracy operates at this level. And yet we often do have knowledge about our locality or workplace, but local democracy and workplace democracy are weak or absent.
    In this context, I’m not convinced by Anthony’s complaint that lefties such as the OccupyLSXers “know what people really want even if they don't yet themselves.” Such a stance is perfectly reasonable, given that cognitive biases research supports Marx’s view that there might well be such a thing as false consciousness and that - partly because of this - actually-existing democracy fails to advance justice or liberty.
     By contrast, I suspect the Occupy movements might be starting to build new foundations for "fourth generation" democracy; as Sunny says, there‘s more to democracy than voting once every five years. I mean this in four ways:
    - Advancing economic democracy. A theme of the Occupiers seems to be a desire for more popular control over the economy. This might take dangerous forms - the market, remember, is a good information-aggregating device - or it might not.
    - Egalitarian democracy. A virtue of democracy is not that it leads to good outcomes - it often doesn’t - but rather that the “one person, one vote” principle embodies an important aspect of equality. Occupy seems to be taking this further, not just by demanding greater economic equality, but also by demonstrating an egalitarian form of political activity - one undistorted by lobbyists or media prejudice.
    - Micro deliberative democracy. The Occupiers are creating an arena in which political questions about economic organization can be asked, and get the attention of the media and Westminster. Such arenas are rare.
    - Macro deliberative democracy. In calling hierarchical capitalism into question, the Occupyers are helping to open the Overton window, to influence mainstream politicians into considering issues which have hitherto been little discussed. In this sense the Occupyers are complements for the parliamentary left, not substitutes.
    Now, I’m almost certainly taking a rosy view of the Occupyers here. As James says, there’s a large element of narcissistic activism among them. But it might grow into something better.
    My main point, though, is that the Occupyers are, potentially at least, a force for democracy in the best sense. And insofar as there is a tension between them and parliamentary democracy, so much the worse for the latter. 

    • Original article
    • Login or register to post comments
     

    Related

    • Living with a weak economy

      Hopi writes: The moderate left is aware that it's fiscal tools to tackle the immediate crisis are horribly limited. The idealist left is uncomfortably aware they don't actually have a plan to offer, other than disbelief at the way things are now. As a result, the right tells the electorate that pain is the only way forward.

    • Democracy: in defence of scepticism

      In one of those “suddenly everyone gives a damn about Egypt” pieces, David Aaronovitch (£) says that scepticism about democracy “dovetails into the aggressive apologia that undemocratic regimes invent for themselves.” This is silly.

    • False consciousness

      Norm criticizes Eliane Glaser’s discussion of false consciousness. I’m not happy with either side of the argument.

    • Authority vs equality

      In its obituary of him, the Times says that Peter Roebuck grew disenchanted with England because he thought it lacked the right combination of egalitarianism and authority. This is a really useful way for thinking about the structure of organizations - be they sports teams, companies or whatever - because there are costs and benefits associated with both*. The benefits of authority are:

    • Cognitive biases and the Milibands

      I fear that the Labour leadership election, and reactions thereto, are heavily influenced by some cognitive biases.Some say that David lost despite being the more experienced of the two brothers. It might be truer to say that he lost because of his experience. Far from this giving him attractive skills, it merely gave him guilt by association.

    • Democracy, liberty & minarets

      In an earlier post, I wrote: “There’s a conflict between liberty and democracy.” The Swiss decision to ban minarets illustrates this perfectly.

    • Social democracy in hard times

      I know a party conference isn’t the place for clear thinking about fundamental issues. But even so, Ed Balls’ speech contrives to miss the basic challenge facing policy-makers.His five point “plan for growth“ consists mainly of temporary tax breaks and the pulling forward of public investment. This would be OK(ish) if our problem were merely a cyclical one of temporarily weak demand.

    • Denialism about democracy

      In recent days, I’ve seen two examples of denialism about the defects of democracy.First, a couple of commenters at LibCon have tried to deny my claim that there is a contradiction between libertarianism and democracy. They’re wrong.

    • Democracy vs justice

      There’s a common theme underlying several of my recent posts - one that I’ve discussed before but which doesn’t get much attention elsewhere. I mean the conflict between democracy and justice.

    • Doubts about democracy

      Coming from different perspectives, Will Wilkinson and Henry at Crooked Timber make a similar point. Henry says:Human beings may not want the kinds of autonomy that liberals presume they doWill says:

    Latest

    Why Women Are Better Positioned Than Men To Be Digital Disruptors
    Why Women Are Better Positioned Than Men To Be...
    What Tumblr Founder David Karp Is Really Like
    What Tumblr Founder David Karp Is Really Like

    User login

    • Create new account
    • Request new password
    • Click on the icon to sign in with your social network login or enter your Bullfax.com login

    Our Blog

    • Did Iceland make it through the crisis?
    • Marks & Spenser, Bank Loans in China, Vodafone and Asian Stocks in Our News for Today 05/21/2013
    • Actavis to acquire Warner Chilcott in $5bn pharmaceutical deal

    Markets Map

    Markets Map

    Follow Us

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS
    S&P 500: 1672.36 0.36% FTSE: 6803.87 0.71% Nikk.: 15381.02 0.13% DAX: 8472.20 0.19% HSI: 23366.369 -0.54% FX: EUR/GBP: 1.1748 USD/EUR: 1.2913 JPY/USD: 102.4635 Commodities: Gold: 1380.10

    Bullfax.com - Market News & Analysis 2008-2011
    Contact Us | About Us | Terms & Conditions

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS .

    Secondary menu

    • Latest News
    • Top Rated
    • Most Popular
    • Archive
    • Discussions