Article: I hate democracy

Google:

Article: I hate democracy

A "view from the global South", and one of those blunt diatribes against democracy that keep appearing in African newspapers from time to time and get very little attention in other parts of the world: The op-ed, "I hate democracy", by Wonder Guchu, a Zimbabwean journalist, poet, and writer of short stories, published in the Namibia-based newspaper, "The Southern Times", on 15 August 2011.

Excerpt: "This democracy speaks the language of anger and hatred. It seeks to isolate and shame all those who do not agree in principle with whatever desires or wishes such democracy wants. It is 'God' in itself. Everything must rally around it. Stop and listen only to its voice. Every person must kneel and crawl only to this democracy. And many voices are drowned. Many people sit back in fear of being called names. Debate is stifled because once you say what you think and it's different from what democracy wants, then you are an 'operative' or an 'apologist'. Whatever view you have does not mean anything as long as it is different from what democracy dictates."

Southern Times - I hate democracy

Article: History of US public administration in the Progressive era: Efficient government by and for whom?

Google:

Article: History of US public administration in the Progressive era: Efficient government by and for whom?

Anti-democratic thought in an historical perspective: Mordecai Lee (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee), "History of US public administration in the Progressive era: Efficient government by and for whom?" ("Journal of Management History", 17 [1], 2011: pp. 88-101).

Quote: "Histories of American public administration during the Progressive era (1890-1920) tend to highlight the positive contributions of its major founders, skimming lightly over nativist, anti-democratic and racial writings. The purpose of this paper is to broaden the given narrative by setting the record straight regarding the latter writings of three major figures: Frederick Cleveland, Frank Goodnow and W.F. Willoughby. ... The three major public administration figures on President Taft's Commission on Economy and Efficiency (1910-1913) ... deemed that only limited populations were qualified to govern a democracy and provide efficient public administration to the masses."

Emerald | Journal of Management History | History of US public administration in the Progressive era: Efficient government by and for whom?

Article: Jihad Against Infidels and Democracy: A Frame Analysis of Jihadist Ideology and Jurisprudence for Martyrdom and Violent Jihad

Google:

Article: Jihad Against Infidels and Democracy: A Frame Analysis of Jihadist Ideology and Jurisprudence for Martyrdom and Violent Jihad

An article on the more obvious enemies of democracy (and the new leader of al-Qaeda): Randall G. Rogan (Wake Forest University), "Jihad Against Infidels and Democracy: A Frame Analysis of Jihadist Ideology and Jurisprudence for Martyrdom and Violent Jihad" ("Communication Monographs", 77 [3], September 2010: pp. 393-413).

Quote: "Of significant noteworthiness is the visible absence of scholarly research investigating the writings, pronouncements, or communiqués of the proponents of jihadism. This study sought to address this gap by exploring two written documents with authorship attributed to Ayman al-Zawahiri that focused on Islam's relationship with democracy and the jurisprudence for jihad. ... The findings indicate that Zawahiri tended to frame democracy as an apostate religion that competes with Islam and therefore, must be destroyed".

Taylor & Francis Online :: Jihad Against Infidels and Democracy: A Frame Analysis of Jihadist Ideology and Jurisprudence for Martyrdom and Violent Jihad - Communication Monographs - Volume 77,
...

Book: The Civic Foundations of Fascism in Europe: Italy, Spain, and Romania, 1870-1945

Google:

Book: The Civic Foundations of Fascism in Europe: Italy, Spain, and Romania, 1870-1945

Dylan Riley (Berkeley) is the author of "The Civic Foundations of Fascism in Europe: Italy, Spain, and Romania, 1870-1945" (Johns Hopkins University Press, January 2010).

Quote: "From the late nineteenth century to World War I, voluntary associations exploded across Europe, especially among rural non-elites. But the development of this 'civil society' did not produce liberal democracy in Italy, Spain, and Romania. Instead, Riley finds that it undermined the nascent liberal regimes in these countries and was a central cause of the rise of fascism. ... Riley credibly challenges the notion that a strong civil society necessarily leads to the development of liberal democracy."

The Johns Hopkins University Press

Article: Social Capital Worldwide: Potential for Democratization or Stabilizer of Authoritarian Rule?

Google:

Article: Social Capital Worldwide: Potential for Democratization or Stabilizer of Authoritarian Rule?

Going to make two posts today introducing resources on how civic associations may promote anti-democracy. My earlier post on the subject can be found here: http://anti-democracy-agenda.blogspot.com/2010/02/how-civic-associations-promote-anti.html

First I came across a recent article by Sigrid Rossteutscher (Goethe University Frankfurt), "Social Capital Worldwide: Potential for Democratization or Stabilizer of Authoritarian Rule?" ("American Behavioral Scientist", 53 [5], January 2010: pp. 737-57).

Quote: "The notion of social capital has gained enthusiastic support from nongovernmental organizations, intergovernmental confederations, and supranational bodies such as the European Union, the World Bank, and the United Nations. They all believe that social capital might be a potent aid for democratization, for repairing defective democracies, and for undermining authoritarian regimes. ... This article examines whether social capital has such positive effects in countries where democracy is not yet established. ... The results are clear: Social capital functions as a stabilizer of authoritarian rule. Its effects are mainly negative. ... Social participation and trust, specifically, increase the stability of nondemocratic leadership by generating popular support, by suppressing regime-threatening forms of protest activity, and by nourishing undemocratic ideals of governance."

The article was published in a special issue of the journal on the "dark side" of social capital.

Social Capital Worldwide: Potential for Democratization or Stabilizer of Authoritarian Rule?

Book: Constitutional Theocracy

Google:

Book: Constitutional Theocracy

Here is a book that shows why it makes sense that I blog about political theology and anti-democracy in the same place now: Ran Hirschl (University of Toronto), "Constitutional Theocracy" (Cambridge University Press, November 2010).

Quote: "At the intersection of two sweeping global trends - the rise of popular support for principles of theocratic governance and the spread of constitutionalism and judicial review - a new legal order has emerged: constitutional theocracy. ... In this book, Ran Hirschl undertakes a rigorous comparative analysis of religion-and-state jurisprudence from dozens of countries worldwide to explore the evolving role of constitutional law and courts in a non-secularist world."

Constitutional Theocracy - Ran Hirschl - Harvard University Press

Article: Barry Hindess and the Critique of Democracy

Google:

Article: Barry Hindess and the Critique of Democracy

An article on a critic of democracy I had, admittedly, never heard of: Baogang He (Deakin University), "Barry Hindess and the Critique of Democracy" ("Alternatives: Global, Local, Political", 36 [1], February 2011: pp. 17-24).

Quote: "In the wake of the collapse of the Communist regime in the Soviet Union, liberal democracy was triumphantly celebrated as the 'end of history.' Against this backdrop, Hindess wrote a number of critical essays launching his intellectual critique of liberal democracy. His approach was primarily conceptual, highlighting the problems and weaknesses of the conceptualization of democracy and democratization."

Hindess is now Adjunct Professor at the Australian National University.

The full text of the article is available at this link: http://www.chinesedemocratization.com/Baogang-English%20articles/2010-11/HindessOnDemocracy.pdf

Barry Hindess and the Critique of Democracy

Report: Democracy Index 2010: Democracy in retreat

Google:

Report: Democracy Index 2010: Democracy in retreat

Published already in December 2010, but still worth a note, is the Economist Intelligence Unit's "Democracy Index 2010", titled "Democracy in retreat".

Excerpt: "The dominant pattern in all regions over the past two years has been backsliding on previously attained progress in democratisation. The global financial crisis that started in 2008 accentuated some existing negative trends in political development."

It's always interesting to see just how much more realistic reports of this kind are in their assessment of democratic failure than most academics are willing to be (i.e. France was here relegated from a "full democracy" to a "flawed democracy"). In academia, we observe a frequent urge to defend every last aspect of democracy, often at the expense of facts.

The full text is available at the link.

http://graphics.eiu.com/PDF/Democracy_Index_2010_web.pdf

Article: Our Country Right or Wrong: A Pragmatic Response to Anti-Democratic Cultural Nationalism in China

Google:

Article: Our Country Right or Wrong: A Pragmatic Response to Anti-Democratic Cultural Nationalism in China

Sor-hoon Tan (National University of Singapore) wrote the article, "Our Country Right or Wrong: A Pragmatic Response to Anti-Democratic Cultural Nationalism in China" ("Contemporary Pragmatism", 7 [2], December 2010: pp. 45-69).

Quote: "This essay will examine anti-democratic tendencies in the rising cultural nationalism in China and, through a philosophical exploration of John Dewey's views about tradition, it will suggest how Chinese pragmatists today might defend democracy against attacks by cultural nationalists who reject the democratic path as alien and therefore wrong for China."

ingentaconnect Our Country Right or Wrong: A Pragmatic Response to Anti-Democrat...

Book: Islamism and Democracy in Indonesia: Piety and Pragmatism / Article: Manufacturing the 'Ontological Enemy'

Google:

Book: Islamism and Democracy in Indonesia: Piety and Pragmatism / Article: Manufacturing the 'Ontological Enemy': Socio-Political Construction of anti-Democracy Discourses among HTI Activists in Post-New Order Indonesia

Masdar Hilmy (State Institute for Islamic Studies [IANA] Sunan Ampel Surabaya) is the author of a book, "Islamism and Democracy in Indonesia: Piety and Pragmatism" (ISEAS, April 2010).

Quote: "Most scholarly works conducted within the period of post-New Order Indonesia have underlined the fact that Indonesian Islamists reject the notion of democracy; no adequate explanation nonetheless has been attempted thus far as to how and to what extent democracy is being rejected. This book is dedicated to filling the gap by examining the complex reality behind the Islamists rejection of democracy. It focuses its analysis on two streams of Islamism: the two Islamist groups that seek extra-parliamentary means to achieve their goals, that is, MMI and HTI, and the PKS Islamists who choose the existing political party system as a means of their power struggle."

The book is available from Amazon and other online bookstores.

Presumably the book incorporates much of Helmy's earlier article, "Manufacturing the 'Ontological Enemy': Socio-Political Construction of anti-Democracy Discourses among HTI Activists in Post-New Order Indonesia", published in the "Journal of Indonesian Islam" (3 [2], December 2009: pp. 341-69).

Abstract: "The Indonesian Islamists' rejection of democracy, as this paper will demonstrate, is not monolithic; it is complex and multifaceted that is accompanied by a long process of argument building. This paper focuses its scope of analysis on Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI), a Middle Eastern-derived 'transnational' Islamist movement that seeks to unite all Muslim nations all over the world under a Caliphate system. This paper argues that, in developing counter-discourses on democracy, the HTI activists employ both theological approach [sic] and modern socio-political narratives. It is also argued that the concept of enemy constructed by the HTI activists serves only as an ontological venture, and not existential one, for the purpose of self-fulfilling prophecy [sic]. The process of construction of the enemy follows the mode of binary opposition between the 'authentic self' and the 'corrupted other.' This paper borrows much of its theoretical framework from Saphiro, Foucault, Berger and Luckmann, and still many others."

Although the journal is supposed to be open access, I can't find a full version of the article, and the link to the abstract seems broken. The relevant journal issue's table of contents should be accessible from this link: http://ejournal.sunan-ampel.ac.id/index.php/JIIS/issue/view/77

Home | Account | FAQ | Cart | Login About Us What's New ...

Chapters: Beyond Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government / Building What?: How State Crimes Against Democracy (SADCs) Can Be

Google:

Chapters: Beyond Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government / Building What?: How State Crimes Against Democracy (SADCs) Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight

In February 2010, the journal "American Behavioral Scientist" ran a special issue on the fledgling field of research into "state crimes against democracy": http://anti-democracy-agenda.blogspot.com/search/label/conspiracy%20theories

One of the articles, "Beyond Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government" by Lance deHaven-Smith (Florida State University), has since been republished as a chapter in the book "Censored 2011: The Top 25 Censored Stories of 2009-10" (Seven Stories Press, October 2010; pp. 231-66).

In addition, the book includes a chapter by David Ray Griffin (Claremont School of Theology) titled "Building What?: How State Crimes Against Democracy (SADCs) Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight" (pp. 267-91).

Censored 2011

Panel: Leader Democracy, Post-democracy, Inverted Totalitarianism: Democratic Theory beyond Crisis Diagnoses and Reform Optimism

Google:

Panel: Leader Democracy, Post-democracy, Inverted Totalitarianism: Democratic Theory beyond Crisis Diagnoses and Reform Optimism

If you should happen to attend the General Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) in Reykjavik later this month and are interested in the concept of "post-democracy", a panel on "Leader Democracy, Post-democracy, Inverted Totalitarianism: Democratic Theory beyond Crisis Diagnoses and Reform Optimism" might be of interest to you.

Click on "Papers: 7 - View" (bottom right) to see abstracts of all papers (both presented orally and tabled) in the panel.

Panel Details - ECPR Reykjavik 2011 - The European Consortium for
Political Research - ECPR General Conferences

Research: Centro di studi e iniziativa per la riforma dello Stato

Google:

Research: Centro di studi e iniziativa per la riforma dello Stato

Last year, I made a post on an extremely insightful text by the influential Italian left-wing philosopher Mario Tronti, "Towards a Critique of Political Democracy": http://anti-democracy-agenda.blogspot.com/2010/01/article-towards-critique-of-political.html

Today, I found out that the research centre Tronti is heading these days, the Centro di studi e iniziativa per la riforma dello Stato (CRS) in Rome, also takes an interest in political theology and has organized events in that area in the recent past.

Unfortunately, I've been told Tronti does not speak English. But if you speak Italian and seek collaboration, why not check it out?

Centro per la Riforma dello Stato

Book: The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom

Google:

Book: The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom

Journalist and scholar Evgeny Morozov (Stanford) wrote "The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom", published by PublicAffairs in January 2011.

According to the publisher, it is Morozov's contention that "authoritarian governments are effectively using the Internet to suppress free speech, hone their surveillance techniques, disseminate cutting-edge propaganda, and pacify their populations with digital entertainment. ... [B]y falling for the supposedly democratizing nature of the Internet, Western do-gooders may have missed how it also entrenches dictators, threatens dissidents, and makes it harder - not easier - to promote democracy. ... Morozov shows why ... 'Internet freedom' might have disastrous implications for the future of democracy as a whole."

Notwithstanding the Arab Spring ...

PublicAffairs Books: THE NET DELUSION

Article: When Democracies Fail

Google:

Article: When Democracies Fail

Mark Chou (University of Melbourne) just published an article titled "When Democracies Fail" ("Political Studies Review", 9 [3], September 2011: pp. 344-56) that draws on my own edited volume on "Anti-Democratic Thought" (Imprint Academic, 2008).

Abstract: "Despite democracy's universal appeal, democracies have frequently suffered from debilitating crises, often of their own making. Sometimes, they have even self-destructed. Why is this the case and how might we respond to democracies that fail? In this article, I review five recent works which provide new answers as well as new provocations to these questions.

"In particular, I argue that there are three interrelated categories of reasons and responses prevalent in the literature on democratic failure. The first category intimates that democracies fail for reasons that have to do with unresolved institutional, socio-economic or political problems and that, as such, the best response is to seek to remove these impediments to democratic consolidation.

"The second category of literature, however, argues that there are certain conditions and characteristics intrinsic to democracy that make it prone to fail and self-destruct. Democracies that seek to guard against this possibility are those that are paradoxically the least democratic.

"This leads to the third category: studies that acknowledge democracy's inherent weaknesses and seek to overcome them through a call for anti-democratic alternatives. Foregrounding these categories is, I argue, crucial not only for improving our understanding of how and why democracies decline and then perish. It also provides us with a better glimpse into the very nature of democracy itself."

I had no access to the full text of the article yet.

When Democracies Fail - Chou - 2011 - Political Studies Review - Wiley Online Library

CONF: Democracy on Trial: Religion, Civil Society, and Democratic Theory

Google:

CONF: Democracy on Trial: Religion, Civil Society, and Democratic Theory

The University of Chicago's Divinity School is organizing a conference, "Democracy on Trial: Religion, Civil Society, and Democratic Theory", based on a theme drawn from the 1993 book of the same title by its faculty member, Jean Bethke Elshtain. The conference will take place on 13-14 October 2011.

Quote: "What is the state of our democracy? Is democracy good for the world? How does religion support or hinder democratic practice? Throughout her career, Jean Bethke Elshtain has ... identified the forces that oppose democracy: identity politics, utopianism, and an elitism that denies ordinary people the prerogatives of citizenship. ... [S]enior scholars, public intellectuals, and public figures ... will present new work on the topics under consideration ... [T]he conference is designed to create opportunities for new ideas to emerge".

Confirmed participants include Elshtain, Francis Fukuyama, Nicholas Wolterstorff, and Carl Gershman.

Free and open to the public. Advance registration strongly recommended.

Divinity School at the University of Chicago | Conferences

Article: Threat from the antidemocrats

Google:

Article: Threat from the antidemocrats

Hugh Cortazzi, scholar and former British ambassador to Japan, worries in an op-ed in "The Japan Times" of 9 August 2011 about a perceived "Threat from the antidemocrats".

Excerpts: "The recent massacre perpetrated by a lone gunman in Norway has made leaders in democratic countries review the threat to their societies from extremist anti-democratic elements. ... The terms left and right are no longer valid in any analysis of the forces which threaten our democracy. Those on the extreme left and those on the extreme right are often indistinguishable. Many disgruntled elements have little or no ideology. ... There are neo-Fascist, neo-Nazi and other anti-democratic parties in almost all European countries."

Too short to be of much substance.

Threat from the antidemocrats | The Japan Times Online

Book: Nobilitas: A Study of European Aristocratic Philosophy from Ancient Greece to the Early Twentieth Century

Google:

Book: Nobilitas: A Study of European Aristocratic Philosophy from Ancient Greece to the Early Twentieth Century

I just chanced upon this book by Alexander Jacob, apparently an Indian-born independent right-wing(?) scholar with a PhD from Pennsylvania State University: "Nobilitas: A Study of European Aristocratic Philosophy from Ancient Greece to the Early Twentieth Century" (University Press of America, 2000).

Quote: "Nobilitas ... aims at providing an alternative to the liberal democratic norms, which are propagated today as the only viable socio-political system for the world community. Jacob reveals that, contrary to popular belief, the social and cultural development of European civilization has, for twenty-five centuries, been based not on democratic or communist notions but, rather on aristocratic and nationalist notions. ... As such, the study includes a survey of the philosophical bases of racism and anti-Semitism."

With an appendix titled "The Spiritual Defects of Democracy".

(Update 31 August 2011: While transferring my Google+ posts for archiving purposes to my earlier blog, I noticed that the link I provided was for some reason cut short in Google+. Here's the full link: http://www.univpress.com/Catalog/SingleBook.shtml?command=Search&db=^DB/CATALOG.db&eqSKUdata=0761818871)

http://www.univpress.com/Catalog/SingleBook.shtml?command=Search&db

Article: Our debased democracies

Google:

Article: Our debased democracies

In the British newspaper "The Daily Telegraph", senior conservative(!) journalist Charles Moore wrote on 22 July:

"What with the the phone-hacking scandal, the eurozone crisis and the US economic woes, the greedy few have left people disillusioned with our debased democracies. [...]

"Democratic politics, which purports to enrich the many, is actually in the pocket of those bankers, media barons and other moguls who run and own everything. [...]

"[P]eople in general have lost faith in the free-market, Western, democratic order. They have not yet, thank God, transferred their faith, as they did in the 1930s, to totalitarianism. They merely feel gloomy and suspicious. [...]

"The greatest capitalist country in history is now dependent on other people’s capital to survive. In such circumstances, Western democracy starts to feel like a threatened luxury. We can wave banners about 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness', but they tend to say, in smaller print, 'Made in China'."

I'm starting to think that the Left might actually be right - Telegraph

CFP: Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2011

Please circulate widely!

CALL FOR PAPERS

Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2011

Organized by: Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society (SCIS)

Mode: Online by Google+ video conference

Date: 15-16 November 2011

The "Anti-Democracy Agenda" is the premier resource on the net for the study of anti-democratic thought and practice across the boundaries of various traditions and academic disciplines. First introduced by the Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society (SCIS) as a blog in January 2010, it has since been reconstituted as a circle (with associated public posts, much like a blog) on the new social network Google+. An archive of the blog is to be found here: http://anti-democracy-agenda.blogspot.com

For the new circle, see here:
https://plus.google.com/109507108125539761871/posts

The Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2011 will be the third event we organize to advance the research agenda on anti-democratic thought and practice as well as old and new criticisms of democracy. It will build up on a highly successful workshop on anti-democratic thought SCIS organized at the Annual Conference Workshops in Political Theory in Manchester, England, in September 2007, as well as the Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2010, taking place at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich in November last year. Both events drew participants from the world over. The Manchester workshop led to the publication of an edited volume on "Anti-Democratic Thought" (Imprint Academic, 2008).

The Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2011 is set to be equally international and interdisciplinary in scope. We invite affiliated academics, independent scholars, and doctoral students and candidates from a wide range of disciplines, such as Philosophy, Political Theory, Political Science, International Relations, Development Studies, Security Studies, Law, Economics, Sociology, Anthropology, Psychology, Literature, History, Classics, Theology, Religious Studies, Education, and so on. Papers may not only cover any and all aspects of criticisms of democracy and anti-democratic thought and practice, from perspectives including anarchism, libertarianism, conservatism, communism, Islamism, the extreme right, and others, but also related concepts such as authoritarianism, dictatorship, military rule, monarchy, chieftaincy, mixed constitution, the backlash against democracy promotion, terrorism, post-democracy, voter apathy, voter ignorance, etc. Have a look at the blog to see what might be of interest and falls within our remit. Papers may be theoretical and/or empirical in nature. Work in progress is welcome too.

This symposium may be the first academic conference to make use of the “Hangouts” video conference facility that is an integral part of Google+. Due to technical restrictions, the number of participants in the Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2011 is limited to 10. All accepted participants will be required to create a profile on Google+ in order to be able to participate in the event. While we encourage the participation of scholars from developing countries, please only apply if you have access to a stable Internet connection. As in our previous physical events, over the course of two days, each presenter will have 60 minutes to present his or her paper and discuss it with all others. Due to the small size of the symposium, all participants are expected to attend both days fully.

As with all SCIS events, no fees will be charged from participants, and no funding is available to cover participants' expenses (if any). We will be glad to issue letters of acceptance on request to assist participants in securing leave from work. Detailed instructions on how to set up a Google+ profile and join the video conference will be provided to confirmed participants.

Please send your proposal to: erichkofmel@gmail.com

Deadline: 15 October 2011

Later submissions may still be accepted, but early submission is strongly advised and proposals may be accepted as they come in.

Cordially,

Erich Kofmel
Managing Director / Research Professor of Political Theory
Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society (SCIS)
https://plus.google.com/109507108125539761871
E-mail: erichkofmel@gmail.com

Postal address:
Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society
1200 Geneva
Switzerland

SCIS is an international association under Swiss law.
Founded 2006 at the University of Sussex.

CFP: Democracy and its Critics: Ancient and Modern

One-day conference "Democracy and its Critics: Ancient and Modern" of the Political Thought Specialist Group of the Political Studies Association (PSA), Oxford, UK (precise venue to be confirmed), October 2011 (possible date: 22 October)

Call for papers

Description: "Most of the countries of the world are now democracies in that they have representative governmental institutions controlled by freely elected officials which operate under the rule of law and guarantee a wide array of individual rights, including equality and non-discrimination, personal liberty, freedom of expression, association and conscience, fair trials and a variety of social benefits. If a country's democratic system works tolerably well, the large majority of its citizens would not want to live under a very different political system, such as an absolute monarchy, communism, fascism, one-party dictatorship or anarchism, and this provides some indication of the relationship between citizenry and democracy. Nevertheless, in the past century or so democracies have had their critics and in some cases powerful enemies who have argued that democracy does not provide society the security, economic development, welfare and the other goods it 'really' needs.

"Some critics, for example, argue that modern liberal democracy is not a 'real' democracy as power is actually exercised not by the people, but by an oligarchy or a bureaucratic elite, and they compare this system unfavourably with the direct democracy of Athens and other Greek city-states in the 5th and 4th centuries BC where the body of citizens actually participated, on an equal footing, in making decisions on public issues. However, ancient democracy also had its critics, including great thinkers like Plato and Aristotle. Similar republican forms of government in ancient Rome also had their critics and enemies. The aim of the conference is to bring together and encourage discussion among scholars who are interested in the main features of ancient and modern forms of democracy, and seek to assess the purposes and methods of their governments by reference to the wishes and needs of the people."

Papers are invited that deal with any of the above issues. Please send an abstract to both Evangelia Sembou (Study group convenor): evangelia.sembou@hotmail.com
and Zenon Stavrinides (University of Leeds): z.stavrinides@leeds.ac.uk

Deadline: 30 April 2011

An early expression of interest would be appreciated, as it would help determine numbers.

Trend: Again less democracies in the world

While recent events in North Africa could lead one to believe otherwise, the "Freedom in the World 2011" survey, released on 13 January 2011 by Freedom House, an organization that advocates democracy around the world, finds that last year, like the years before, the number of electoral democracies declined further.

According to the press release, "[t]his represents the longest continuous period of decline in the nearly 40-year history of the survey. [...] A total of 25 countries showed significant declines in 2010, more than double the 11 countries exhibiting noteworthy gains [...], and the number of electoral democracies dropped to 115, far below the 2005 figure of 123. [...] Three countries – the Philippines, Tanzania, and Tonga – achieved electoral democracy status after conducting elections that were regarded as improvements over earlier polls. Declines in Burundi, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, and Sri Lanka triggered their removal from the list of electoral democracies."

In an overview essay, "Freedom in the World 2011: The Authoritarian Challenge to Democracy", the author, Arch Puddington, Director of Research at Freedom House, writes: "[T]he world's most powerful authoritarians have acted with aggression and self-assurance, and democratic leaders have responded with equivocation or silence. [...] Among lesser powers, those with energy riches or geostrategic significance demonstrated that acts of antidemocratic contempt will draw no serious rebuke from the democratic world. [...] [I]f the world's democracies fail to unite and speak out in defense of their own values, despots will continue to gain from divide-and-conquer strategies, as Russia's leaders are now doing in their approach to Europe and the United States. [...] The past decade began at a high point for freedom and concluded with freedom under duress."

Details are to be found here:

www.freedomhouse.org/images/File/fiw/FIW_Overview_2011.pdf

CFP: Freedom and Power

"Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory", based out of the Faculty of Humanities, Development and Social Sciences at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, is planning an issue on "Freedom and Power".

Call for papers

Description: "Ever since Livy proclaimed that 'freedom is to be in one's own power', if not from a long time before, the relationship between freedom and power has been an enduring concern of political theorists. It has withstood even Berlin's sharp distinctions between seemingly irreconcilable kinds of freedom and the subsequent diversion via debates about 'negative['], 'positive' and 'republican' freedom. With greater historical purview it is possible to see that the fault line between various competing conceptions of freedom is clearest with regard to how social and political theorists conceive of the relationship between freedom and power. While some thinkers have opposed freedom and power, arguing that liberty can only be truly attained free from power and domination (republicans) or in the absence of external impediments imposed by other human beings (liberals), others have identified a close and intriguing link between them, especially in the sphere of politics. A motley crew of radicals, Marxists and conservatives occupy the latter camp, including Livy, Machiavelli, Montaigne, Marx, Nietzsche and Foucault. Moreover, those in the former camp tend to think of freedom in formal and abstract terms, while proponents of the latter eschew this now normal tendency in political philosophy and instead think of freedom in fully substantive, concrete and even materialist terms. (Hobbes is an unusual and unique figure as his account of freedom inspires members of both parties in this debate.)

"Several important questions arise concerning freedom and power: What is freedom?; What is the relationship between freedom and power?; How, if at all, are freedom and domination related?; Is there a categorical or insurmountable conflict between freedom and discipline?; Does freedom depend upon being free from interference or being able to achieve certain desired or desirable goals or ends?; Are these two conditions – freedom from interference and the ability or power to achieve certain ends – related in some sense?; Can we measure freedom, and, if so, how?; What forms or degrees of freedom are possible in modern representative democracies?; How does representation affect freedom?; Is our freedom dependent on the power of our representatives?; How does the degradation of the planetary environment affect our views on freedom?; Given the dire need for self-control and self-discipline, especially regarding levels of consumption in the developed North, is the concept of freedom even still relevant?; Does the concept of freedom need to be reconfigured to accommodate constraint, austerity and self-control? If so, how?; What do the experiences of relatively recently liberated states teach us about freedom?; What is the relationship between freedom and power in the 'Global South'?; How, if at all, does poverty affect freedom?

"The editors of Theoria ask contributors to think about these questions in and of themselves and in the light of the various arguments from any of the proponents of the various conceptions of freedom. These can be written about in term of furthering our understanding of the nature of personal and political freedom within modern representative democracies or in order to develop novel arguments that propose conceptions of freedom for different possible future political organizations and forms of power. While abstract theoretical insights and arguments are welcome, we urge contributors to try and think about freedom and power within and between particular political contexts, especially within the 'Global South', where often freedom is a nascent and precarious achievement, and sometimes only for the lucky few, and between the 'Global South' and the 'Global North', either in relational or comparative terms. Given the changing power relations that exist within and between existing states, there is also much room for utopian thought regarding new forms of freedom in as yet un-experienced contexts of political power and moral conflict."

Submission must be sent in MS Word format to the Managing Editor, Sherran Clarence (University of the Western Cape): sherranclarence@gmail.com

Deadline: 31 August 2011

Article: Postdemocracy, organizational transformation and the (im)possibility of politics

Timon Beyes and Christina Volkmann, "The fantasy of the organizational One: Postdemocracy, organizational transformation and the (im)possibility of politics" ("Journal of Organizational Change Management", 23 [6], 2010: pp. 651-68):

www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1891962

Abstract: "Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon the politics of and in organizational transformations in the wake of the fall of the Berlin wall and Germany's reunification. Design/methodology/approach – The paper juxtaposes a political-philosophical perspective informed by Rancière – what we call a dramaturgy of politics – with the findings of an ethnographic study conducted in the Berlin State Library in 2002/2003. Findings – The paper outlines a reading of the event of November 9, 1989[,] and its aftermath as a dissensual event of politics proper, i.e. the emergence of a new political subjectivity, followed by a consensual process of social organization. In the state library, both the consensual 'fantasy of the organizational One' as well [sic] its disruption are causing struggles over what is visible and sayable. A dramaturgy of politics thus encourages us to add our voices to the specific time-spaces in which an excess of words, signs and forms alters the configuration of what is visible and expressible. Research limitations/implications – The usual disclaimers about the limits of ethnographic research apply. The paper calls for further inquiries into the dramaturgy of organizational politics. It also reflects upon the 'Western gaze' and the problematic of 'speaking for' the presumably dominated. Originality/value – It is hoped that the paper contributes to the understanding of the politics of organization (theory) by outlining an alternative conceptual approach and confronting it with ethnographic findings."

I had no access to the full text of the article.

Timon Beyes is Senior Lecturer in Non-Profit Management at the University of St Gallen, Switzerland.

Christina Volkmann is Lecturer in Management at the University of Essex.

Report on the Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2010: Setting the example for the debate of the future

The first event held by the Geneva-based Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society (SCIS) in conjunction with its "Anti-Democracy Agenda" blog, the Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2010, took place to great acclaim on 8 and 9 November 2010 at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich.

Keynotes to the symposium were contributed by Professor Doh Chull Shin, a native of Korea, director of the Korea Democracy Barometer, and core partner in the Asian Barometer Survey (an ongoing research project monitoring democratization in Asian countries), who is based in the Department of Political Science at the University of Missouri, a leading public research university in the United States, and Professor Kuldip Singh, Head of the Department of Political Science at Guru Nanak Dev University in Amritsar, India.

The Anti-Democracy Agenda Symposium 2010 attracted twelve papers submitted by participants from institutions such as the National University of Singapore, the University of the Philippines, the Technical University of Lisbon (Portugal), Ankara University (Turkey), the University of the Punjab, Quaid-i-Azam University (both Pakistan), the University of Central Oklahoma (USA), and the Islamic Azad University (Iran). Other countries and territories of origin or residence represented include Palestine, Hong Kong, New Zealand, the UK, Switzerland, Nigeria, Korea, and India.

Participants – from doctoral candidates to full professors – came from the disciplines of Political Science, Philosophy, Political Theory, Islamic Studies, Defence and Strategic Studies, Law, and Media Studies, giving theoretical as well as empirical presentations under the titles "Is Confucianism Anti-democratic?", "Islamic Philosophy and Criticizing Democracy", "Against Liberal Democracy", "Anti-Democracy Is Created By Means of Media", "Twenty-First Century Anti-Democracy: Theory and Practice in the World", "A Critique of Western Discourses of Sovereignty and Democracy from Chinese Lenses", "Reflecting on Anti-Democracy Forces in Arab Politics", "'Democracy' in Kazakhstan: Political System Managed from Above", "Pakistan’s Road to Democracy: Islam, Military and Silent Majority", "Democracy: A Form of Government or an Instinct?", "The Role of Ethics in Shaping Democracy: An Examination of Unethical Actions among House of Assembly Members in Nigeria", and "Pekan Anti Otoritarian: Some Observations on Anarchist Gathering at Indonesia".

After a workshop on "Anti-Democratic Thought" in Manchester in 2007, this was the second symposium on anti-democracy organized by the Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society and, once more, it opened up new frontiers for the study of anti-democratic thought and practice. Bringing together scholars from both sides of the debate, advocates of democracy as well as critics and opponents, it set the example for the proper academic conduct of a discussion that does not take place anywhere else, yet. Focusing on twenty-first century anti-democracy, rather than historical expressions and criticisms, it shone the way toward the most important debate of the near future. Asia will play as central a role in that debate as participants from Asia did in our symposium.

The Anti-Democracy Agenda blog and the Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society will continue to be at the forefront of these developments.

Book: We Are an Image from the Future: The Greek Revolt of December 2008

"We Are an Image from the Future: The Greek Revolt of December 2008", edited by A.G. Schwarz, Tasos Sagris and Void Network (AK Press, February 2010):

www.akpress.org/2010/items/weareanimagefromthefuture

Publisher's description: "What causes a city, then a whole country, to explode? How did one neighborhood's outrage over the tragic death of one teenager transform itself into a generalized insurrection against State and capital, paralyzing an entire nation for a month? This is a book about the murder of fifteen-year-old Alexis Grigoropoulos, killed by the police in the Exarchia neighborhood of Athens on December 6th, 2008, and of the revolution in the streets that followed, bringing business as usual in Greece to a screeching, burning halt for three marvelous weeks, and putting the fear of history back into the bureaucrats of Fortress Europe and beyond. We Are an Image From the Future delves into the December insurrection and its aftermath through interviews with those who witnessed and participated in it, alongside the communiqués and texts that circulated through the networks of revolt. It provides the on-the-ground facts needed to understand these historic events, and also dispels the myths activists outside of Greece have constructed around them. What emerges is not just the intensity of the riots, but the stories of organizing and solidarity, the questions of strategy and tactics: a desperately needed examination of the fabric of the Greek movements that made December possible."

Endorsement: "This dazzling collection is not a book about the great insurrection of 2008 – it is a living piece of it that can become a part of us, and through us, it opens the prospect of a universe we might never otherwise have imagined possible. Future historians may well conclude that the Revolution finally began in 2008. If they do, this book will have played a crucial role in that realization." (David Graeber, Goldsmiths, University of London)

The book contains texts such as "Their Democracy Murders – The Polytechnic University Occupation" and many writings by the "Ego Te Provoco" counter-information group, including the eponymous "We Are Here / We Are Everywhere / We Are an Image from the Future" (pp. 165-8), "The media as part of the counter-insurgency" (pp. 169-72), and "A Bedouin Anytime! A Citizen Never." (pp. 197-8; translators not named).

Excerpts: "The other thing we put forward was a discourse against democracy, because many people were saying, what kind of democracy kills children, we need more democracy, and we were trying to deconstruct this whole notion of democracy, to claim that this murder is not an exception, it is the rule of democracy, the rule of the nation-state, the rule of capitalism." (p. 170)

"We despise democracy more than anything else in this decadent world. For what is democracy other than a system of discriminations and coercions in the service of property and privacy? [...] The bourgeois, with a voice trembling from piety, promise: rights, justice, equality. And the revolted hear: repression, exploitation, looting. [...] Our contempt for democracy does not derive from some sort of idealism but rather from our very material animosity for a social entity in which value and organizing are centered around the product and the spectacle." (p. 198)

A.G. Schwarz is the assumed name of a North American living in exile abroad.

Tasos Sagris is a member of the Athens-based Void Network, an arts and action collective established in 1990.

Article: Democracy is not everything: A plea for non-democratic enclaves

Jonathan van Tongeren is the author of an article titled "Democracy is not everything: A plea for non-democratic enclaves", published on 8 November 2010 on the "Christians and Politics Portal" website.

The full text of the article can be read free of charge here:

www.cpportal.org/k/n22654/news/view/455708/383320

Excerpts: "As we all know, there is no clear cut case for democracy in the Bible. At best some basic principles about government can be derived from scripture. This explains why some Christians are convinced democrats, while others only tactically accept the democratic rules or principally oppose democracy altogether. [...] Engelbert Dollfuss [...] was the leader of the Austrian Christian Social Party. Now, as a Christian Democrat, he was responsible for the end of the democratic system in Austria in the 1930's. [...] [H]e understood quite well that democracy is not a goal in itself, but that the aim of Christian-Democracy is to serve public justice. Democracy can be a means towards this end, but that is not to say there are no other means towards the same goal. Historically, Christian politicians such as the Dutch leader of the Anti-Revolutionary Party Groen van Prinsterer have criticized the basic tenet of democracy, the 'sovereignty of the people'. Groen believed that all sovereignty comes from God, and [...] that this basic tenet of Christian-Democracy is at odds with a basic tenet of modern democracy [...]; sovereignty lies either with God or with the people. [...]

"[N]eoconservatives and radical democrats [...] assume that democracy is everything. [...] Christian-Democracy is not about a blind faith in the workings of democracy. What Christian-Democrats have historically understood is that the usefulness of democracy is limited. Democracy is just a system of regulating the relations between the different spheres of sovereignty but it should not enter into the realm of the spheres itself. Authority in such spheres is naturally non-democratic. Families don't have a vote who will be in charge for the next four years, the children obey the parents[,] and what would be the point of a faith community without a central point of authority (revelation)? [...] For a long time Christian-Democrats have emphasized the rights of the pre-democratic institutions [...], radical democrats are working to undermine those rights. [...] Christians in politics should reconsider their strategy and focus on strengthening the pre-democratic institutions. Only these enclaves on non-democratic authority can save us from an overdose of democracy."

Jonathan van Tongeren, from Groningen in the Netherlands, was Secretary General of the European Christian Political Youth Network (ECPYN) from 2006 to 2010. ECPYN is the youth organization of the European Christian Political Movement (ECPM). Both are associations of political parties and organizations from all over Europe.

Article: State crimes against democracy in the war on terror

Lance deHaven-Smith, "State crimes against democracy in the war on terror: applying the Nuremberg principles to the Bush-Cheney Administration" ("Contemporary Politics", 16 [4], December 2010: pp. 403-20):

www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a929282687

Abstract: "This article asks whether, in waging war in the Middle East, the Bush-Cheney Administration developed and executed a conspiracy comparable to the one for which Nazi leaders were tried, convicted, and executed at Nuremberg after World War II. To meet the Nuremberg standards, such a conspiracy must include efforts to subvert the constitutional order. Today, scholars refer to these actions as 'state crimes against democracy' (SCADs). After explicating the Nuremberg standards, the article applies them to the Bush-Cheney Administration's 'war on terror'. The conclusion reached is that evidence of a SCAD-driven conspiracy is extensive and certainly adequate by the Nuremberg standards to warrant investigations and trials."

Excerpts: "To the extent the Bush-Cheney actions mirror the crimes of the Nazis, the administration's moral guilt becomes rather clear even if Bush, Cheney, and other responsible persons are for some reason beyond the reach of the national and international legal systems as they are now constituted. In the Nuremberg war crimes trials, the defendants were charged with, among other crimes, conspiring to [...] transform democratic Germany into a police state by contriving and exploiting threats to the nation's stability and security [...]. Hitler and his associates were charged with staging acts of domestic terrorism, issuing false warnings of impending coups, conducting false-flag attacks on the nation's frontiers, and in other ways mobilizing mass support for authoritarian government and aggressive war. [...]

"The IMT [International Military Tribunal] did not use the term 'state crimes' or 'crimes against democracy', but its jurisdiction and judgments prefigured the SCAD construct [....] [S]tatutory and constitutional reforms should be adopted to strengthen democratic governing institutions so that future presidents cannot repeat past abuses. If, as the evidence indicates, the Bush-Cheney Administration succeeded in hijacking American democracy, the political system was and remains quite vulnerable to SCADs by top officials. [...] The high crimes of the Bush-Cheney Administration show that representative democracy is quite vulnerable to antidemocratic conspiracies in high office."

Lance deHaven-Smith is a Professor in the Reubin O'D. Askew School of Public Administration and Policy at Florida State University.

Article: Gambia president may become king

On 8 November 2010, the news agency Associated Press released an article by Dakar/Senegal-based staff writer Artis Henderson titled "His majesty? Gambia president may become king".

The full text of the article can be read free of charge here:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AF_GAMBIA_KING_OF_GAMBIA?SITE=OHALL2&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Excerpts: "Gambia's president [...] may soon have a new title in this tiny West African nation: His majesty. Tribal chieftains are touring the country to rally support for President Yahya Jammeh's coronation. 'The president has brought development to the country, and for that he deserves to be crowned King of The Gambia,' said Junkung Camara, chief of the western region of Foni Brefet. [...] Like many rulers in this part of Africa, Jammeh, 45, came to power in the wake of a coup. He was elected president two years later, and is currently serving his third elected term in the tiny country surrounded on three sides by Senegal. If he were crowned king, he could dispense with the formality of elections altogether. [...] Abdoulaye Saine, professor of political science at Miami University in Ohio who specializes in Gambian politics [...] says Jammeh's coronation would give him a new title but would not change anything politically. 'Jammeh is already king,' Saine said. 'He practically owns the country of Gambia. He controls the press, the opposition, the clergy, and the coffers of the state.' While sub-Saharan Africa has just one remaining absolute monarchy – in the southern African nation of Swaziland – other leaders have tried to similarly solidify their role."

Book: The Chinese Communist Party as Organizational Emperor

Zheng Yongnian, "The Chinese Communist Party as Organizational Emperor: Culture, reproduction and transformation" (Routledge, December 2009):

www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415559652/

Publisher's description: "The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is the largest and one of the most powerful, political organizations in the world today, which has played a crucial role in initiating most of the major reforms of the past three decades in China. China's rapid rise has enabled the CCP to extend its influence throughout the globe, but the West remains uncertain whether the CCP will survive China's ongoing socio-economic transformation and become a democratic country [sic]. With rapid socio-economic transformation, the CCP has itself experienced drastic changes. Zheng Yongnian argues that whilst the concept of political party in China was imported, the CCP is a Chinese cultural product: it is an entirely different breed of political party from those in the West – an organizational emperor, wielding its power in a similar way to Chinese emperors of the past. Using social and political theory, this book examines the CCP's transformation in the reform era, and how it is now struggling to maintain the continuing domination of its imperial power. The author argues that the CCP has managed these changes as a proactive player throughout, and that the nature of the CCP implies that as long as the party is transforming itself in accordance to socio-economic changes, the structure of party dominion over the state and society will not be allowed to change."

Review: "Throughout his book, Zheng makes the case that the CCP's approach to power is contingent on historical continuity and draws from practices implemented back when the country was ruled by emperors. Though this argument could be exploited to make a case against democratization, it nevertheless makes a valid contribution to our understanding of the party's resistance to Western-style democracy and the ostensible lack of widespread calls for such democracy among ordinary Chinese. [...] Ironically, as Zheng points out, historical continuity, i.e., the reproduction of the organizational emperorship, is also the main driver behind the CCP's need to adapt and embrace Marxism's nemeses, such as capitalism and democratic elements, as Chinese history is rife with examples of rigid systems being overthrown by a counter-hegemonic force. As such, to avoid a similar fate, the CCP has no choice but to open up, which in turn empowers other social classes that must be kept in check lest they overturn the system. 'As long as the CCP is able to reproduce itself as an organizational emperor,' Zheng concludes, 'it is unlikely that China will develop into a Western style of democracy.'" (J. Michael Cole, "Taipei Times")

Zheng Yongnian is Professor and Director of the East Asian Institute at the National University of Singapore.