Search results

This book is a policy proposal aimed at the democratic left. It is concerned with gradual but radical reform of the socio‐economic system. An integrated policy of industrial and economic democracy, which centres around the establishment of a new sector of employee‐controlled enterprises, is presented. The proposal would retain the mix‐ed economy, but transform it into a much better “mixture”, with increased employee‐power in all sectors. While there is much of enduring value in our liberal western way of life, gross inequalities of wealth and power persist in our society.

Opening the special issue on global protest and democracy since 2011, this article surveys the key dimensions of the debate. It provides a critical overview of significant protest events in the post-2011 period and explores a range of the analytical tools that may be used to understand them, before proceeding to identify, disaggregate, and draw into question some of the major claims that have emerged in literature on the post-2011 mobilizations. The articles contained within this volume are then outlined, revealing the novel and nuanced insights provided by the contributors with respect to the post-2011 protests’ composition, mobilization forms, frames, democratic practices, and interrelationships with other actors in pursuit of democratic reform. The article concludes with a discussion of the opportunities for further research into protest and democracy.

This is an interpretive study in the sociology of literature that explores Aeschylus’s trilogy of dramatic plays known as the Oresteia. The plays dramatize a normative argument that exemplifies the dialectical struggle between domination and democracy. Social relations are characterized by agon (struggle), domination, and contradictions brought about by learning through suffering. These social realities reflect the primary theoretical claim of radical interactionism (RI) that domination and conflict are profound, pervasive, and perennial. On the interpersonal level, the plays dramatize structure, agency, role-taking, and the Thomas Axiom. As the first drama to interrogate an inchoate polity as an object of the public’s gaze, the Oresteia anticipates the sociological importance of critical consciousness, collective decision-making, political institutions, moral and, ultimately, cultural transformation. Despite a social context of slavery, imperialism, xenophobia, ostracism, misogyny, exclusivity, and constant warfare, the Oresteia foreshadows Western civilization’s ideals of legal-rational domination, citizenship, human rights, persuasion, and justice that have been imperfectly institutionalized to reduce surplus domination. The West still struggles to realize those ideals.

Arguably democracy and globalization are among the most debated topics in contemporary scientific, political and cultural circles. Indeed, for some optimistic observers, these two phenomena are end points. Globalization is a process that generates economic prosperity and provides fresh opportunities for the emancipation of selves. Democracy is a product of previous phases of the evolution of society, but it has reached its most advanced form in this post-Fordist, post-cold war, global society (e.g. Friedman, 2000; Fukuyama, 1992). For critical thinkers, however, the growth of globalization problematizes the existence and practice of democracy. In an interesting convergence of opinions, this latter group includes radical conservative and progressive theorists alike. Radical Conservatives have argued that globalization engenders a crisis of democracy and that this situation is to be addressed through a retreat to the local and the ethnic. This new tribalism (Antonio, 2000; de Benoist, 1995) features attacks against the “move to the center” (the Clinton-Blair centralism) of many historically leftist and progressive liberal groups. The critics contend that the mainstream parties have converged and that neither the conventional left or right offer alternatives to the dominant neo-liberal approach, crisis-ridden post World War II idea of socio-economic development, or the erosion of sovereignty entailed by globalization. In this regard, the radical right proposes the replacement of “demos” with “ethnos” as the key organizational concept for contemporary society.

Two extreme positions set the tone in learned literature on the feasibility of democracies in the information society. In the opinion of a number of authors, the widely proclaimed “electronic revolution” will inevitably take us to “direct democracy”. The only question these computopeans hold different views on is to what extent active steering of the further introduction of technology is necessary to reach direct democracy. Some of them (like De Sola Pool, 1983) are of the opinion that technologies of freedom are involved, which will almost automatically result in a more democratic society, provided that the free market is left to its own devices. Other authors believe that the new technology enables a drastic renewal of political culture and structure, provided that it is used deliberately in a practical and sensible way (Etzioni, Laudon, & Lipson, 1975; Becker, 1981; Hollander, 1985; Barber, 1988; Abramson, Arterton, and Orren, 1988).

Immigration represents one of the most contentious and complicated issues for social democracy in many national contexts. In Scandinavia, the social democratic parties have been particularly tormented, being split internally on central concerns related to immigration policy. Social democratic parties in Scandinavia have had a basically ambiguous relationship to the issue from the initiation of the era of ‘new immigration’. This chapter argues that this can be explained by the specifically strong attachment and ‘ownership’ of these parties to the Scandinavian welfare model, with its particular claims on a strong tax base and an orderly labour market. ‘Social democracy’ is dealt with mainly as an institutional and political entity, close to what goes as ‘The Nordic Model’ in the international literature. The chapter describes and analyses similarities and differences between the three Scandinavian countries, through a historical exposé of the period after the early 1970s; on the one hand, the institutional and normative prerequisites for social democracies in handling migration, and on the other hand, the way in which recent flows of migrants have influenced the very same social democracies. Theoretically, the chapter is drawing on conceptual tools from political economy, citizenship discourse and institutional theory.

In the 1970s, Olof Palme, Willy Brandt and others deemed market-driven globalisation a major threat against Social Democracy. Hence, they tried to build a New International Economic Order, but failed. In the 1980s, neo-liberal globalism gained hegemony. In the 2010s, the third wave of democracy faded. Today, there is not even an international alternative to xenophobic protection. The common neglected factor is the weakness of like-minded partners in the Global South. Why has Social Democracy been so difficult in the South? This chapter draws on longitudinal studies since the 1970s of Indonesia, India and the Philippines, with references to Brazil, South Africa and Sweden. It argues that after the struggle against colonialism, democratisation was neglected, along with the role of elitist politics in the rise of capitalism. As for the subsequent third wave of democracy, the prime factors were: (1) that uneven development caused further fragmentation among labour; (2) that bottom-up democracy movements were divisive and unable to scale up; (3) that decentralisation stumbled over localisation; (4) that democratic representation was avoided by internationally supported elites and civil society groups but also populist links between leaders and people; (5) that the Blairist-like efforts to combine market-driven growth and welfare were bifurcated; and (6) that transformative politics were downgraded. Fortunately, however, the negative insights also point to new opportunities in terms of broad alliances for social rights and welfare reforms as a basis for inclusive economic development by partnership governance. This would be crucial for Social Democracy in the North too.

The introduction of new communicative ethics in political communication has imposed new procedures and values in politics. The close interrelation of media and politics has many facets and effects on the way politics is exercised and on how it is perceived by the citizens. This chapter investigates how new methods of political communication have been introduced and internalised in Greek politics. By taking into account critical political events and in particular elections and relevant studies, the ‘Greek media democracy’ is divided into six periods covering a time span from 1981 to the present. The division and analysis underline the milestones and transition paths in Greek politics towards new communicative and political ethics. The rationale of our research is commensurate with many comparative studies which emphasise the importance of the context in the adaptation of the ‘Americanized’ political communication model. This chapter reflects how the specific sociopolitical context of the country has interfered, defined and shaped the adaptation of ‘imported’ methods in political communication and how these methods have resulted in significant changes and shifts in Greek media democracy and Greek politics in general.