| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
137085
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In contrasting UN with EU democracy promotion discourses, the article contributes to the debate on the substance of EU democracy promotion by approaching the question of ‘democratic substance’ from the vantage point of sovereignty. For its analytical framing, it draws on relevant aspects of Foucault's work on power. The article suggests that, due to their diverging obligations to sovereignty, the substance of democracy promotion in UN discourses revolves around an institutional-centric understanding, whereas in EU discourses we see a significant reconceptualization of democracy as a norms-based concept. The latter does not aim at the government of society but the ethical self-governance of socially embedded individuals. It is argued that, with the decreasing purchase of democracy as a universal political project and the growing concern with local contexts, the EU's norms-based conception emerges as better equipped to adapt to contemporary challenges of governing. The article concludes with raising some doubts about the democratic promise and potential of the democratic rationality underpinning EU discourses. Democracy, participation and political change are no longer conceived in terms of shaping and influencing public agenda but refer to socially shaping and influencing subjective perceptions and behaviours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
182438
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article explores the nature of resilience-informed international interventions today by thinking about ‘difference’. Up to the 1990s, international interventions were often characterised by a patronising tone in which backward others needed help to develop. Some 20 years later, key lessons learned were that others were so fundamentally different that efforts to assist them invariably failed. This article argues that contemporary approaches seeking to foster resilience are simultaneously propelled by both approaches. They are thus underpinned by two conflicting understandings of difference: the other that is in need and the other that cannot be attended. Even more, we contend that this contradiction is put to productive use in resilience-building: protracted crises today demand practitioners to ‘be there’, engaged permanently, to speculate, experiment, and affirm radical uncertainty. In order to analyse the novel features of resilience, we draw on Graham Harman’s speculative realism and look at policy programming of the Syrian refugee crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|