Democracy as Procedure and Democracy as Regime

Abstract

The very subject of our discussion is a translation and expression of the crisis the democratic movement is currently undergoing. And our choice of this subject is indeed conditioned by the appearance of a conception of "democracy" that, breaking with all previous political thought, makes of democracy a mere set of "procedures." Political thought saw in democracy a regime that was indissociable from a substantive conception of the ends of the political institution and from a view, and from an aim, of the type of human being that corresponds to it. It is easy to see that, whatever the philosophical window dressing, a purely procedural conception of "democracy" itself originates in the crisis of the imaginary significations that concern the ultimate goals [finalités] of collective life and aims at covering over this crisis by dissociating all discussion relative to these goals from the political "form of the regime," and, ultimately, even by eliminating the very idea of such goals. The deep-seated connection between this conception and what is rather ridiculously called contemporary "individualism" is quite manifest and I shall return to it. But we must begin at the beginning.

Revisiting Bureaucratic Dysfunction: The Role of Bureaucracy in Democratization

“…In other words, a set of "procedures" makes democracy (Castoriadis, 1997). In his incisive critique of Prussian bureaucracy, Max Weber (1958) points out that Prussian politicians used parliamentary inquiries as a means to check on the progress of the administrative implementation of legislation.…”

Democratic Ideals and the Politicization of Nature

“…The imaginary is never merely a reflection of a given reality; it is a situated and social-historical genesis of specific symbols, images, forms, and institutions. Every society has unique imaginaries that distinguishes it from other societies and is locatable in history as a "creation and ontological genesis in and through individuals' doing and responding/saying" (Castoriadis 1987, 3-4). 14 .…”

Introduction to symposium on private agrifood governance: values, shortcomings and strategies

“…In global food governance this implies the identification of a functionally defined demos sharing a common fate and affected by the same threats, rather than one based on territory (Van Waarden 2008). Autonomy presupposes equality as it is difficult to imagine freedom under law if it is not equally possible for all to participate in the positing of the law (Castoriadis 1997). Thus, participation is defined in terms of access of all relevant actors in the development of standards and equality among the actors in the decisionmaking procedures.…”