Technology & Participation as Tools to Support and Strengthen Resilient Democracies

On 23 May, the Hannah Arendt Network on Democratic Resilience and Renewal was launched with an inaugural conference at the Egmont Palace. This article provides an insight into the day’s discussions

*****

Technology & Participation as Tools to Support and Strengthen Resilient Democracies

On 23 May, the Hannah Arendt Network on Democratic Resilience and Renewal was launched with an inaugural conference at the Egmont Palace. This article provides an insight into the day’s discussions in general, and the panel on technology and participation as tools to support and strengthen resilient democracies in particular.

Democracy under pressure

Although there can be a divergence of views on its root causes and symptoms, from a global perspective, there is currently a general agreement that democracy is under pressure, if not openly threatened. The direction set out by the Trump administration leaves little question on its intent, but begs an answer on the other side of the Atlantic: is the EU, and by extension Europe, ready to be the global sponsor of democracy and fill the void left by the US’ retreat? And if so, can the EU be a credible actor abroad, when it continues being pestered by democratic troubles within its own borders?

The symptoms of the pressures on democracy are plenty, but perhaps most clear is the decentring of voting behaviour with a clear tendency towards political parties that were once on the fringes of the political spectrum but have found themselves vulgarized over the past decades. In fact, at present, about one in four EU citizens votes for a far-right party, along with an increased favourable stance towards authoritarianism.

A distinction can be made however between far-right parties, and extreme parties, whereas the former operate within the democratic framework but with illiberal tendencies as opposed to the latter who advocate for undemocratic regimes.

The crisis of democracy is thus very much a crisis of liberal democracy.

EU: defender of democracy?

Democracy is under pressure, but who is ready to resuscitate it? Several initiatives of the EU should not be overlooked: from the European Democracy Action Plan, over the Defence of Democracy-package, to the upcoming European Democracy Shield. What stands out however is the very reactionary tone of its approach: we do not disagree that democracy needs to be defended, and that these initiatives are not just defensive in nature, but the narrative’s tone should be more ambitious. With democracy as an established European value, it deserves to be treated accordingly. It is not enough to simply defend democracy; the EU must collectively go beyond and embrace the fact that democracy also requires reparations and improvements, so as not to merely support it, but strengthen it, to achieve democratic resilience and renewal.

Initiatives at both EU and national levels are plentiful, with the Conference on the Future of Europe and consecutive European Citizens’ Panels springing to mind. Belgium as well is known as a democratic innovation hub, in particular for extensive experience in Brussels and Ost-Belgien, but important progress has also been made on the federal level, with several legislative initiatives under the previous government, which also had two ministers in charge of democratic innovation.

However, not just a whole-of-government, but a whole-of-society approach should be adopted. This requires not only policymakers to reflect on how they could approach citizens and civil society organizations, but also asks of citizens in all their identities to be closer involved with their civic duty.

This can however not be achieved without providing them with the appropriate tools, which necessitates civic education to enter into the foreground.

From awareness to action: twin paths to democratic resilience

Civic education comes in different shapes and forms, and can as much be about the return of politics (the idea that politics is about far more than policy, but also a space for divergent and opposing views to meet) and the understanding of liberal values (rule of law, separation of powers, plurality, freedom of speech and media, …) as well as opening democracy to more participation by both civil society and citizens directly.

Whereas those propagating for democratic innovation, including deliberative practices, might have been understood as striving for a radical overhaul of democratic practices, nowadays, there seems to be a rapprochement between representative and participatory democracy. This maturing of democratic innovation that reconciles stronger accessibility for citizens to make their voice heard with the need for political representation to allow accountable decision-making, offers a learning opportunity for both policymakers and citizens. Opening the doors of democracy, if well-done, provides those participating with a steep learning curve with decision-making procedures and institutional functioning, therefore not only enriching political decisions with their considerations, but also empowering them to become democracy advocates, regardless of the scale. With sufficient replication, this can reinforce societal awareness of democratic practices and challenges, therefore making citizen participation a vital tool of civic education.

New opportunities, new challenges

Tools of direct citizen participation in particular face the challenge of reaching a critical mass, to make a difference beyond one conversation, one policy item at a time. Likewise, there exists an expectation around digital tools to deliver a solution to scale issues. So far however, they contributed to reducing the barriers of communication, but not those of democracy. To achieve this, focus must reshift towards the needs of citizens. Perhaps paradoxically when the digital sphere allows for ever-closer interconnectedness, the answer might lie in the geographical scope of digital democratic tools: enabling people to make a difference in their communities by a digitally enabled democracy at the local level. Although this does not exclude scaling up, achieving a critical mass of democratically engaged citizens (beyond elections), might very well only be possible by starting at a grassroots, local level of politics, closest and most familiar to people’s everyday lives.

Strategically, what is strived for needs to be emphasized more clearly. The above-mentioned rapprochement in mind, democracy actors need to find and speak with a common voice.

EU: collective efforts towards a beacon for democracy

In conclusion, let’s revisit the question from the start of this article on whether the EU is ready to become the global sponsor of democracy. The achievements from the previous mandate and the ambitions for the current legislature with strong expectations for the European Democracy Shield are of paramount importance, but more needs to be done. In particular, to become a global sponsor, the EU must become a global beacon that does not only come to democracy’s defence when it’s under pressure, but is a constant promotor and guarantor of democracy, both abroad and at home. For this, it is on the right track, but the EU, and in particular the Commission, cannot do this in isolation, and needs to have and be a full partner both vertically, with Member States, all the way down to municipalities, and horizontally, to create a whole-of-society approach in achieving this democratic mindset. When voices speak out against democracy, democratic actors across the EU need to find a common voice in refuting those attacks.

In summary, democracy needs efforts both from citizens and policymakers to be successful and this cannot take place in a vacuum: democracy is an ongoing conversation. It is a civic duty to defend democracy, but also to stand up for it even when it does not seem in need of our defence. To fulfil a duty however, the right tools need to be available, for which civic education, democratic innovation and digital progress all need to be counted on and mutually reinforced through synergizing their added value and account for their individual shortcomings.

(Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons)