critisticuffs
27th March 2015, 18:34
We have a day seminar coming up on elections. It's on the 12 April from 12-7pm in London. RSVP at the address below if you want to come!
The state is like "hi" and the people are like "hey"
Elections are central pillars of democracy. Every 3-5 years democratic
states ask their subjects to cast votes on who should run the
government. The parties who wish to fulfil this role agitate for a
recognition of what they consider the nation's problems, for their
solutions and for their visions for the nation, and ultimately for them
being the best to run the country. If successful, they take over power
which is accepted by those who they defeated.
People on the left typically engage with this feast of nationalism and
rule in one of two ways. A small minority dismisses elections as
inconsequential and fails to see that successful elections accomplish a
lot and exactly what they promise: the formation of a government which
rules in the name of those it rules over. Others see a great
opportunity to make critical voices heard about what "we" really need
and ask which left-wing party has the best chance of being the British
SYRIZA.
In contrast, we want to take a step back from these discussions and
simply ask what an election is and what it ought to accomplish for the
democratic state. Our main claim here is that elections are means to
affirm the unity between rule and those ruled over. On the one hand,
elections affirm this unity formally: the outcome of a successful
election is a legitimate government which is accepted by society. On
the other hand, elections affirm this unity in content: the winning
party agitated many it rules over for the necessities of its policies
for the betterment of the nation.
In this workshop, we will not try to get you to vote, get you to abstain
from voting, get you to vote without illusions or get you to vote the
Green party as the most radical "realistic" choice. Nor do we want to
have a debate about "reform or revolution", where "radical purity" is
posited against "realistic goals". Instead, we want to establish what
an election actually is so that debates like these can be more than
poking around in a fog.
Format:
We prepared a series of claims which we want to discuss one by
one. Our focus is neither to get through all of the material nor to
merely assert our position but put it up for debate.
Please RSVP by sending an e-mail to [email protected] if you
want to take part.
The state is like "hi" and the people are like "hey"
Elections are central pillars of democracy. Every 3-5 years democratic
states ask their subjects to cast votes on who should run the
government. The parties who wish to fulfil this role agitate for a
recognition of what they consider the nation's problems, for their
solutions and for their visions for the nation, and ultimately for them
being the best to run the country. If successful, they take over power
which is accepted by those who they defeated.
People on the left typically engage with this feast of nationalism and
rule in one of two ways. A small minority dismisses elections as
inconsequential and fails to see that successful elections accomplish a
lot and exactly what they promise: the formation of a government which
rules in the name of those it rules over. Others see a great
opportunity to make critical voices heard about what "we" really need
and ask which left-wing party has the best chance of being the British
SYRIZA.
In contrast, we want to take a step back from these discussions and
simply ask what an election is and what it ought to accomplish for the
democratic state. Our main claim here is that elections are means to
affirm the unity between rule and those ruled over. On the one hand,
elections affirm this unity formally: the outcome of a successful
election is a legitimate government which is accepted by society. On
the other hand, elections affirm this unity in content: the winning
party agitated many it rules over for the necessities of its policies
for the betterment of the nation.
In this workshop, we will not try to get you to vote, get you to abstain
from voting, get you to vote without illusions or get you to vote the
Green party as the most radical "realistic" choice. Nor do we want to
have a debate about "reform or revolution", where "radical purity" is
posited against "realistic goals". Instead, we want to establish what
an election actually is so that debates like these can be more than
poking around in a fog.
Format:
We prepared a series of claims which we want to discuss one by
one. Our focus is neither to get through all of the material nor to
merely assert our position but put it up for debate.
Please RSVP by sending an e-mail to [email protected] if you
want to take part.