Democratization - Science topic

this is a dissertation in the partial fulfilment of Master degree

There has not been any intentional probe on the role of youth and social media in reforming Nigeria’s democratic process whereas recent involvement of the Nigerian youth in socio-political matters and their engagement on different social media has shown the tendency to impact the democratic process and engineer changes that could herald reforms.

i need articles that are related to peace building and Democratic peace theory .

i will also need articles that have argued if Ghana is 'at peace'

I propose as subject for a discussion my PDF-PowerPoint "Remarks on Seyla Benhabib’s interpretations of the cosmopolitan rights". I prepared this PDF-Powerpoint for my lecture at the INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC-PRACTICAL CONFERENCE, Alfraganus University, Tashkent, 3-4 October 2023. My essay is dedicated to the analysis of aspects of Benhabib’s interpretations of the birth of cosmopolitan rights. The expression “the right to have rights” is contained in different works of Seyla Benhabib: it refers, in the thought of Benhabib, to the birth of a new constellation of human rights. This new constellation of human rights consists in the claim, which every individual may raise, to be acknowledged and protected as a person by the world community. In Benhabib’s view, rights and the interpretation of rights have profoundly changed after and thanks to the different covenants and conventions signed by the countries belonging to the world community for the protection of human rights: this process of transformation of the interpretation of human rights began with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. The new dimension of human rights is a cosmopolitan one: it is not merely a national dimension. This new dimension overcomes the dimension of particular countries; it promotes, and, at the same time, it calls for the creation of new juridical spaces. Through this new dimension, moreover, individuals are no longer seen as being only citizens of a particular country: individuals are elevated, thanks to the new dimension of the rights, to the condition of world citizens possessing rights which are independent of their belonging to a particular country. Cosmopolitan norms create a new universe of values, of juridical meanings and of social relationships that did not exist at all before the creation of these norms. Seyla Benhabib has expressed the birth of the new constellation of rights in many of her works such as, for instance, The Rights of Others. Aliens, Residents and Citizens, Another Cosmopolitanism. With Commentaries by J. Waldron, B. Honig, W. Kymlicka, and Dignity in Adversity. Human Rights in Troubled Times. The new dimension of rights directly (that is, without the mediation of a particular country) connects every individual to the world community: the right dimension does not depend on a particular country and it is not limited to the validity it possesses within a particular country. The authority that corresponds to and is responsible for, at least, some rights of the individuals is the world community. The right of men qua men, that is, the rights independent of a determined citizenship and not coinciding with a determined citizenship emerge gradually, even though this process is steadily being affected by backlashes. As covenants and conventions signed by the countries of the world community, Benhabib mentions the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948); the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (approved on 28 July 1951); the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination – ICERD – (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 21 December 1965); the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – ICCPR – (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 1966); the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights – ICESCR – (adopted by United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 1966); the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women – CEDAW – (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979); the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment – UNCAT – (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1984). Within the new constellation of human rights, particular countries are being surpassed by the world community: particular countries do not represent the first and last authority for the acknowledgement of rights. Correspondingly, individuals possess determined rights qua human beings: to have certain rights does not depend on the individuals’ possession of a particular citizenship; to have rights depends on the fact that individuals belong to mankind. A new dimension of the individuals comes about: individuals are not only citizens of a country; they are, first of all, human beings, and they have to be recognised as human beings. Benhabib sees a fundamental difference between the Westphalian and the post-Westphalian concept of country and rights. Within the Westphalian interpretation of rights, countries are the first and last authority for the acknowledgement of rights. Within the post-Westphalian interpretation of rights, countries depend on common values and on common principles which they have accepted: countries obligate themselves to the protection of definite rights and definite principles; this means that countries acknowledge these rights and these principles as being over the sovereignty of the countries themselves. A new dimension of countries, a new dimension of rights, and a new dimension of individuals arise at the same time. An indispensable presupposition for the promotion of the integration between inhabitants of a country is, according to Benhabib, that citizenship does not depend on ethnos: to belong to a definite ethnos ought not to be the condition for possessing citizenship. If the condition for possessing a citizenship depends on belonging to a definite ethnos, all the inhabitants of a country not belonging to the definite ethnos are automatically excluded from citizenship. This kind of condition for possessing the citizenship of a country is steadily being used to bring about the exclusion of definite inhabitants and groups of inhabitants, for instance, the exclusion of all the inhabitants that have been compelled to or are compelled to migrate to a country. Benhabib strongly differentiates between the concepts of ethnos and of demos as criteria for the possession of the citizenship: Whereas the concept of ethnos represents a closed concept, the concept demos represents a completely different conception as regards the conditions for membership: demos is a flexible concept, since demos can always be modified by political decisions. Benhabib is particularly firm when it comes to all the structures establishing the right to citizenship on belonging to an ethnos; she is likewise firm as to all the structures excluding certain inhabitants of a country from the right to citizenship because these inhabitants belong to a culture which is different from the culture of the majority of a country: a democratic institution may not afford to forever exclude inhabitants from acquiring citizenship; every kind of such an exclusion is, in the opinion of Benhabib, simply not compatible with a democratic order. To conclude, I believe it should be noted that Benhabib endorses a kind of flexible, dynamic interpretation of the concept of culture: this means that cultures do not constitute unchangeable patterns; cultures are structures continuously changing: they are dynamic patterns. Moreover, Benhabib considers all individuals as not being prisoners of their own culture; Benhabib does not accept concepts like culture essentialism or culture reductions, as if individuals essentially belonged to only a culture and as if individuals could be reduced to only a culture: individuals possess cultures, they are not possessed by them. All individuals maintain, in the opinion of Benhabib, autonomy in relation to their own culture: individuals are more than just a culture.

In their essay, Erica Dorn and Federico Vaz make the assertion that:

"Current democratic structures designed to be representative of the people cannot adapt to the increasing number of people on the move. As a result, an overwhelming gap exists between the rapidly changing reality of democracies made up of ineligible voters, and the need for inclusive participation in the democratic process."

How, therefore, can representative democratic structures account for an increasingly mobile demos?

In his essay here (https://theloop.ecpr.eu/how-to-overcome-democratic-gridlock/), Pablo Ouziel states:

"Today, our ability to imagine democratic futures is diluted, and narrow perspectives on democracy are presented as universal. Such a state of affairs [...] calls for a conversation among democratic traditions that emphasises diversity and reciprocity."

From my perspective, a key to emphasising diversity and reciprocity, as Ouziel puts it, is to carefully describe the thousands of different manifestations of "democracy" (<- this includes synonyms in English and like-terms in other languages) that we can presently perceive.

I'm thinking, for example, of Panchayats, the Haudenausonee Confederacy, Black democracy, but also Tlaxcallan republicanism, decision-making among the Inuit (including their circumpolar democracy), and thousands of other already-existing examples like this.

I think that if people can understand these different manifestations (myself included!) they can then be equipped to use that information if they wish to do so by, for example, communicating it to others or implementing aspects of it/combinations of it, wherever they want in their lives.

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/how-to-overcome-democratic-gridlock/

JAS Google AI BARD LLM:

JAS

TIME conversion x Saudi Arabia education "the bridge" is South America = Colombia (between as-is & to-be) == #how @way (R: OUR = ARE == E-RES #5 ERES @REAL $AND ((Education)) (Health Law Protect Trades ~ Glass Houses)

BARD

Saudi Arabia and Colombia are both located in the Middle East and South America, respectively. Education is important in both countries, and both countries have a rich history and culture.

Here is a possible response to your query:

Education is the key to unlocking a better future for individuals and societies alike. In Saudi Arabia and Colombia, education is a top priority, and both countries are investing heavily in their education systems.

In Saudi Arabia, the government is committed to providing high-quality education to all citizens. The government has made significant investments in education in recent years, and the number of students enrolled in school has increased dramatically. The government is also working to improve the quality of education by investing in teacher training and curriculum development.

In Colombia, the government is also committed to education, but the country faces some challenges. One challenge is that Colombia has a high rate of poverty, and many children from low-income families do not have access to quality education. Another challenge is that Colombia has a long history of violence, which has disrupted education in some areas.

Despite these challenges, both Saudi Arabia and Colombia are making progress in improving education for their citizens. Education is the bridge to a better future for both countries, and both countries are committed to building a strong educational system.

How to bridge the gap between education and the real world

One way to bridge the gap between education and the real world is to provide students with opportunities to learn outside of the classroom. This could include internships, apprenticeships, and other work-based learning experiences. Another way to bridge the gap is to focus on developing students' soft skills, such as communication, problem-solving, and teamwork. These skills are essential for success in the workplace, regardless of the field in which a student chooses to work.

It is also important to make sure that the curriculum is relevant to the needs of the workforce. This means ensuring that students are learning the skills and knowledge that they need to be successful in their chosen careers.

The importance of education

Education is important for many reasons. First, it helps individuals develop their full potential. When people have access to quality education, they are more likely to be successful in their careers and contribute to society.

Second, education helps to reduce poverty and inequality. People with higher levels of education are more likely to be employed and earn higher wages. This means that education can help to create a more just and equitable society.

Third, education helps to promote democracy and good governance. Educated citizens are more likely to participate in the democratic process and hold their government accountable.

Conclusion

Education is essential for building a better future for Saudi Arabia, Colombia, and the world. By investing in education, we can create a more just, equitable, and prosperous world for all.

JAS

define adoption @country #how ^way *time %transfer (resource: suplementals)

BARD

Adoption is the legal process by which a child becomes the permanent member of a new family. It is a way to provide a loving and supportive home for children who are unable to live with their biological parents.

Country adoption is when a child is adopted by parents who live in a different country than the child's birth country. This type of adoption can be complex and challenging, but it can also be incredibly rewarding.

The process of adopting a child from another country varies from country to country. However, there are some general steps that are involved in most cases:

The timeline for country adoption can vary depending on a number of factors, including the country from which you are adopting and the complexity of your case. However, most country adoptions take at least one year to complete.

When you adopt a child from another country, you are committing to providing the child with a secure and loving home. This includes providing the child with all of the resources they need to thrive, such as food, clothing, shelter, education, and healthcare.

In addition to providing the child with financial support, many adoptive parents also choose to transfer other resources to the child's birth country. This could include sending money to the child's orphanage, donating school supplies, or volunteering their time to help children in need.

Country adoption is a complex process, but it can be incredibly rewarding. By adopting a child from another country, you are giving the child the gift of a loving home and a better future.

JAS

correct entry #@when a nation "adopts" another country (e.g. SA = Saudi Arabia may adopt South America) entry time stamp supplement grace global program for sustainability ^UN *Element %Revise (Entry)

The term "adopt" is used in this context to describe a long-term partnership between two countries, in which the more developed country provides resources and support to the less developed country. This can include financial assistance, technical expertise, and educational and cultural exchanges.

The goal of adoption programs is to help developing countries achieve their sustainable development goals, such as reducing poverty, improving education and healthcare, and protecting the environment. Adoption programs can also help to promote peace and security in the world.

In 2023, Saudi Arabia announced a new adoption program for South America. The program will provide funding for sustainable development projects in the region, such as renewable energy projects, water conservation projects, and agricultural development projects.

The Saudi Arabian adoption program is part of a larger global initiative supported by the UN. The goal of the initiative is to help developing countries achieve their sustainable development goals by 2030.

It is important to ensure that adoption programs are safe and ethical for both the adopting country and the adopted country. Here are some key considerations:

By following these guidelines, we can help to ensure that adoption programs are safe, ethical, and beneficial for all involved.

JAS

describe "Reciprocal Marketing"

BARD

Reciprocal marketing is a marketing strategy in which two businesses promote each other's products or services for mutual benefit. It is a way to reach a new audience and generate leads and sales without spending a lot of money on advertising.

There are many different ways to implement reciprocal marketing. Here are a few examples:

Reciprocal marketing can be a very effective way to grow your business. However, it is important to choose partners carefully. Make sure that you partner with businesses that have a similar target audience and that offer products or services that complement your own.

Here are some tips for implementing successful reciprocal marketing campaigns:

Reciprocal marketing can be a great way to grow your business and reach a new audience. By following the tips above, you can implement successful reciprocal marketing campaigns that will benefit both you and your partners.

JAS

attach "ELEMENT" adoption = @Nation

Element: Adoption

Definition: The legal process by which a child becomes the permanent member of a new family. It is a way to provide a loving and supportive home for children who are unable to live with their biological parents.

The term "adoption" is also used to describe a long-term partnership between two countries, in which the more developed country provides resources and support to the less developed country. This can include financial assistance, technical expertise, and educational and cultural exchanges.

The goal of adoption programs is to help developing countries achieve their sustainable development goals, such as reducing poverty, improving education and healthcare, and protecting the environment. Adoption programs can also help to promote peace and security in the world.

It is important to ensure that adoption programs are safe and ethical for both the adopting country and the adopted country. Here are some key considerations:

By following these guidelines, we can help to ensure that adoption programs are safe, ethical, and beneficial for all involved.

JAS

define how Nation's Supplemental Adoption Program can be adapted

BARD

The Nation's Supplemental Adoption Program (NSAP) is a federal program that provides financial assistance to families who are adopting children from foster care. The program can be adapted in a number of ways to make it more effective and accessible to families.

One way to adapt the NSAP is to increase the amount of financial assistance that is available to families. The current maximum benefit is $6,190 per child, which is often not enough to cover the costs of adoption. Increasing the benefit amount would help to make adoption more affordable for families.

Another way to adapt the NSAP is to expand the eligibility criteria. The program is currently only available to families who are adopting children who are in foster care for at least 12 months. Expanding the eligibility criteria to include children who have been in foster care for less than 12 months, or who are in kinship care, would make the program more accessible to families.

The NSAP could also be adapted to provide more support to families after the adoption process is complete. For example, the program could provide funding for post-adoption services, such as counseling and support groups. This would help families to transition to parenthood and provide their adopted children with the support they need to thrive.

Here are some additional ways to adapt the NSAP:

By adapting the NSAP in these ways, we can make it a more effective and accessible program that helps more families to adopt children from foster care.

JAS

show code = family adoption program scales into Space (Place) Adoption for purpose of Global Sustainability

BARD

Here is a pseudocode example of how a family adoption program could be scaled into Space Adoption for the purpose of Global Sustainability:

def space_adoption_program(): # Create a database of families who are interested in adopting space habitats. # Create a database of space habitats that are available for adoption. # Match families with space habitats based on their needs and preferences. # Provide financial assistance to families who are adopting space habitats. # Monitor the progress of the space adoption program and make adjustments as needed.

This pseudocode can be adapted to create a more specific and detailed program plan. For example, the program could focus on a particular type of space habitat, such as orbital habitats or lunar habitats. The program could also focus on families with particular skills or experience, such as families with engineering or scientific expertise.

Here are some specific examples of how the space adoption program could be implemented:

The space adoption program could also provide support to families after they have adopted a space habitat. For example, the program could provide funding for training programs, or could provide access to resources such as tools and equipment.

The space adoption program could play a significant role in promoting global sustainability. By providing families with the resources they need to adopt space habitats, the program could help to reduce the pressure on Earth's resources and create new opportunities for humanity.

Mencius/Confucius wrote the following some estimated 2,400 years ago:

"‘The people are the most important element in a nation; the spirits of the land and grain are the next; the sovereign is the least 民為貴，社稷次之，君為輕" (see book 7, part 2)"

As Li-Chia Lo explains, Mencius is here giving an explanation for the term "min ben" 民本 which, due to its adherence to sovereignty, is controversial among liberal democrats.

I find this controversy confusing, though, as liberal representative democracy has always been strongly adherent to the (at least) Westphalian nation-state. In fact, in practice it seems that the state is considered the most important in liberal democracies, the land (resources) secondmost, and peoples last. One could argue that the liberal democratic state is simply a synonym for an Emperor. Like an Emperor, the state must find ways to stay atop the "slippery egg" of legitimacy (as John Keane puts it from time to time), it must continue to prove its worth to the people in its capture lest they revolt, and it must also keep its power away from the people lest the elites lose it (and therefore lose their privilege or, as some paternalists see it, allow anarchy caused by state failure).

In short, I see more similarities between minben theory and liberal democratic theory than differences. Perhaps this is why there is discomfort among our liberal democratic peers about minben for it exposes the "Emperor/dictatorship" of electoral democracies (David Beetham recognized this dictatorship across more than 40 years of publishing democratic theory - so this is not a new position either).

Have a read of Li-Chia Lo's essay and let us know what you think. We'll be seeing more of these discussions between languages and their respective contested concepts.

"Ruthless", writes Jennifer Greiman, "is not a descriptor normally attached to democracy. Unlike familiar modifiers – constitutional, representative, direct – it does not simply describe a stable and recognisable form that the rule of a people might take. Instead, 'ruthless democracy' describes an egalitarian principle that is pursued without sentimental attachment to the permanence of any particular form. It is a commitment to the fundamental equality of human (and nonhuman) life that demands a receptivity to perpetual change."

As you can see for yourself in reading Greiman's essay, the concept comes from Herman Melville's many contributions to democratic thought. My favourites are the story of "round robins" (see image attached) - which is a democratic approach to mutiny and also Greiman's conception of "cetocracy", or a polity of whales.

What is it about ruthless democracy that draws your attention? What stands out for you?

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/herman-melvilles-ruthless-democracy/

In her ECPR essay for the sciences of the democracies, Jenny Wustenberg argues that memory offers training to citizens, especially in the arts of tolerance and inclusion.

Whilst this point may seem, or be taken to mean, something obvious - it isn't. In fact, as Wustenberg points out, the concept of "mnemonic democracy" is (a) barely used (it came up with a few hits on a general Google search, for example) and it (b) also stumped Chat GTP which usually comes up with something for any question!

Given the above, I think Wustenberg is right to argue that there is a lack of focus on the intersection between memory and democracy. We need to focus more on how "actors engage in negotiations over public memory. For all of them, the power to define what a democratic approach to the past means is highly valuable."

What do you think?

In an essay on the types of democracy used by members of the Church of Norway, Helge K. Nylenna points to the broader picture of the democracies (and democratic innovations) used/created by other non-governmental organizations.

Here I encourage that we try not to think of the "big" global NGOs but rather that we focus on the ones started locally, as community groups, ones that remain small in number.

These smaller NGOs are deeply underappreciated sites of democratic innovation and, in my experience with the literature, appear infrequently within the works of democracy's professional students (aka academics/lifelong practitioners in international democracy development and promotion).

Is there a small NGO that you know of that runs itself democratically?

The potential for AI to generate convincing fake content raises questions about misinformation, propaganda, and the influence it may have on public perception and democratic processes.

What is the propensity for authoritarian regimes to use quazi-democratic institutions, such as sham elections, stacked legislative bodies, etcetera, to undermine the public's confidence in democratic principles, thereby averting opposition?

Democracy, writes Nathan Pippenger, "involves a kind of cultural aspiration wrapped up in words and meanings."

But "[h]ow can this distinctive way of living together include all citizens when the demos comprises such different groups?"

The answer that Pippenger provides to this question is thrilling. He follows Ralph Ellison's example to argue that to understand a diverse community's democracy - and democratic aspirations - we need to examine its common talk.

"Ellison", Pippenger writes, "did not naively believe that the vernacular process would automatically resolve complex questions that arise in culturally diverse democracies. But his writings offer an account of how certain virtues of artistic and political importance — such as creativity, aesthetic sensitivity, and openness to novelty — can help citizens overcome social barriers without resorting to assimilation. In this way, he believed, the everyday workings of language and culture might promote a shared democratic life."

What would you say is your community's aspiration for democracy? And how did you get there through your understanding of the common talk around you?

Remi Chukwude Okeke argues that we need to demonstrate the effectiveness of democracy in, for example, families, schools, apartment buildings, etc., so that people can see, for themselves, that being democratic in those settings suits (at least) their self-interests.

Importantly, as Okeke and others point out, there are many benefits to being democratic in our social lives - benefits most of us do not get as our social lives are, in the majority, authoritarian in nature.

What is your proposal for how we can do this?

In my esteem, the key is to try to practice democracy or be democratic (however defined) in one's own family, etc., and to lead by example.

What do you think?

In the essay linked above, psychologist Fathali M. Moghaddam argues that "actualised democracy does not exist – yet. And this is because we have not yet achieved the psychological portrait of the democratic citizen in a demographically broad or especially multiracial sense."

To get there, Maghaddam avers, we each need to all get better at practising ten characteristics of thought which he sees as integral to manifesting (bringing about) the possibility of an individual behaving/being a democratic citizen.

These ten characteristics are given as follows:

1. "I could be wrong"

2. "I must critically question everything"

3. "I must revise my opinion as the evidence requires"

4. "I must seek to better understand those who are different from me"

5. "I can learn from those who are different from me"

6. "I must seek information and opinions from as many different sources as possible"

7. "I should be actively open to new experiences"

8. "I should be open to creating new experiences for others"

9. "There are principles of right and wrong"

10. "Not all experiences are of equal value"

Would you question any of these characteristics, want to change/rephrase one or more, or add to this list?

Hager Ali, in the essay linked above, makes what I believe to be a profound argument. Today, "autocracies around the world are emulating democratic features and democracies [are adopting] authoritarian characteristics". Perhaps this has always been the nature of regimes for as long as there have been regimes. Some are better at being "democratic" whilst others less so.

Ali demonstrates that we, private citizens, residents, and visitors of various sorts, need to get better at differentiating what makes a "real and existing democracy" - be that in a country or school or family - and why that's the case.

This is a formidable challenge as most of us are ill-equipped to understand the often delicate or nuanced differences between an act of democracy and an act of authoritarianism. Some say that "you know it when you see it" but I am not convinced. Today's ars politica are often sophisticated and power, as John Keane wrote a few years ago, has taken on a more spectral (shadowy) quality. We require an upgrade to whatever the perceptive faculty of ours that is responsible for detecting a democratically-formulated order of power.

Ali offers one approach to help us detect democratic order: democratic states control their militaries through civilian oversight.

What approach might you offer to help others detect "democracy"?

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/control-over-militaries-is-the-forgotten-landmark-of-democracy-after-imperialism/

In July of 2021, a short essay of mine was published by invitation from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Religion & Ethics section: https://www.abc.net.au/religion/words-of-democracy-an-abandoned-science/13386940).

In that essay, I worked through an idea put forward by the philosopher Isaiah Berlin to argue that we can approximate democracy's total texture by collecting its many thousands of words (e.g. 'black democracy', 'democracy lite', 'archaic democracy', etc) and studying them, where they came from, why they exist, what their democratic credentials are (<- this must be recurringly participatory and not an 'expert only' determination), how they relate to one another in meaning or through bibliometrics, etc.

As enchanting as the idea was and remains (we are preparing a homegrown AI-supported open digital encyclopedia of the democracies), what brilliant thinkers like Alex Prior and nearly 100 others have shown, is that should a total texture of democracy ever be approximated it is going to require far more data than just words but also theories to help us all understand these many, and disparate, data.

For example, Prior suggests that we look to fractals: Benoit Mandelbrot is credited with the 'discovery' of fractal geometry which pairs art and math together so very well. Prior relies on fractal art/geometry as a metaphor to show that certain types of democracy - such as electoral majoritarianism - does repeat itself from the smallest scale to largest scale. Indeed, what Prior doesn't mention in his essay is that neurologists have shown that dendrites in animal brains rely on majoritarian decisions! (See: ) And that our planet, Gaia/Pachamama/Turtle Island/etc, is arguably itself majoritarian in how planetary systems self-regulate.

If you were to try to make sense of democracy's immense diversity in the world, how would you do it?

Reginald Oduor writes the following:

"Prior to the incursion of Western imperialism, a sizeable proportion of the governance models of Africa’s peoples placed a high premium on consensus-building rather than majoritarianism."

Oduor goes on to detail how elections across Africa today continue to stifle democratization in the continent and that's precisely because majoritarianism is used to shut down discussion.

The critical stance toward making a majoritarian decision first instead of last, as often happens in elections, was also struck decades ago by David Beetham. He, too, held the opinion that we should only use a majoritarian decision when all other options to reach a decision have failed.

In short, consensus-building, deliberation, etc., should be what we reach for first when it is time to decide who our representatives will be or when it is time to make any sort of decision.

What do you think? Why should reaching for a majoritarian decision be the last resort and not the first option to be tried?

Neology and sociolinguistics are at the crossroads of analysis for the democratization processes and need an integral approach combined with the concept studies to understand linguistic democratization dynamics fully.

Linguistic Democratization of the Modern English Language - one more book chapter of mine is now in the wild of the #openaccess academic realm. This chapter focuses on Functional Parameters of English Youth Slang Neologisms. Thanks to prof. Nata Lazebna who co-edited this collective monography with prof. Dinesh Kumar - Studies in Modern English published by The Julius Maximilians University of Würzburg Press.

Big shout out to prof. Rusudan Makhachashvili who created and leads a network of Contemporary English researchers now being scattered across the globe but contributing wherever we are.

Shtaltovna, Y. (2022). Linguistic Democratization of the Modern English Language: Functional Parameters of English Youth Slang Neologisms // N. Lazebna / D. Kumar (Ed.), Studies in Modern English, Würzburg, 2022, p. 105-115. DOI: 10.25972/WUP-978-3-95826-199-0-105

Democracy links to a genetic or epigenetic regulation? Can we create democratic mice or humans? The switch on/off of Democratic values depend on the social; memories; spatial properties of the individual or the society?

Are we democratic individuals or just members of social groups who follow?

Lucy J. Parry points out the exclusionary character of "mainstream" democratic theory. Parry writes:

"There is a disconnect between democratic innovations in academic research and practice. Hans Asenbaum and Friedel Marquardt have already pointed out that, to reinvigorate democracy, we need to engage with those who enact it outside academia in their day-to-day work and lives. Practitioners – including facilitators, designers, public servants, NGOs and consultants – have been somewhat neglected in this debate. Yet they are often on the frontline of democratic innovations, and their experience can greatly enhance our understandings of democracy."

For more, see: https://theloop.ecpr.eu/connecting-theory-to-the-messy-realities-of-democratic-innovations-in-practice/

I have discussed Parry's point on and off with colleagues since this essay was published and one of the recurring questions in these discussions is how to connect with practitioners.

Academics are trained in typically exclusive arts that rely on specializing in specific methodologies, adopting certain writing styles, using technocratic language, publishing in specialist outlets, and attending specialist events/developing specialist networks. This does not bode well for collaborating with experts who not only do none of these things but sometimes have little interest in the "high theory" that some democratic theorists promote.

What would be your suggestion for helping democratic theorists to connect with experts outside of academia?

How will emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain, impact democratic processes and governance structures?

What is the best way to conduct this study?

It's talking about public opinion in democratic governance

As a result of tools such as Chat GPT, Bing and others, What would be the main risks for democratic systems when using AI like these? personalized fake news? Perpetuation of biases? Or what other elements?

Anyone can kindly share a sample copy of (Principals Leadership Style) and (Teachers Job Performance) Questionnaires used in Parveen et al. 2022 study :Impact of Principal Leadership Styles on Teacher Job Performance: An Empirical Investigation or any other useful validated questionnaires. I'm looking at the impact of autocratic and democratic leadership styles on teachers performance. Thank you

The Quantum Computing can is not that far down the road.

Should companies operate without much oversight with a different goal setting than society?

In her essay, Paula Sabloff asserts that:

First and foremost, a democratic government protects people’s human rights as laid out in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Among these are the right to life, to freedom from degrading punishment or enslavement, and to follow one’s own beliefs. They also include the right to citizenship and, most relevant to dignity, the right to self-determination.

If you were asked to complete the sentence: A democratic government must ...

What would you come up with? What would be your answer or list of minimum requirements?

In reading John B. Min's essay here (https://theloop.ecpr.eu/a-democratic-philosophy-for-democracys-data-mountain/) I began to wonder about "democratic progresses" as opposed to the now all too familiar "democratic backslidings".

For me, at the moment, "democratic progresses" looks like a combination of private citizens (inclusive of residents and visitors, especially migrants), civil society (or public sphere) organisations, and public things/officials/institutions working together to develop trustworthy patterns of behaviour given to enhancing the power of people - especially marginalised individuals and groups.

These sorts of progresses are people-driven and advices are provided to them by so-called "democracy experts" (broadly conceived).

One example is the rising interest and practice in "sortive", "aleatory", or "sortition democracy".

What do you think? What examples come to mind for you and why?

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/a-democratic-philosophy-for-democracys-data-mountain/

Patricia Roberts-Miller begins her essay as follows:

"'Thucydides’ trap' is famous in international relations, used to describe a situation in which a rising power threatens an existing hegemon. It’s also a misnomer — it describes a 'trap' of no interest to the Athenian historian Thucydides. Neither is it applicable to the relationship between Sparta and Athens that would result in the regionally devastating Peloponnesian War, the history of which Thucydides wrote. The misnomer is the consequence of a misunderstanding of a quote from a secondary writer, and an anachronistic understanding of what it means to be a hero in classical literature."

This led to my asking: what does it mean to be a hero today especially in relation not only to "democracy" but to "the democracies" - the thousands of possible routes that we can take to be ever more democratic, ever better democratic people?

To my mind, perhaps because I am working on a book called "Democracy Therapy: Democratic Treatments for our Authoritarian Lives", such a hero tries to democratise their family, or school, workplace, condo/apartment building, local hospitals, their neighbourhood, domestic relations with non-human life, and so forth - all, notably, more social than political spaces.

What does being a hero of the democracies today mean to you?

In his essay, Ramon Van Der Does (https://theloop.ecpr.eu/the-best-use-of-our-limited-resources-in-service-of-democracy/) argues that: "We already know the cures for many of democracy's ills. What we lack are ways to realise the transition towards a deeply democratic society".

Why is that the case? What is preventing us from achieving deeply democratic societies?

"Democratic theory should account for diverse democratic practices happening worldwide. At a closer look, this deceptively simple proposition leaves contemporary democratic theory with a range of conceptual and methodological puzzles. How can we acknowledge plural forms of democracy in our normative and empirical endeavours? How can we gain a more comprehensive picture of diverse understandings of democracy in the first place?"

These are the words of Dannica Fleuss from Fleuss's essay here: https://theloop.ecpr.eu/gagnons-data-mountain-a-lookout-point-for-revolutions-to-come/

The puzzle of accounting for diverse democratic practices is, it seems to me, made up of philosophical and methodological challenges.

Philosophically: what is democracy? who constructs it? where? with what justification? would a specimen of it "count" as a "valid" democracy if, for example, that specimen falls more into the authoritarian family of resemblance than the democracy family?

Methodologically: what tools do we use to detect democratic practices when meaning is so variable? how can this work be done affordably? where is the data kept? who is overseeing that the benefit of this work goes to, e.g., marginalised scholars & practitioners (if not one and the same)?

Are there any emphases you would like to add to the puzzle or questions to its philosophical or methodological aspects?

Alex Prior makes the excellent point that "[w]e cannot simply airdrop a democratic institution and expect a democratic outcome, because the institution inevitably ‘lands’ on an already established context".

For more see his essay here: https://theloop.ecpr.eu/rethinking-understanding-democratic-trends/

Like others who have studied global histories of democracy, I take this "already established context" to mean that people - wherever they are to be found - innately understand what it means to, for example, resent a tyrant, want freedom from authority, and seek the autonomy to live as they see fit (collectively, individually). These feelings can turn into institutional/cultural "birth moments" or origination points of a form/type/kind/model of democracy.

Do you know of any resources that can help us map these "births" of the democracies?

As someone who is considered a newcomer in the architectural academic field, I found the typical teaching process to take place inside closed studios without engaging the community in whatever we are teaching.

Upon searching for the meaning of open education systems, most of the readings talk about the structure and the role of administration in the educational process. Yet, there seems to be limited writings on the quality of education itself, i.e. the production and delivering of knowledge inside the studios. Teaching manner, which takes the place of the learning manner, is a one-way direction from the teacher to the students.

Where is the community? Doesn't including the people ensure a more democratic design process? Do you think the teaching process should take place in a more open environment rather than the traditional studio rooms?

Thomas Bunting argues that "sport is a forum for democratic contestation" (https://theloop.ecpr.eu/sporting-democracy-as-illustrated-by-the-qatar-world-cup/).

What are examples of democracy or democratic contestation in sport?

In her essay, Sonia Bussu avers that "democracy is far removed from our daily lives". See: https://theloop.ecpr.eu/democracy-as-a-way-of-living/

I read this as meaning most of us do not have an "inner" or "psychogenic" democracy, most families/homes are not democratic, nor schools, workplaces, apartment/condo buildings, hospitals, aged care facilities, prisons, even many social/sporting clubs.

Why do you think our social lives are so far removed from democracy (meaning they are more authoritarian/autocratic in nature)?

We are probably all aware by now that artificial intelligence will disrupt virtually every single industry globally. It will eliminate millions of old jobs and create millions of new ones. Memorization, multiple-choice testing, or rote work will no longer be relevant to these new jobs. Even jobs in the service sector that traditionally need the "human touch," like nursing and teaching will be affected in one way or another.

Unfortunately, the developing world will probably make attempts to adhere to "tradition" and resist change. How can we democratize technology so that students gain the data and computer literacy needed to succeed in the job market of the future despite this resistance?

Friedel Marquardt avers the following:

"[The] naming and recording of various definitions of democracy gives place to those definitions that may not have been considered or acknowledged before, often eclipsed by more prominent definitions like liberal democracy. Identifying a manifestation as 'democracy' and applying the term to it has the effect of recognising a wide range of practices as democratic. It gives them legitimacy among the other more prominent democracies identified." (For more, please read Marquardt's essay here: https://theloop.ecpr.eu/who-gets-a-say-in-the-meanings-of-democracy/)

Which practices around you, perhaps ones you conduct yourself, are not formally part of the "canon of democracy" but should be?

Patricia Roberts-Miller writes that people need to deliberate about the democracy they want to have. Brigitte Geissel is also arguing this in her forthcoming (Routledge) book on democratic innovation.

Does anyone know of an instance where such a deliberative event may have happened?

Taina Meriluoto argues that "total democracy" refers to the way democratic arrangements are pervasive in Finnish society. https://theloop.ecpr.eu/democracy-what-a-lovely-mess/

In your experience, does this extend to:

1) Individual psychology?

2) How families/households govern themselves?

3) How schools, workplaces, apartment buildings, etc., govern themselves?

How pervasive is democracy in Finnish society and what kinds of democracy? Where are they happening? What is considered "common" here?

Poland has suggested Russia's exclusion from the G20 group, while China opposes it. Should the group's democratic members boycott the planned events as long as Russia continues its war of aggression in Ukraine?

Democrats buy most of the books that have been banned somewhere. Republicans form censorship committees and read them as a group. Democrats name their children after popular sports figures, politicians, and entertainers. Republican children are named after their parents or grandparents, according to where the money is. Republicans tend to keep their shades drawn, although there is seldom any reason why they should. Democrats ought to, but don’t. Republican boys date Democratic girls. They plan to marry Republican girls, but feel they’re entitled to a little fun first. Republicans sleep in twin beds—some even in separate rooms. That is why there are more Democrats. (From the October 1, 1974, Congressional Record, submitted by Craig Hosmer). How important is humor in Politics? Would more humor make us less tribal?

Spread of MONKEY POX is due to mutational etiology? Monkeypox was first discovered in 1958 when two outbreaks of a pox-like disease occurred in colonies of monkeys kept for research, hence the name ‘monkeypox.’ The first human case of monkeypox was recorded in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo during a period of intensified effort to eliminate smallpox. Since then monkeypox has been reported in humans in other central and western African countries,

then why its being now spreading all over ?

Newly established democratic countries are badly affected from crony capitalism or Cronyism as business elites and politicians formulate rules favorable to themselves and kill the real and fair business environment. Collusion between economically rich and political masters has been the real threat to democracy where everybody are equal before the law.

Once the Democrats in the U.S. won the Presidency, they increased corporate, personal income, and other taxes significantly. Is this because the Democrats as a left-wing did so because of their ideology, or they acted upon the circumstances where the Government more than ever before needs the resources to reorient economic development?

We need a Global Wealth Tax How rich are the rich relative to the poor? If they had ten times the wealth, no problem. It has always been that way. But what if the ratio was a million to one? That's undemocratic power. You know when democracy has gone. Elections become a sham, and leaders become increasingly incompetent, dishonest, and corrupt. Sound familiar? The existence of just one billionaire -- a single person with the wealth of a thousand millionaires, or a million workers with $1000 each -- is a sign that democracy is on the way out. We now have 3000 billionaries, including three smiling centibillionaires (Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg). A centibillionare has the wealth of 100 billionaires or 100,000 millionaires. Capitalism may have its pros and cons, but this is getting ridiculous. If we want our democracy back, we have no choice but to reduce the wealth of the wealthiest. If we want peace, we have to do that gradually and fairly. In a word: democratically. Don't despair. It can be done. Big changes have happened before. Our main task is to think clearly and tell the truth.

Richard Parncutt

Please suggest me a good questionnaire for conducting a study with the following details. The independent variables of the proposed study are 1) Autocratic Leadership Style, 2) Democratic Leadership Style, 3) Laissez-Faire Leadership Style, 4) Transformational Leadership Style, and 5) Transactional Leadership Style. The research objectives and research questions are as follows;

The research objectives for the proposed study are as follows;

1) To examine the impact of autocratic leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians.

2) To examine the impact of democratic leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians.

3) To examine the impact of laissez-faire leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians.

4) To examine the impact of transformational leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians.

5) To examine the impact of transactional leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians.

The research questions for the proposed study are as follows;

1) What is the impact of autocratic leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians?

2) What is the impact of democratic leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians?

3) What is the impact of laissez-faire leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians?

4) What is the impact of transformational leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians?

5) What is the impact of transactional leadership style on job satisfaction of physicians?

How do you see clientelist politics?

What are effects of Clientelism upon democracy?

Is this a threat to democratic system?

The coming of exism movements in 2016 led to the coming of extreme democratic outcomes within majority rule based liberal democracies like in the USA.

And this brought a change in the nature of democracy as it has led to a shift from true democracy thinking to temporary democratic authoritarianism thinking.

We are probably familiar with the structure of the forces competing for power in a true democracy, I think. but not with the forces competing in a temporary democratic authoritarianism system. Which raises the question, what is the structure of temporary democratic authoritarianism? Any ideas?

Feel free to express your own views so we can exchange ideas in a positive academic environment as this is an academic question, not a political one.

How do you respond to

can situation of conflict or rivalry

actually promote human development by enlarging available competitive market and democratic elections?

Dear fellow RG members, allow me to share with you this quote from Graubard (1983) "Functional literacy is the ability to read and write sufficient to be adapted to society, or to communicate with others in order to serve their interests , economic or other, or to participate in democratic life ".

I am pleased to invite the community of researchers members of RG to interact on the concept of "functional literacy".

Graubard S.R., Nothing to fear, much to do. Daedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Spring 1983, vol. 112 (2), pp. 231-284.

Open access is increasingly modifying traditional research and publishing.

More and more "high profile" journals are using this "method" of publication.

Does paid open access method "democratize" research or does it "manufacture" false reputation for the researcher?

Do you prefer to spend time with people of a similar level of education to yourself? Why or why not?

For the last 6 weeks, we've been talking a lot about the rapid and forced change in accessibility of the educational tools in reaction to pandemic restrictions.

Last week only I was invited to share my opinion on online education at a TV-programme, during two online debates and in a private discussion.

So, I decided to share one of my academic articles (2018) on the concept "Democratisation of education" so that more people can use the term accordingly, understanding what lies within this notion. In a nutshell, equality in learning + transparency + accessibility+ globalisation of education + (learn more in the article) = Democratisation of education.

Feel free to check out "The pursuit of democratization in education - knowing where to go. Concept analysis for the correct use of the term "Democratization of Education".

Do you have any research questionnaire that can scale managers' tendency to autocratic leadership or subordinate inclination?

Most of the troubled and poorest countries have high levels of natural resource wealth, comparing with developed countries. Why is the negative affect of natural resources much higher in democratic nations, but not among none democratic nations?

Thanks a lot ahead.

Big tech is constrained by the political environment in which they operate, locally and globally.

If the world is divided between democracy and non-democracy given current capitalism dynamics, we should expect big tech to face fewer constraints; and therefore enjoy more business stability under democracy than under a non-democracy, and this should expected to affect future globalization trends. Which raises the question, Democratic capitalism vrs non-democratic capitalism: Is this the end of true globalization?

I think, perhaps yes and perhaps no. What do you think?

Military Studies is one of the large and rapidly growing fields in Social Sciences. The researcher's integration into the research context generally affects the process of obtaining data and analysis. Primarily, I am interested to get a specific response to two major questions; (1) What sort of rapport is needed to obtain data when a researcher is a civilian or a member of the military or works for the institution as a civil servant ? (2) How is the publication of the research results received by the military institution in various parts of the world in the democratic and non-democratic regimes?

If the judges don't are elect for popular voting, why would they have - in terms philosophical, and not in legal terms - legitimacy to fail to apply a law approved democratically by legislative?

A Fiat Government is a Government that is "artificial ", like Fiat Currency, something backed only by trust and belief in in promises made.

Governments around the world portray to help their citizens, however , data suggests that Governments actually work in collusion for the benefit of the wealthiest segments of the world, often using financial policy to enslave citizens and the global population.

Fiat Government images that the illusion of democracy or socialist value is only an illusion, and that the availability of decades worth of government data suggests that democracy and a democratic republic does not exist, however, the illusion exists. In that, we then see a Fiat Government, fake and not backed by the illusion, but backed by people and interests that ignore a democratic process.

In the United States, we have witnessed a complete breakdown in the rule of constitutional laws, a breakdown of cultural norms and a breakdown of societal benefit, with a shift towards highest-bidder corporate interests and military dominance, something that is not new, but which has been exposed as a Fiat Government during the 2010-2020 decade.

Is it time to challenge a New World Order of Fiat Government that is nothing more than centralized power and corruption?

Last years a have an arising question based on my experience from different academic and scientific activities. The contemporary humanism, obviously very good and peaceful, including everybody, is more and more changing its approach towards a truth as to something that actually equals consensus of a largest possible (inclusive and democratic) group. It seems so, that we have somehow forgotten a mission or quest of the past centuries, that there IS some Truth and we are to discover it or at least come one step closer than our predecessors. Now, we tend to be more and more satisfied with "having OUR truth" about something, actually a mere consensus in particular group. We are a bit confusing this consensual semi-truth with the general truth (not speaking about Truth as eternal spirit or even person). In humanities it is as usually more visible. The theory of firm Truth is understood as something "ideological" and thereby dangerous, potentially threatening by some kind of mis-use in the service of political party or religious authority. Are we still able to know this? Or is the comfortable consensus already here as "the truth"? Is it SUSTAINABLE?