Okrepljena ustavna demokracija

Najpomembnejša značilnost spopadanja z veliko finančno, gospodarsko in socialno krizo od leta 2008 naprej je, da se poskuša na globalni, evropski in nacionalni ravni rešiti v okviru obstoječega omejevalnega niza institucij reprezentativne demokracije, tržnega gospodarstva in svobodne civilne družbe. Razprave o alternativnih institucionalnih oblikah, ki bi temeljito preoblikovale ustavno demokracijo, tržno gospodarstvo in svobodno civilno družbo v smeri bolj vključujoče, bolj raznolike in bolj eksperimentalne družbe, še vedno ni na mizi. Obstajajo le posamezne regije v prvem in tretjem svetu, ki uspešno eksperimentirajo z novimi institucionalnimi oblikami in veljajo za najuspešnejše regije ne le po merilih konkurenčnosti, temveč tudi socialne kohezivnosti, ekonomskih in izobraževalnih priložnostih ter inovativnosti. Teoretično izhodišče za razpravo v okviru sodobnih institucionalnih teorij je naslednje: klasična ustavna teorija, politične stranke, utemeljene v devetnajstem stoletju, in množična fordistična proizvodnja, organizirana po ekonomskih principih zgodnjega dvajsetega stoletja, ne morejo ostati institucionalni okvir za organizacijo in delovanje modernih demokratičnih družb enaindvajsetega stoletja. Za bolj ustvarjalni, domišljeni dialog na nacionalni ravni in za okrepljen nacionalni razvojni projekt v okviru EU potrebujemo resnično neodvisno in avtonomno, a dobro organizirano civilno družbo. Ta mora postati partnerica političnim strankam, ki bi se morale odlikovati po izdelovanju bogatih in raznolikih programskih alternativ. Namesto ustvarjanja površnega konsenza bi morali bogatiti in krepiti razpravo o razvojnih alternativah ter zanje ustvarjati široka družbena zavezništva. Seveda pa pri iskanju poti iz krize - ne na evropski ne na nacionalni ravni - ni bližnjic. Pretekli dve leti sta bili tako v evropskem kot nacionalnem ustavnem in razvojnem kontekstu v veliki meri izgubljeni in ju bo težko nadomestiti.The key characteristic of dealing with the financial, economic and social crisis since 2008 is that efforts are being made to solve the crisis on global, European and national levels within the existing limited set of institutions of a representative democracy, market economy and free civil society. A discussion of the alternative institutional possibilities which would comprehensively restructure the constitutional democracy, market economy and free civil society towards a more inclusive, more diverse and more experimental society is not yet on the table. There are regions as exceptions in the first and third world which are recognised as the most advanced regions not only according to the level of their competitiveness, but also according to their social cohesiveness and economic and educational opportunities, as well as their innovation levels. The theoretical basis for the discussion in the context of modern institutional theories is as follows: classical constitutionalism, political parties founded in the nineteenth century and mass Fordist production developed according to the economic principles of the early twentieth century cannot remain an institutional basis for the organisation and functioning of modern democratic societies in the twenty-first century. In order to facilitate more creative, imaginative dialogue at the national level and to strengthen the national development project within the EU context we need a truly independent, autonomous and well-organised civil society. It has to become a partner of political parties. Political parties should be able to develop and excel on the basis of rich and diverse programmatic alternatives. Instead of having a superficial consensus, we should foster and strengthen the discourse on the alternative development pathways and be able to create broad social alliances in striving for such pathways. The past two years were wasted in the national and European constitutional and development context, which is why it will be difficult to redeem this lost period of time

RADIKALNA DEMOKRACIJA IN MODERNA

The author discusses the current debates about modernity and postmodernity from the point of view of the radical democratic project. She tries to show that the critique of the modern rationalist universalist (Enlightenment) epistemology does not necessarily have to lead to political conservatism, as e. g. Habermas (among others) has argued. On the contrary, the critique of this epistemology is what makes possible the articulation of the project of radical and plural democracy. This project is defined as the continuation of the democratic tradition using the tools of the postmodern age.Avtorica obravnava aktualne razprave o modernizmu in postmodernizmu z vidika projekta radikalne demokracije. Dokazuje, da zavračanje moderne (razsvetljenske) racionalistične univerzalistične epistemologije ne pelje nujno v politični konserva-tivizem (kot meni npr. Habermas). Nasprotno, kritika te epistemologije odpira možnosti za artikulacijo projekta radikalne in pluralne demokracije. Avtorica označuje ta projekt kot nadaljevanje demokratične revolucije s pomočjo postmodernistične kritike

Što je normalna demokracija?

The author argues there is no such thing as a "normal democracy", and that the decision made by the European Court of Human Rights in Sejdić-Finci case does not pay enough respect to consociational democracy as one of the legitimate forms of democracy. As human rights have to be balanced against one another, they also have to be balanced against other values, including peace and stability. As the practical solution in the election of the three-person collective Presidency in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the author suggests three separate electoral colleges in the three territorial districts that would settle the tension between the politically viable power-sharing arrangements and the demand to respect human rights. The author concludes that more moral modesty is in place when foreign political advice in democratic constitutional design is issued for the divided societies.Autor tvrdi da ne postoji tako nešto poput "normalne demokracije" te da odluka Europskog suda za ljudska prava u slučaju Sejdić-Finci ne uvažava dovoljno konsocijacijsku demokraciju kao jedan od legitimnih oblika demokracije. Kao što se ljudska prava moraju uravnotežiti jedna s drugima, tako se moraju uravnotežiti i s drugim vrijednostima, uključujući mir i stabilnost. Kao praktično rješenje u izborima tročlanoga kolektivnog predsjedništva u Bosni i Hercegovini, autor predlaže tri odvojena izbornička kolegija u trima teritorijalnim okruzima, što bi riješilo napetost između politički održivih aranžmana za podjelu vlasti i zahtjeva za poštivanjem ljudskih prava. Autor zaključuje kako je potrebno više moralne skromnosti kada se podijeljenim društvima daju inozemni politički savjeti o demokratskom ustavnom dizajnu

Demokracija, povjerenje i socijalna pravda

Sve donedavno demokratska teorija nije posvećivala dostatnu pažnju fenomenu socijalnog povjerenja i njegovoj ulozi u izgradnji stabilnog i prosperitetnog demokratskog poretka. S vremenom, a osobito nakon propasti komunističkih režima, postalo je jasno da demokracija može zaživjeti samo u društvima koja karakterizira visoki stupanj povjerenja i u kojima su građani spremni djelovati u cilju ostvarenja općeg dobra. Takvo generalizirano povjerenje usmjereno na široke i nespecificirane kategorije ljudi vrši niz važnih funkcija za demokraciju. Ono omogućuje komunikaciju među građanima i različitim društvenim grupama, potiče kooperativne društvene odnose, olakšava postizanje kompromisa i konsenzusa u stvarima od općeg značaja, doprinosi toleranciji i prihvaćanju razlika, a time posredno stabilnosti i daljnjem razvoju demokracije. Prema autoričinom uvjerenju, cjelovita analiza odnosa demokracije i povjerenja mora ponuditi i odgovor na pitanje što determinira opskrbu društva povjerenjem. Ona odbacuje kao jednostrana i pojednostavnjena ona objašnjenja koja povjerenje tretiraju isključivo kao proizvod specifičnih lokalnih tradicija i kulture nekog društva i naglašava da povjerenje u modernim društvima nije automatski proiz’od kulture, već aktivno političko postignuće, fenomen koji počiva na kontinuitetu određenih fundamentalnih institucionalnih karakteristika društva. Pravedna, odgovorna i općem dobru posvećena vlada te institucije koje se u svojim praksama rukovode normama govorenja istine, ispunjavanja obećanja, poštivanja ugovora, pravednosti i solidarnosti generiraju odnose povjerenja i doprinose stabilnosti demokratskog poretka. Stoga je izgradnja institucija čiji obrasci ponašanja reflektiraju navedene vrijednosti prioritetni zadatak nove Hrvatske vlade. U suprotnome, daljnji će razvoj demokracije u našoj zemlji biti ozbiljno usporen.Until recently democratic theory did not pay enough attention to the phenomenon of social trust and its role in building a stable and prosperous democratic order. In time, and especially following the collapse of communism, it became clear that democracy can function only within societies characterized by a high level of trust and in which citizens are prepared and willing to work together towards some common goals. Such generalized trust that exists between disparate categories of people serves a number of functions critical to the development of democracy. This kind of trust enables communication among citizens and between different social groups, stimulates cooperative social relations, facilitates compromise and consensus, and contributes to tolerance and acceptance of differences. In this way trust underpins the growth and stability of democracy. According to the author, a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between democracy and trust should answer the question of what is the source of this trust within society. This paper rejects as one-sided and oversimplified those explanations that view trust exclusively as a product of a specific society’s local traditions and culture. In addition, it stresses that in modem societies trust is not a given product of culture but, rather, is an active political achievement, a phenomenon that results from the continuity of certain fundamental institutional characteristics of society. Trust, it is argued, can be generated through government that is just, accountable, and devoted to the common good and through institutions whose practices are governed by the norms of truth-telling, promise-keeping, contract-fulfilling, justice and solidarity. This is why the principal task of the new Croatian government must be to build institutions whose patterns of behavior reflect these values. Failing this, the further development of democracy in our country will be seriously stunted

Javna jednakost, demokracija i pravednost

This paper examines the principle of public equality which, according to the view Thomas Christiano defends in his book The Constitution of Equality: Democratic Authority and Its Limits, is of central importance for social justice and democracy. Christiano also holds that the authority of democracy, and its limits, are grounded in this principle. Christiano’s democratic theory can be, broadly speaking, divided in two parts. The first part deals with the derivation and justification of the principle of public equality. The second part argues why and how the authority of democracy, and its limits, are based on this principle. This article will deal only with the first part of Christiano’s theory. While I believe that the second part is crucially important for Christiano’s democratic theory, I think that before examining the role of the principle of public equality, it is necessary to examine its nature. For that reason, this paper deals primarily with the nature of the principle of public equality as the requirement of social justice and the basis for the justification of democracy.Ovaj članak propituje načelo javne jednakosti koje je, prema poziciji koju brani Thomas Christiano u svojoj knjizi The Constitution of Equality: Democratic Authority and Its Limits, od središnje važnosti za društvenu pravednost i demokraciju. Christiano također smatra da je autoritet demokracije, kao i njegove granice, utemeljen u tom načelu. Christianova demokratska teorija može se, općenito govoreći, podijeliti u dva dijela. Prvi dio bavi se izvodom i opravdanjem načela javne jednakosti. Drugi dio pojašnjava zašto i na koji način su autoritet demokracije i određivanje njegovih granice utemeljeni na tom načelu. Ovaj se članak bavi samo s prvim dijelom Christianove teorije. Iako je i drugi dio važan za Christianovu demokratsku teoriju, prije nego propitamo ulogu koju igra načelo javne jednakosti, bitno je propitati njegovu prirodu. Stoga, ovaj se članak primarno bavi s prirodom načela javne jednakosti kao preduvjeta socijalne pravednosti i temelja opravdanja demokracije