Huge Kates Playground Gallery

Some current problems of democracy. Interview with Leonardo Morlino


Some current problems of democracy. Interview with Leonardo Morlino
* Ariel Ruiz Mondragón


During recent decades have experienced processes of democratization in different countries and regions, a phenomenon has generated an important and vast literature devoted to the analysis of democracy: its genesis, development, consolidation, extension, quality and even fall. Undoubtedly, an entire section are privileged within the territory of Political Science.

Among the books most transcendent, rich and full that have been devoted to the study of political phenomena of modern democracy we have Democracies and democratization (Mexico, Cepcom, 2005), Leonardo Morlino, who performed in that text a material relevant combination of empirical and theoretical work to address the issue.

About this book and its developments to the world of today we had a conversation with the author, in which we discussed such topics as the role of media in political transitions, the main critical element of democracy, its relationship with social rights, operation of the mechanisms of direct democracy, the quality of democracy in Latin America, the expansion of democracy and the international environment, and the possibilities of building a democratic world order.

Morlino is currently a professor of political science at the University of Florence and director of the doctoral program in political science at the Istituto Italiano di Scienze Umane and director of the Research Centre on Southern Europe. He was also co-editor of the Rivista Italiana di Scienza Policy. He has published several books, among them regiments Come cambiano i politici and Democracy Between Consolidation and Crisis. Parties, Groups, go Citizens in Southern Europe.

Ariel Ruiz (AR): For starters, there's something I've always been interested in books about transitions to democracy, and that you discussed briefly in his book: What has been the role of media in Generally, political transitions in both passing from authoritarian to democratic regimes as those between democratic undemocratic?

Leonardo Morlino (LM): This is a difficult question on which there is much research. The first reaction, a mere comment would be that the development of media parallels the transition to democracy. But that is a simplification. In that regard would have to see, at least, two relevant observations: one, there are situations in which there are authoritarian different views expressed for the media, not television. One example: in Egypt there was a moment of transition to democracy for many years, after a moment it stopped, and a return to authoritarianism. But in this situation authoritarianism in that country there is still a plurality of media, the reality is that the media are the different powers that dissent is tolerated.

The second consideration when talking about minimum requirements of democracy, one that I take is the presence of alternative media.

There is still a role for this transition type when popular participation, which is not common in all the different transitions, a possibility is quite rare, if this is a development-that always talking about the press. This is a feature that should be in minimum democracy.

Now the other part of the answer is that, at the same time, within established democracies there is a problem, particularly with the television when the public television monopoly "is something that happens in Italy, as you know.

AR: As you just mentioned, one of the hallmarks of a democratic regime is precisely that of having different information sources and alternate. Today has been a high concentration of the media, what is the risk that fact entails for democracy? Italy is an excellent example.

LM: The problem is that Dahl began many years ago, consensus building, training opinions. The views are shaped by several factors: the first is belonging to a community, a group, to a territory. This factor has been the most relevant to the formation of consensus, is constituted by what your friends think, what you think your girlfriend, your people, is the whole social group where you are. Then there is a problem of means, but a problem of personal relationships.

The second factor, if any, is the presence of political institutions, parties, trade unions, who are influential in political organization. But if the parties and unions are very weak or disappear, then the role of the media, particularly television, becomes more important and becomes the second or third most important factor.

This is most useful aspect of political psychology studies about voting behavior or on the formation of political identity. Third
consideration, more general: we have to forget that there is now much more open the possibility that there is no consensus building, ie not going to vote, did not participate.

AR: I want to talk about some threats that are about democracy. You spend a chapter in his book talking about the crisis of democracy and the crisis in democracy. What of the elements that make for a crisis in democracy you think is more prevalent today?

LM: The long-term negative economic results over time. That is, how politics is not ideology, the problem of values \u200b\u200bin politics is a problem that is always more on the substance of the analysis, the political context. The policy is and comes from the arena in which the politician has to solve collective problems, ie politics understood as a solution to these problems. If now this is a definition of politics, collective problem is the most important economic issues like inflation, labor. Then the crisis of politics is when you are not able to solve this problem.
But as you no doubt remember, Argentina has been in economic bankruptcy, but was not in the general discussion of democracy, but democracy has been discussed specifically who was at that time, and particularly their leaders. Then the internal crisis of democracy is a crisis of lack of resolution of problems, but in democracies there is no such alternative.

Let me add another thing: maybe there are problems without solutions.

AR: An element that you point out as very important in the emergence of Western democracies, is the gradual development civil rights, political and others who always have a keen interest in Latin America: the social. How do you combine these rights democracy, how democracy can take root in countries and contexts in which deprive inequality, poverty, misery?

LM: That I think is a very important question. I believe that now, in certain areas of the world such as Latin America but also Africa and Asia, the possibility of democracy and enhance their legitimacy is to develop policies against inequality, poverty. Behind this there is a conception of democracy that is now a notion of democracy that is widely disseminated and accepted, at least in Europe. I'll make an example that is quite clear: both in the Constitutional Treaty of the European Union that ultimately was not adopted, as in the new Lisbon Treaty is to be approved perhaps now is the presentation of a conception of democracy , which is one in which there is not only civil and political rights but also social rights, which are very important.

So in this sense one could say that the European concept of democracy with social rights is a different conception of the American concept, in which social rights are not involved, a declarative level, the same role. But perhaps also in the States there are forms of social assistance, and possibly are forms with a better profile than the actual conditions in Europe.

In every way, today the concept of democracy includes social rights. That is, that today has to be developed further as a democracy in which no solution to problems: poverty, inequality, which is also a question of solidarity. For example, if you remember the second principle of Rawls, who is ultimately and primarily, a philosopher is a liberal-democratic idea of \u200b\u200bthe importance of solidarity at the collective level of human communities.

AR: In the part devoted to the quality of democracy seems to me that you are realistic and pessimistic. You say, for example, that democracies are of low quality common. In that sense, Latin America we are no closer to the pseudo-democracy, these democracies with civil and political rights very limited, narrow or illiberal democracies-that democracy?

LM: Yes, this is a reality. What I want to develop in my future research is the important problem of trying to limit the impact of obstacles to democracy, the development of quality democracy. In this regard, I speak eight different qualities of democracy, among others, are the sovereignty or rule of law-what I call the rule of law - responsibility electoral accountability among institutions, competition, participation, respondents - responsiveness, ie the ability to solve the problems of citizens, "freedom and equal citizenship.

The first one is the sovereignty of the law. When there are democracies that are at least at the lowest level of democracy, I think the first address should attempt to make is the development of the sovereignty of the law, the rule of law. That is, build a more conscious state system of bureaucracy, public services, which is the problem of independence and responsibility judges, ie the problem of fighting corruption, civilian control of police and security apparatuses, and respect for civil and political rights. Must be done soon developing the rule of law. When there is no democracy without quality or low quality, the development of this quality is important.

The other qualities can be seen as consequences and as a result, but the sovereignty of the law goes first, it must be stressed. It is still a significant deficit.

AR: In Latin America we see a fascination with the mechanisms of direct democracy. You mention in the part of his book dedicated to illiberal democracies, there are consultations conducted through plebiscites that have no meaning because they are democratic characterized by effective competition. Broadly speaking, how do mechanisms of direct democracy, beginning with the referendum and the plebiscite, in democratic regimes?

LM: First consideration: Lipjhardt remember, and I think that is totally correct, that the tradition of democracy in the world is a tradition of representative democracy, not direct democracy. Of direct democracy are very few examples: New Zealand, some states within the United States, but not at the federal level, Switzerland is more traditional, and Italy, where there are different examples referendum.

Second consideration: the fascination with direct democracy is always present. In the main normative theories of democracy that exist today-that is, the deliberative, associative, participative, to mention only the most widely-known and there is the idea of \u200b\u200bdoing more specific forms of direct democracy. That is, the problem is how to perform direct democracy.

The answer is very simple: direct democracy can not be done, but there are different forms of participation, different forms of development associations, organizations, deliberative participation in decisions, particular level and there are different initiatives in these directions.

This is the third account: a local level, especially, there is some experience of developing forms of direct democracy. There is some legislation in Italy at the regional level, the participation, in Germany there is some lander, and is also locally in France and Great Britain. In Europe there are, particularly, how to push some initiatives forms of participation as an expression of direct democracy at local level.

AR: Let me close with two questions. I was born a Dahrendorf approaches: "The international environment has been conducive to the spread of democracy? States are trying to promote democracy in other countries, as we illustrate with the United States and the European Union. So what are possibilities and limitations today in the international environment for the spread of democracy?

LM: The seventies are very important in the beginning of the creation of a more general climate conducive to democracy. I think it is a reflection on the experience of American foreign policy during the fifties, sixties and seventies, and, of course, at the end of the Cold War, which is in Samuel Huntington's article "Will More Countries Be Democratic" , published in 1984 in Foreign Affairs. That is, in the early eighties, at the formulation of U.S. foreign policy is a condition that is the result of negative politics towards Latin America in previous decades. The idea was: I will support military and authoritarian regimes because they give me stability. That was not the truth, but otherwise, the truth was the support from Cuba to guerrilla forms in different countries.

At the same time, there was a transformation in Europe: Greece, Portugal, Spain, Western Europe is democratic. There is also a reflection that is important at the policy level: for Europe's stability, of course, is important as well as security and the possibility of specific policies, ie to have a slightly more developed state may be stability, security, bureaucracy, but we also have the need for democracies around us.

In that sense, what we call the policy of the European Union neighbors has been a policy push democracy. But try to do to ensure security and the possibility of policy at the neighbors. This is the great project of enlargement in 2004, then the policy of extending the area of \u200b\u200bdemocracy.

At this point we must take into account other considerations: the globalization with negative and positive effects for democracy. There are imitation effect, you remember when Deng Xiaoping began a discourse of political change in China in 1978 after a U.S. trip and after speaking with different political leaders abroad. China also said that there is a policy that takes into account what happens in other parts of the world, which takes into account the transformation.

Now, in a situation where there was the triumph of democracy and no interest or, ultimately, the perception of U.S. interests and the European Union have democracies around is also a fact: two types of scheme authoritarian China and Russia are trying to do a good compromise between political development, pluralism and in fact control the political and civil rights. These are two new authoritarian ways: it is a hot topic, important, very seriously.

Another problem is the limit to the expansion of democracy: there are different countries in the world in which democracy can not exist because no state, that is, because there is no possibility of ensuring human and civil rights. The reality is that in what I call hybrid regimes, most are those who qualify for without law.

Thus, in the end, to conclude: there is a spread of democracy, but there three factors as an obstacle to it: first, the two important effects authoritarian models to imitate or just presence. The existence of these two alternative models, China and Russia, he sees the possibility of extension in countries that surround them.

Second obstacle: as I was saying, the fact that no state even a locally-developed in some African countries. That is very important.
The third obstacle is that the strength of America and particularly Europe, is a force that becomes weaker in both countries that are more distant from Europe and the United States. Then the interests of economic exchange, stability, is less strong.

AR: You mentioned that to solve these global problems facing the world might be nice to have a broader political organization, which of course would have democratic features, and mentions the EU. What are the chances of building this international order for democratic countries today with traditional resistance, as might be Iran?, What are the chances let alone build a kind of global governance, such as Danilo Zolo, Cosmopolis, but some type of democratic system that can confront the socioeconomic challenges of the world?

LM: There is today, and had not a few years ago, a very strong obstacle: we could build a global democratic order in two situations: a state of total U.S. hegemony and a situation of equilibrium between different hegemonies. The fact is that globally there are none of the two situations, because American hegemony is not global, but there is no balance, because U.S. hegemony is a quite strong. Then it is an intermediate situation which is a very strong barrier that prevents a building in that direction. There are also important realities, such as China and Russia, have developed policy positions and interests very strong economic. Here would be the problem of Iran and the Middle East, where Israel's conflict with Palestine is very relevant.
worldwide
But this is not the problem, not only is there. You can say, with a little imagination, that when technological progress can, for example, to invent an alternative to oil, it will have no more important area. Then the Iranian people have many more problems now in terms of resources.

The conclusion of the interview is to remind you and all readers, as Tolstoy said, humans are forbidden to know the future.

* Interview published in Metapolítica , no. 62, November-December 2008. Reprinted with permission of the director.

Psa For Drinking And Driving

A literature is not complacent. Interview with Daniel Sada


A literature not willing
Interview with Daniel Sada
Ariel Ruiz Mondragón

just a few weeks ago, it was announced that a jury Clotas Salvador, Juan Cueto, Luis Magrinyà, Enrique Vila- Matas and editor Jorge Herralde, unanimously decided to award the Prize Novel Herralde 2008-one of the most important in English-Mexican writer Daniel Sada, for his book rarely.

Sada (Mexicali, 1953), who was already a recognized writer and winner of several literary awards previously obtained with this award is a distinction that will surely facilitate internationalization, though most of his work has been translated into several languages, including Slovenian, for example-and a greater interest in their work.

way of getting his award and his recent book Sada had with a conversation about their training and development as a writer, his literary training in the desert is mixed and classical readings as well as its foray into journalism career. The author also conducted a general reflection his work both as a poetic narrative, as well as future projects.

AR: You were born in Mexicali, Baja California, and then lived in Coahuila. How has expressed in his work his experiences in the desert?

DS: Almost all my work was farm in the desert, and especially in the central region of Coahuila. There I lived my childhood in Sacramento, where I learned to read and write, I began to read literature and got my literary education.

My father was an agricultural engineer, and got a chamba in Mexicali. He was an expert in cotton and cotton Mexicali was an area, so there he went to live with my mom and there I was born. After the business was over and we came to Coahuila, where we live a long time.

It was very impressive, very significant that all of my childhood. I must say that I can brag that I had a very happy childhood, Marcel Proust said that authors put their entire childhood literature are far more things to say. I think it was very shocking to me all that I lived at that time because I had no restrictions at all. He lived in a village, I could go to the river, the hill, no prohibition of any kind. It was an absolutely quiet town, I went to the river, bathed me, I could spend all day, despite that my mother sometimes worried that I was absent, in fact I felt I owned the world in this little town. And all that I lived there for me was a landmark precedent in my life.

AR: In those early formative years, and also as a teenager, what were your favorite authors?

DS: from very young I read the classics, I read many poets. read The Iliad and The Odyssey since childhood, as well as children's books as The White Elephant , many books of stories from India, and that was my training. But I really had no reading the classics. In Sacramento there was no library, the only was that of a teacher, and I had no vision of classical literature. The local bookstore had was in Monclova, after I hit puberty that I began to search for books, other literature, but it was very difficult to transport 50 miles to find a book. So I stuck to classic literature.

AR: Then what followed in their readings?

DS: Well, I arrived in Mexico City and I felt at a disadvantage because I had a classical culture that nobody here had, everyone was reading Joseph Augustine and the nouveau roman, the French and experimental literature. I felt very out of date because they did not even know nineteenth-century literature. It was a fight against the tide, collecting time readings in order to nurture and be aware about everything that was done in the nineteenth century, early twentieth century and what was written in those years.

Incidentally, when I read Joseph Augustine as I did because it was a way into Mexico City with all my friends in the neighborhood, read, and then I had to read all that literature in order to live, if I was not very isolated.

AR: You also had training as a journalist, How was your visit to this profession?

DS: I studied journalism because I was interested in the career of Arts. I never thought that humanism were academia, said: "Well, if I study lyrics, I'll end up as a research cubicle, cubicle literature, and I need the streets." Then I liked journalism so, because I learned literature, economics, history, politics. I

agency a number of skills that would have been impossible to capture in the career of letters. I studied journalism because there was no other: it was the closest thing I found in the literature, and besides, I felt that in my case journalism was also a way of living. To become a master of cubicle, who knows what would have done.

AR: In the last two decades appears to be a literature boom in northern Mexico, you would be part. Do you think there is such a stream?

DS: This question is for both sides. For the first time in the eighties began to appear the literature of the desert, Jesus Gardea, Ricardo Elizondo, Severino Salazar, etc., but it was the first time the literary optical moved north. Began to call attention to writers from the north, and now there are many writers there. Now not said desert culture, it has diversified and expanded both the northern culture that now there are many authors that interest abroad, they begin to be translated and with increasing force.
other hand, say that I do not care if literature is north or south, central, or Chiapas chilanga: I think there are good and bad literature, and I would not classify the literature of the north, or I'm interested to see me as a writer from the north. Abroad does not matter where you are, in other countries are not valued because it is such a place, but the quality of books and literature.

AR: Some critical notes on his work have been written, is may highlight the claim that you are an author difficult to classify, which is a difficult author, uncomfortable. What would you say are the specific characteristics of your work?

DS: Well, I'm very strict in what I write. My world is verbal, I really like the expression, the cadence, the language, I hate maquinazos in any form. I can not write to vuelapluma, I am very analytical writing. So in that sense maybe I am uncomfortable because I'm not going with the flow, the inertia of many writers who produce and produce.

I am very slow in production, I'm steady but slow. Since I have 15 books, but all I have cost a lot of work. But that is not the value, but I like to do so, give it my best and look for more expressive in what I do and the best insight as well.

So I can not predict what my work projected. I think there are some that do not like absolutely nothing of my work, others are fascinating, but in that sense I am unarmed, I do not know what impact may occur.

Epictetus said that there are things that are unique and things that are foreign. The same is to do my best, that is the responsibility of one, or your job, your profession. But what are the fame, prestige and reputation, that is totally foreign. One can make cartwheels and a half to get attention, but the others are famous, you can not give himself fame. That belongs to others, and one is helpless before these things. At one point, for as one moves and turns of the head, can influence people to read, but fame is a fleeting, lasting fame can not identify one as an author.

AR: Behind his writing is all work and rigor that are not usual. In this direction, what challenges it presents you the reader?

DS: My literature no longer a challenge, I am not complacent, nor my writing is conventional. I've always imagined a hypothetical reader will want all the best, that taste is very demanding. I can not know in advance what the desires of an ordinary reader, who does not cost any difficulty reading.

AR: Many people consider it a good book that you read fast.

DS: It is not my case, I am happy in that sense, but in another, appreciate other forms of expression. That's the writer I want to be and I wanted to be forever. If I succeed or fail, it will be strictly on what I do. But I'm not going to bow to the demands of the market, I do not want publishers to win the battle.

AR: The prize you just won also implies recognition of some of the major publishers in English, such as Jorge Herralde. How was your relationship with publishers, while his work is not so simple and commercial?

DS: There's always suspicion of how he is going to the book. The bet is for literature, but have no absolute certainty that it will succeed. It is hardly a prize, do not know if the book will be widely read or not, but what is rewarding is literature, not sales or whatever you can enable.

AR: So many publishers are very accommodating with his readers?

DS: Well, there are currently very specific aesthetic parameters to which many authors are attached. Now, to be in the market there to sell, that is indiscernible. If you do not wants to be marginal and is on the market, then one has to sell and have an audience. Now, within that age some people are more receptive to literature, and there are others looking for entertainment at all costs.

AR: To move to another topic. broadly understood and how the policy expressed in his work?

DS: To me politics is an issue, it is not something absolutely inherent. What happens is that politics affects us all, is part of our daily lives, we are people who live in a society, we need her and she needs us. In that sense I am interested in politics, but I can not give political guidance in my work, and especially if it is a work of fiction.

I do not want to demonstrate anything, I want to do thesis novels where you read this or that, or disclose unpublished stuff that is political corruption or the vicissitudes of political grid. It is not my intention.

To me, the most important literature is the fable, imagination, and there affects politics. Not an end, a means, say it is one issue among many others.

AR: I think it also has talked more of his work in the poetic narrative. How important is it in his poetry and how it relates to his narrative?

DS: Most part of the same, nothing that I have not saddled the name of poet. I write poetry without knowing what will happen also. I can not be hopeful that someone do a test or pay attention to it. I have some demons that I have to get afloat, and among them is the poetry. But sometimes I write test, but not much.

literature is also breaking: to break the mold, to seek new forms of expression, new climates, new insights. Not every day I write poetry occasionally. In my narrative there are a lot of poetic power, but I could not speak of poetic prose, I hate using that term. To me poetry is poetry, but is in prose, do not have to be ready in verse to be poetry.

AR: In all his work, where are you located Rarely, the novel prize?

DS: Here I return to the north, is a novel that is located in the forties. It leaked a report that took me 25 years to write this novel, and not true. The was conceived 25 years ago, but the novel took me less than three years to write.

is a story I wanted to tell but I did not dare because some characters are real, and some still live. So, I did not want to see involved in this. Although 70 percent is a matter of fiction, I based myself in many facts to write this novel, so I dared not write or make 25 or 10 years ago. I was a little scary. Now I said: "I no longer have to be scary," there he goes, to see what happens.

AR: How important attributes Herralde Novel Award?

DS: It's a push, a very strong boost after nearly 35 years of writing and publishing. Obviously you want things to arrive much sooner, this award, if he had received 15 years ago, would be nothing, but I also would have reacted very differently.
I am grateful for the award, but also confuses me: I do not feel the best of all, much less. It is simply the recognition of a job, I thank you and pushes me to continue the struggle and creativity.

AR: What lies ahead?

DS: I have a book of short stories that I'm working, but still do not foresee when it will finish, I'll give you all the coming year. I'm giving too much air to a novel, not want to rush, as I've ever done, take things calmly, slowly things are coming. I have several projects and I have work for 15 years: two novels more or less extensive, and I want to write a book of essays. I have ideas but are not yet consolidated.



* interview published in Millennium weekly, no. 581, December 1, 2008. Reprinted with permission from the director.