In recent decades, a deeply flawed line of reasoning has led to the diminished importance of democratic nations in the ongoing process of globalization. It wants the nation to be seen as a simple geographical level – or, even worse, a technocratic one. It conceives of nations in purely geographical terms, or worse, in technocratic ones. In a world with an increasingly globalized economy, the fragmentation of 200 separate nation-states–each with its own constitution, governmental structure, currency, jurisdictions, social model– is, at best, the lingering trace of another era’s political order. At its worst, it’s a logical and economic aberration, with the potential to threaten the competitiveness of the whole.
David Djaïz, author in France of Slow Démocratie, argues, in the article that we will be discussing during this fourth session of geopolitical debates, that nations are still the best way to guarantee the existence of a democratic system.
To make his point, he examines the different forms of political organizations that existed in human history : tribes, cities, empires, and nations, and concludes that nations are, nowadays, the only form of political organization that allows citizens to govern themselves, to enjoy civil liberty and solidarity. In doing so, he studies two tendencies in contemporary political thought : the aspiration to empire, or, in Europe, to the idea that the European Union should behave like an Empire to confront the United States and China ; the creation of new tribes, made easier, of which global jihadism is probably the most famous example.
Is nation the only form of political organization that allows citizens to have a democratic existence ? Is it the relevant scale to maintain the possibility of political rights in the age of globalization and new tribalism ?
———————————— Come discuss with us at St John’s College, Oxford (New Seminar Room in Canterbury Quad) on Wednesday 23 October, from 7 to 8:15 pm.
? ? Free refreshments will be provided at 7PM and the session starts at 7:15 promptly.
The one-hour discussion will be followed by more informal one at the college’s bar.
No debate experience or political background is necessary. We value diversity of perspectives and opinions.
