The Disenchantment of Politics

             This post is a summary of two papers. The first is a summary of few pages (starting on page 84) of the book with the title of, "Political Trust and Disenchantment with politics: International Perspectiva."https://books.google.com.br/booksid=Q2TiBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86&dq=disenchantment+in+politics+and+how+to+avoid+it&source=bl&ots=uDQ8VrMHRY&sig=6ZZa6. The second was published with the title above in 2008 at  http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/6472/Kersbergen_Disenchantment.pdf?sequence=1

            The aim of this paper is to examine how different means of political participation are affected by individual and national characteristics, in particular levels of political trust. In contemporary democracies, there are numerous ways for every citizen to become active in the political sphere: from wearing a button supporting a candidate or party, writing a letter to a representative, becoming a member of a political party and standing as a candidate, just to name a few, the list of possibilities is almost endless. Voting in an election is the most conventional and widespread form of involvement. More than that, it is a democratic citizen's most fundamental right. Yet, authors like Norris demonstrate a clear downward trend of aggregate turnout percentages in 24 Western European countries, dropping as low as 70% in the most recent years. Also, there is evidence that most Western European parties experience long-term erosion in their loyalties as party identification and party membership rates fall across the continent. Given this situation, citizens find new ways of political expression. These new ways lack the institutionalized form of traditional political engagement, they are sporadic, issue-specific, abrupt, occasionally proactive and requiring a lot of engagement from citizen. They are important political actions connected to specific issues people feel strongly about. Although there is no general theory of trust and explanations vary, scholars agree that without a certain level of trust in others as well as in political institutions, neither society, not democracy can function. We base our work on the definition by Delhey and Newton, who understand trust as,"belief that others will not deliberately ot knowingly do us harm, if they can avoid it, and will look after our interest, if this is possible." From this, we can deduct two different notions of the concept: particuparized trust in well-known persons we interact regularly with and generalized trust in strangers and groups. Scholars like Newton summarize these two as social trust and distinguish them from political trust. This article draws more on the political trust and less on the social aspect of the trust concept as it deals with the relation between trust and participation., although we are aware of the fact that it is not easy to separate the two and that society is the foundation the politics builds on. The concept of political trust includes trust in the system as a whole, trust in the institutions and trust in the political actors. Looking at the system as a whole, the main elements of modern democracies are fair and free elections that let citizens choose their representatives for the next legislative period. These representatives are then assigned with the mission to govern the state while acting in the best interest of the represented. Thus, elections are not only means to select political personnel but also a way to hold politicians accountable. Trust in these mechanisms is the basis of political trust. We see that if people do not trust their politicians, because they feel that members of government or parliament pursue their own interest rather than the public interest. This, in turn, means that the political system is even less able to deliver what is promised resulting in even lower satisfaction and trust, a vicious circle that may end in "government collapse." What encapsulates the good functioning of mechanisms and the good conduct of politicians, are political institutions. They are the core of a well-functioning democracy and they reflect the true qualities of the system. Citizens feel that they are part of the system, that they influence decision making and that their preference are taken into consideration. Disenchantment expressed as lower political trust cut the direct link between represented and representatives.

                The goal of this paper is to understand better the current malaise in and of democratic politics. There is a long tradition of comparative research, starting with Tocqueville's Democracy in America to Putnam's Making Democracy Work,  that connects the fate of democracy to the vitality of civil society. In recent decades, we have learned much about how social capital, that is to say, people's extended bonds within and between social networks, and trust function as the societal glue, which holds a society together. This adhesive also secures an orderly, stable and well-performing democratic system and a healthy political life. Indeed, politics is decisive for the fate of society and concerns all social activities of individuals to handle their collective problems and resolve their conflicts of interests. Politics creates space for human choice and diverse lifestyles. Politics, if done well, creates the positive context and stable environment for you to live your life. Democratic politics then, is critical for the integration of modern societies, each and every one which is after all, characterized by large differences between citizens in opinions. This understanding, that there is something wrong with the way we do politics is joined by a deeper sense that somehow or other we have forgotten what politics is capable of doing, and perhaps, we are unclear about what it can not do. The observation that "the malaise afflicting democratic governance today is that many citizens rather wish they could do without politics. It is a crucial insight to the extent that it points to the accomplishments of politics of democracy that are now taken for granted." The project of democracy have empowered citizens to become more independent individuals, by granting individual political and social security. Politics is about collective decisions, balancing conflict and cooperation, in order to promote human purposes. However, it seems that it is exactly this sense of purpose that have been lost. What is the point of citizens participating enthusiastically if one can not identify any purpose other than solving petty daily problems of party power and personal position?  Similarly, democracy is about achieving liberty, political equality, just exchanges in social and economic life, political and legal reliability and protection against the arbitrary power of the state. With the extension of the possibilities of active and passive political participation, and equal political rights, democratization established fundamental and inalienable basic rights, included the whole population in the political system, increased predictability of state and government behaviour, greatly advanced opportunities of self-determination, all of which instituted a crucial sense of political security. Disenchantment describes the loss of "utopian realism" that characterized the enchanting political projects. The oxymoron now has vanished, leaving only pragmatic realism to be the most significant feature of politics. Politics now seems to have deteriorated into an entirely pragmatic and disengaged practice of professional politicians who are submerged in the exercise of power over a populace, which increasingly indifferent to any collective project, or worse more engaged in voicing protests against a by now autistic leadership, or worst, entirely disengaging from democracy and cynically protecting purely private interests. The disenchantment of politics, that is to say, the gradual elimination of politics an instrument of worldly salvation is causing the decline of political allegiance, that is to say, a deteriorating relationship of exchange and power between the rulers (political elite, government) and the ruled (people, citizens). Disenchantment occurs, because of the failure, and the unintended effects of interactions of the projects. Pondering over the possible consequences of waning political allegiance, one might hypothesize that the disenchantment of politics causes a political void in democratic societies, an emptiness of collective power, which exerts a pull on various political escapades, some of which could imperil the very existence of democracy. One could think of the decomposition of the political centre and the increasing importance of fringe politics that many democracies are currently experiencing. As a result of this, coalition building and effective government on the basis of beneficial exchange are becoming increasingly difficult. Ungovernability not only contributes to the further disenchantment of politics, but also reinforces the image of a impotent political elite that seems to have only one rationale left to govern: the protection of its own petty profitable position. The popular dissatisfaction with the performance of government, and the political cynicism with respect to political elites that comes with it, is a revolt that attacks elitism, the closed nature of political recruitment, and the lack of representativeness of politicians more generally.

5th Anniversary of the Protests of June of 2013

              Next  Wednesday, June 20th, One of the biggest protests in Brazil history will complete five years. The reason why those protests are studied until now and other though bigger, like what happened in March 2016, for example, is not so much studied, it was its character totally spontaneous and unexpected. It was as, if suddenly, the Brazilian people realized that they deserve a better governance, a better return for so many taxes the Brazilians pay. Besides, we want respect for our most basic human rights and justice when they are violated, this meaning due compensation for any harm, humiliation, loss of freedom, death, persecution, etc. We want a country where goodness is exalted and evil, lies and hipocrisy combated.  We want a fair, transparent and inclusive electoral and political systems.  We want honesty, efficiency, productivity, solidarity and accountability from our politicians and authorities. In short, we want a country that really works for the progress and happiness of its citizens. This year there will be elections, so it is time that we all remember what have happenned in the last ten years and make a good decision in October. This post is a summary of the article published in 2015 at  www2.pucpr.br/reol/index.php/dialogo?dd1=16100...

              In Brazil, manifestations of social movements in public spaces are usual since the time of the colony, but gained greater visibility from the decade of 1950. they built new meaning to social struggles, collaborated to build the Brazilian citizenship and contributed to the process of consolidating democracy. There were large demonstrations, as the ' Diretas Já 'in 1984 and the movement of the 'painted faces' by the impeachment of former President Collor de Melo in 1992, which entered into the history of the country as a mark of fighting for democracy and ethics in politics. That period to the present, hundreds of organized social movements that took to the streets to fight for their rights. Workers led by unions have taken to the streets as a space for public visibility of your demands. From 2013 brand new actors stepped in and changed the panorama of the demonstrations in Brazil with crowds on the streets after being called by social networks online. It is estimated that over a million people took to the streets in brazil during the month of June 2013 in demonstrations that had an initial focus on the increase of public transport fares, and then expanded the repertoire of demands for other areas of the public service in the areas of education, health and public security, etc. On the posters seen in the demonstrations, there was indignation about various things and themes, the complaint of the precariousness of public services to the low standard of political practice. There was great youth protagonism, organized into collectives that summoned online public acts, performed without partisan flags or t-shirts and rent sound of unions. It is also known that the Free Pass Movement ( FPM ) had decisive action on invocation of the acts of protests on the streets in June. The FPM was officially created in 2005 in Porto Alegre, during the WSF ( World Social Forum ). The great revolution operated in form of communication between individuals, with the consumption and development of new technologies, especially the internet and the use of mobile devices, generators of great potential for mobilization of civil society. For this reason, in June 2013, when crowds took to the streets, there was no mediator between the demonstrators and the authorities, there was no interlocutors. After June 2013, civil society institutions, such as the CNBB, OAB, anti-corruption movements and the platform of social movements have formed a "democratic political reform coalition and clean elections" for the preparation of a proposal to be presented as a bill of popular initiative. In March 2015, new mass demonstrations erupt on the streets of Brazil, with different characteristics of June 2013 at repertoire demands, social groups that call, social composition and age of the participants. Among the new group's organizers of the act in March 2015 are: "Coming out the streets," "Brazil Free Movement," and "Angry Online," among other ten new groups. The demonstration of March 2015 will certainly go down in history of acts of large protests in Brazil. The dynamics of the process of social contestation has expanded as the mobilization of public opinion, conducted mainly through social networks, acted as agent for the maintenance of street demonstrations. With that gave impulse to political campaigns around various topics, share new images and sociasl representations about the economic crisis and politics in Brazil today.    Organizing

around social networks, not an organization or given specific movement, have made possible new dynamics to social protests, fleeing the already institutionalized organizations control,  such as: CUT, MST, etc. For all that, from 2013 we must rethink the analyses on the logic of collective action organized structures have taken traditional movements in the brazilian scene, in recent decades, and the logics of personal engagement, convened by a plurality of social and political groups for as better understanding of the conditions of transformation and activism at the present time. In our interpretation, the demonstration in Brazil from 2013 also built new meanings to social struggles. Certainly, their protests go beyond digital activism. The events in the heat of the time provoke reactions that generate new fronts of collective action. The composition of them is complex, diverse, with multiple actors, proposals and conceptions of politics, society and the government. Democracy expanded and demonstrations show us that it is a process, not something given or closed. One of the great legacies of June 2013 was the legitimation of the social protest as a way to search for short-term changes. The crowds have adhered to the streets as a way to press to changes. In the short term, the changes can be more than cultural, in order to create new values and perspectives in participants and in society in general. For this, we say earlier that this type of proposal can generate mobilizations that produce other lifestyles and values in society, these values that refers to the human rights field, to think about a new generation of rights. June 2013 affected the field of politics and party-political forces correlation was taut. As for the ideological underpinnings that has fueled the collective actions of the main actors who have participated in the recent street demonstrations in Brazil, the characterization that we presented above show us that they have many arrays, ranging from Utopian socialism of the 19th century, to the power of the social networks, also conceptions of liberalism and marxism. There is a hegemonic orientation, that there are groups or collectives activists on social networks, organizing and disseminating guidelines of demands where at least one focus is common: the fight for ethics in politics, against corruption. Implicit in the demands and forms of forwarding of the protests is a big question of how to operate the Brazilian democracy today and the search for new path. How to establish mediation between government and civil society, which actors and political agents to establish nexus in this relationship?

10th Anniversary of the Oslo Freedom Forum

             Last Monday to Wednesday was hold in Oslo, capital of Noway, the annual event that became one of the most important in the world for democracy and human rights. As a human rights defender I get happy to see events like this growing every year. I think more and more people are realizing the importance of human rights in their live. This post is a summary of ten texts featuring every OFF, all of them published at the same website. https://oslofreedomforum.com/

            The theme for the first Oslo Freedom Forum was, "The Nobility of the Human Spirit and the Power of Freedom." The event in 2009 was held in May 18 - may 20.  Conceptualized with the guidance of playwright and stateman Vaclav Havel, Oslo freedom Forum (OFF) was envisioned as aplace where the human rights heroes of the 20th century could meet and share their stories with the leading activists of today. The inaugural three-day summit featured icons of the literature of survival such as Holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel, Chinese´British author Jung Chang, Tibetan former prisoner of conscience palden Gyatso, Russian human rights advocate Elena Bonner, and Chinese former political prisoner Harry Wu.

            The theme for the second OFF was, "From Tragedy to Triumph." The 2010 OFF featured participants from more than 40 countries and six continents, focusing on the progress made in the realms of civil liberties and freedoms over the past century, while exploring the innovation of modern day advocates, both those working on the ground and those agents of change such as policy makers, world leaders, and media entrepreneurs. Speakers included Vietnamese pro-democracy advocate Thich Quang Do, Cuban blogger Yoani Sanchez with, "Opening a Window into Cuba," former Malaysian deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim with, "Confronting half a century of one-party rule," modern day abolitionist Benjamin Skinner, and Uyghur leader Rebita Kadeer, Garry Kasparov with, "Chess, human rights, and the self."

           The theme for the third OFF was, "The Spark of Change." The 2011 OFF summit assembled an inspiring group of rights advocate and world leaders in Oslo, including Nobel Laureates Shirin Ebadi and Jody Williams; the former presidents of Peru, Colombia, and Romania, and bloggers and activists from pro-democracy movements unfolding in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Sudan, and Libya. This forum introduced panels to the programming and live streaming of all plenary sessions online. Featured talks: Thomas Glave with, "Ending Anti-Gay Violence in Jamaica, Violet Band with, "Giving Voice to Malawi's Youth". George Ayittey with, "Defeating Dictators." Lina Ben Mhenni with, "Tunisia's Unfinished Revolution."

           The theme for the fourth OFF was, "Out of Darkness, Into Light." The 2012 OFF explored numerous topics, including a spotlight on the many forms of modern-day slavery, exposes on how Western public relations firms, I.T. and arms companies support dictatorships; the drug war's impact on human rights; a focus on the burgeoning democracy movement in Russia; perspectives on fighting poverty through individual rights; an examination of global censorship; and a discussion on the state of the Arabs uprisings. The inaugural Vaclav Havel Prize for Creative Dissent was awarded at the 2012 event. The laureates included Burmese opposition leader Aung Suu Kyi, Chinese artist Ai Weiwei, and Saudi women's rights advocate Mana Al-Sharif. 2012 speakers included Google Ideas principal Scott Carpenter; Canadian jurist and lawmaker Irwin Cotler; Pakistani women's rights champion Asma Jahangir; British journalist Nick Cohen; Internet freedom pioneer Rebecca MacKinnon. Feature talks: Mana Al-Sharif with, "The Drive for Freedom." Natalia Pelevine with, "Protesting for democracy." Ethan Nadelmann with, "The Human Cost of the War on Drugs." Naomi Natale with, "The Art of Activism."

             The theme for the fifth OFF was,"Challenging Power." The 2013 annual summit featured leaders and innovators from academia, advocacy, media, politics, social entrepreseuship, technology, and arts who are challenging the most repressive regimes and exchanging ideas on how best to tackle humanitarian crises. The 2013 program centered on a range of topics, such as the art of dissent, asymmetric activism, nwe tools for rights advocates, the power of media, women under Islamic law, and the threat of authoritarian capitalism. For the first time, OFF held break-out, interactive workshops for participants, teaching best practices for protecting data and using technology to maximize the impact of advocacy efforts. The conference culminated on the afternoon of May 15, with the presentation of the Vaclav Havel Prize for Creative Dissent. The 2013 laureates were Syrian cartoonist Ali Ferzat, North Korean democracy activist Park Sang Hak, and Cuban civil society group The Ladies in White. Features talks: James Kirchick with, "Devil's Advocates." Sasa Vucinic with, "Investing in Free Press." Mario Vargas Llosa with, "Literature, Freedom, and Power." Luke Harding with, "Putin's Mafia State."

            The theme for the sixth Off was, "Defeating Dictators." The sixth annual OFF took place in Norway on October 20-22, 2014. Profiled in The New York Times as the place where "The world's dissidents have their say," the conference brought together a diverse crowd of activists, innovators, entrepreneurs, media, and philanthropists from more than 50 countries. The NYT focused on how OFF's community draws "strength from one another," and it showcased how the conference goes beyond networking, by providing attendees with "broader exposure" and connecting them with "prominent financiers and technologists." In a 6-minute video produced by the BBC for its flagship evening show "newsnight," OFF was profiled as a "school for revolutionaries" where "pro-democracy activists share ideas and learn about agitating for positive change." Chief correspondent Laura Kuenssberg said the event was a place where "activists gather to share secrets of successful protest." The Economist called OFF "an annual festival for human rights defenders and advocates of more open societies," praising the event for bringing together "an extraordinary array of courageous people who have defied authority, be it political, ideological, or religious, at a high personal cost." OFF amplifies the messages of its speakers and attendees, generating press coverage of human rights issues across the world. Norway's most prestigious newspaper called OFF speakers "the next generation of heroes," And that "from Cubans to Chinese, North Koreans to Ghanaians, the OFF featured some of the bravest and most captivating activists in our time."

              The theme for the seventh OFF was, "Living in Truth." The 2015 was a tribute to the late Czech dissident-turned-president Vaclav Havel, who showed the world how even ordinary individuals can force authoritarian systems to crumble. Speakers from 20 countries, including Gabon, Malaysia, Mexico, North Korea, Thailand, Turkey, Tunisia, and Ukraine, united in Oslo to share their stories with more than 300 conference attendees. After a press event featuring Human Rights Foundation chairman Garry Kasparov and the 2015 speakers and attendees had the opportunity to join in two workshops designed to educate and empower human rights advocates. Serbian nonviolence expert Srdja Popovic led a session on peaceful resistance, with breakout sessions focused on specific successful techniques used by protest movements around the world. A second workshop focused on how to build online advocacy campaigns. Following the workshop, we hosted a discussion on corruption in petro-states from Angola to Kazakhstan to Nigeria to Venezuela. OFF closed with the presentation of the 2015 Vaclav Havel Prize for Creative Dissent. The prize celebrates those with bravery and ingenuity, unmask the lie of dictatorship by living in truth. The 2015 laureates were the Sudanese resistance movement GIrifna, Indonesian stand-by comedian Sakdiyah Maruf, and Cuban graffiti artist and activist Danilo"el sexto" Maldonado.

               The theme for the eighth OFF was, "Catalysts." A single spark can start a raging fire, which is why the 2016 OFF is dedicated to catalysts: women and men who have realized that while individuals can not change the world on their own, the world can not change without individuals. That even if you are the first person to stand up, you will not find yourself standing alone for long. Defending human rights in the 21st century requires tech savvy. The 2016 OFF Tech Lab brought together Twitter, Jigsaw, and seven other of the world's foremost tech companies and organizations for a full day of hands-on sessions on how to leverage the latest innovations in the fight for freedom. Art and music have always been a powerful form of dissent. The OFF celebrates this idea with incredible performances by some of the world's most famous artists and musicians. This year's forum featured performances from Swedish singer-songwriter Jose Gonzalez and  artist Tomas Kubinek, and an exhibit of political cartoons. The Vaclav Havel laureates were Uzbek photojournalist Umida Akhmedova, Iranian cartoonist Atena Farghadani, and Russian artist Petr Pavlensky.

             The theme for the ninth OFF was, "Defending Democracy." This OFF united leaders and activists from all over the world to defend democracy. Once again Oslo became the hub for new collaboration and innovative solutions, bringing together experts in advocacy, business, media, philanthropy, policy, and tehnology. Participants at the 2017 OFF watched riveting talks, joined inspiring panel discussions, learned valuable lessons from tech experts, engaged with organizations promoting individual freedoms, and enjoyed musical performances with non-profits, governments, and foundations to brainstorm new and creative solutions to the world's most pressng human rights issues. Speakers at the 2017 OFF included Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg, Iraqi parliamentarian Vian Dakhil, Zimbabwean civil rights leader Evan Mawarire, and Pulitzer prize-winning author Anne Applebaum.

              The theme fro the tenth OFF was, "Rising." The 2018 OFF marks the 10th anniversary of a unique gathering where the world's bravest human rights activists meet creative entrepreneures, intrepid reporters, cutting-edge technologists, policymakers, generous philanthropists, and bold artists, united by their commitment to making today's world peaceful, prosperous, and free. OFF has evolved from an annual human rights event into an international community with a flagship in Oslo and satellite events in New York, Johannesburg, Taipei and Mexico City. The tech lab will feature talks, workshops, panels, and the activist tech bar. We will explore how tech can advance human rights and democracy, focusing on encryption, citizen journalism, blockchain, internet freedom, and more. We will also look at how technology is being manipulated by repressive regimes to censor, control, and surveil citizens across the world. Panel - Blockchain vs. the Surveillance State - Laeding crypto-journalist Laura Shin will interview Blockstack co-founder Ryan Shea, Bancor co-founder Galia Benartzi, Orchid founder Steve Waterhouse, and Tezos creator Arthur Breitman and cover topics including decentralized data, censorship-resistance, the evolution of money, and ownership of digital property.