Conclusion. a Research Agenda for Political Pragmatism

Conclusion. A Research Agenda for Political Pragmatism Throughout this book I have contended that, in its broadest terms, a wide view of democracy can help us revive and advance the democratic project, insofar as it reconnects the political phase of democracy to its social roots. Such a theory provides us with precious theoretical resources to tackle some of the most pressing challenges of our time, such as the rise of popu- lism, democratic deficits, the ongoing crisis of formal political institutions, and the emergence of new forms of discrimination. By including the whole of social life in the concept of democracy, the wide view is better suited not only to the critical task of identifying the cracks and tensions that threaten the democratic project, but also, and especially, to the recon- structive task of providing concrete guidance for reform projects, whether for democratizing the workplace and other social institutions, for extend- ing the scope of the associational principle to new production practices, for reducing global inequality by politicizing consumerism, or for achiev- ing greater degrees of accountability in global politics. Indeed, it seems to me that it is only by radically broadening our conceptual framework that we can hope to overcome the practical and theoretical deadlocks that democracy faces today, precisely because this enlargement allows us to come closer to the true reasons that render the democratic project so important and so inescapable, even when its political performances appear © The Author(s) 2019 395 R. Frega, Pragmatism and the Wide View of Democracy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18561-9 396 Conclusion. A Research Agenda for Political Pragmatism so shallow and the legitimacy of its formal institutions so wanting. Those who contend that democracy does not matter to us, that our representa- tive institutions have been emptied of meaning and are therefore worth nothing, or that we have entered a post-democratic phase, should look at the immense achievements that the democratic project has brought to our societies in terms of freedom, equality, and social involvement in all spheres of social life. They should also consider that the democratization of our habits, patterns of social interaction, and forms of organization are not only incomplete, but also badly in need of furtherance, and that no jeremiad against neoliberalism or post-democracy will be of much help in this task. What a wide view of democracy can provide is an all-encompass- ing scheme within which practices of reform and transformation can find their broadest meaning, so that diverse projects and practices such as those discussed in this book will finally appear as coherent instantiations of a single unifying vision of the future we desire and for which we strive. In concluding, I wish merely to recapitulate the three major normative statements that this book has vindicated. The first is that the democratic project advances or retreats according to how patterns of social interaction evolve throughout society. We should, therefore, consistently refer to democracy as the appropriate norm to assess the quality of social life at all its levels, and not only of its political institutions. The second is that experi- mental democratic institutions provide the most adequate strategy to iden- tify, face, and meet social challenges and generate social innovation. This assumption should guide us in inventing new projects of social and institu- tional reform aimed at designing private and public institutions more suited to our times. The third statement is that social involvement matters as much as freedom and equality. We should, therefore, pay more attention to the inclusive nature of social practices, and be less content with merely formal, or legal, patterns of recognition. Democracy is inseparable from an imperative of social involvement, as only active participation in social practices create the concrete belonging which is required by any community to exist. Developing social settings in which not only freedom and equality but also social involvement are effectively achieved, devising new experi- mentalist democratic institutions, and rendering patterns of social interaction consistently democratic throughout the social body define the guidelines that committed democrats should prioritize in their agenda. Conclusion. A Research Agenda for Political Pragmatism 397 Arguments supporting these general claims have been developed throughout the book. They vindicate the claim that adopting a wide view of democracy is a necessary step if we are to engage more consciously in the never-ending pursuit of the democratic project, one that is unachiev- able not because of its supposedly elusive or utopian content, but because it requires constant adjustment and transformation of the temporary and fragile solutions with which we meet ever-changing social circumstances. These are the normative implications the wide view of democracy bears for political theory. If this picture of democracy is correct, then we have a clear indication for a new research program in democratic theory, as well as some decisive indications for a new political agenda. References Abbott, A. (2016). Processual Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Abensour, M. (2011). Democracy Against the State: Marx and the Machiavellian Movement. Cambridge: Polity. Abraham, J. and Y. Abramson (2015). A Pragmatist Vocation for International Relations: The (Global) Public and Its Problems. European Journal of International Relations 23(1), 26–48. Achen, C. and L. Bartels (2016). Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Addams, J. (1912). Twenty Years at Hull-House. New York: The Macmillan Company. Alexander, J. (2006). The Civil Sphere. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Alexander, M. (2012). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York: The New Press. Alexander, T. (1990). Pragmatic Imagination. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 325–348. Allen, A. (1998). Rethinking Power. Hypatia 13(1), 21–40. Allen, A. (2016). The End of Progress: De-Colonizing Critical Theory. New York: Columbia University Press. Almond, G. (1993). The Study of Political Culture. In Berg-Schlosser, D. and R. Rytlewski, pp. 13–27. © The Author(s) 2019 399 R. Frega, Pragmatism and the Wide View of Democracy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18561-9 400 References Almond, G. and S. Verba (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Almond, G. and S. Verba (1980). The Civic Culture Revisited: An Analytic Study. Boston: Little Brown. Anderson, E. (1999). What Is the Point of Equality? Ethics 109(1), 287–337. Anderson, E. (2006). The Epistemology of Democracy. Episteme 1(3), 8–22. Anderson, E. (2009). Democracy: Instrumental vs. Non-instrumental Value. In T. Christiano and J. Christman (Eds.), Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy, pp. 213–27. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Anderson, E. (2010). The Imperative of Integration. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Anderson, E. (2016). The Social Epistemology of Morality: Learning from the Forgotten History of the Abolition of Slavery. In M. Brady and M. Fricker (Eds.), The Epistemic Life of Groups: Essays in Collective Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Anderson, N. (1923). The Hobo: The Sociology of the Homeless Man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ansell, C. (2009). Mary Parker Follett and Pragmatist Organization. In The Oxford Handbook of Sociology and Organization Studies: Classical Foundations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ansell, C. (2011). Pragmatist Democracy: Evolutionary Learning as Public Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ansell, C. and M. Bartenberger (2015). Expanding the Toolkit of Experimen tation for Environmental Problem-solving. Ecological Economics. Ansell, C., M. Farjoun, and A. Boin (2015). Pragmatism in Organization Studies: Meeting the Challenges of a Dynamic and Complex World. Organization Science 26(6), 1787–1804. Antic, A. (2016). John Dewey’s Philosophical Legacy for the Global Access to Knowledge Movement in the Digital Age. Kinesis 41(1), 6–16. Arendt, H. (1970). On Violence. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World. Arendt, H. (2006). On Revolution (1st ed. 1963 ed.). London: Penguin. Armstrong, H. D. (2002). Mary P. Follett: Conflict Resolution Through Integration. Peace Research 34(2), 101–116. Arneson, R. (2013). Egalitarianism. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 ed.). Barber, B. (2003). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. University of California Press. Bassett, K. (2014). Rancière, Politics, and the Occupy Movement. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 32(5), 886–901. References 401 Bayat, A. (1997). Street Politics: Poor People’s Movements in Iran. Columbia University Press. Bayat, A. (2010). Life as Politics: How Ordinary People Change the Middle East. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Beck, U. (2006). Cosmopolitan Vision. Cambridge: Polity. Beck, U. and E. Grande (2007). Cosmopolitan Europe. Cambridge: Polity Press. Beck, U. and E. Grande (2010). Jenseits des methodologischen nationalismus: Aussereuropäische und europäische variationen der zweiten moderne. Soziale Welt 61(3–4), 187–216. Bell, J. and K. Parker (Eds.) (2014). The Relevance of Royce. New York: Fordham University Press. Benkler, Y. (2003). The Political Economy of

Load more