|
Dear Luke, thanks for supporting the Stand Up for Democracy initiative!
I agree with you in general and, in particular, with your last sentence:
“/Finally, in my opinion designers can help to confront forces of
de-democratization by creating diverse and accessible infrastructures
that correct inequalities in the capability for people to initiate
public deliberation on their interests, to participate in collaborative
projects together, and to publicly express dissent/”.
I agree that this is a fundamental thread of possible design
initiatives: we could call it /“infrastructuring for democracy/”. Here,
I would add another thread of action: design initiatives the aim of
which is to trigger and support citizens’ participation in co-design
processes. The idea is to revitalise democracy, and in particular, the
participatory democracy, thanks to a lively mesh of co-design processes,
considered as new arenas of discussion where democratic life can thrive.
In other words, in my view, i.e. according to my experiences in design
for social innovation, design and democracy intersects in two ways:
1.creating a more favourable environment for democratic life
(/“infrastructuring for democracy/”)
2.triggering and stimulating co-design processes that, beyond getting
specific results, are direct contribution to democratic life
(“/designing as democracy”/)
I think that 1 and 2 are complementary:
2 without 1 is very difficult, if not impossible (it is the case of
promoting democratic events in an authoritarian regime)
1 without 2 generates a kind of empty box, i.e. a potentially favourable
environment where nothing happens (it is the case of a formally
democratic regime, where democracy is in crisis because citizen don’t
commit to common activities).
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Da:* PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
> related research in Design <[log in to unmask]> per conto di
> Luke Feast <[log in to unmask]>
> *Inviato:* domenica 14 maggio 2017 23.13
> *A:* [log in to unmask]
> *Oggetto:* ‘Stand Up for Democracy’ by Ezio Manzini and Victor Margolin
> Dear all,
>
> The recent issue of Design Research News (May 2017) contains an open
> letter—‘Stand Up for Democracy’—in which Ezio Manzini and Victor
> Margolin maintain that the design community should stand up, speak out
> and act to resist on-going de-democratization. I have included a copy
> the letter after this post and I am writing to support this initiative.
>
> Democracy is more than a political method and in my opinion one way to
> resist forces of de-democratization is to articulate an inclusive and
> open view of democratic society. I agree with Mackie’s (2003, pp.
> 418-419) argument that democracy includes but is not limited to the
> following components. First, democracy implements what free and equal
> people will the public good to be based on wide suffrage and contested
> elections. Second, a democrat may recommend institutions that
> neutrally inform and enlarge the will of the people through public
> deliberation within multiple overlapping forums and sites. Third, a
> democrat may maintain that direct democracy may be impractical in a
> large territorial state and that it is necessary to implement a system
> of representatives who are capable to professionalize and depoliticize
> political conflicts. Fourth, a democrat may insist that there are
> essential preconditions to democracy such as fundamental rights to
> life, liberty and personal property, regular elections, equal voting
> rights, freedom of association, and freedom of speech. Fifth, a
> democrat may propose independent standards of justice and propose
> consent to constitutional arrangements that approximate such
> independent standards. In my view, democratic society embraces all
> these notions.
>
> In addition to the normative aspects of democratic society, there are
> good reasons to believe that democracy produces reliable decisions due
> to its tendency to maximize the cognitive diversity of the people
> involved in public deliberation (Landemore, 2013; Landemore & Page,
> 2014; Mercier & Sperber, 2011, 2017). Consequently, a necessary
> condition for a flourishing democracy is equal capability for people
> to associate and deliberate in formal and informal public spheres
> (Anderson, 2006, pp. 15-17; Bohman, 1997, pp. 325-326).
>
> Finally, in my opinion designers can help to confront forces of
> de-democratization by creating diverse and accessible infrastructures
> that correct inequalities in the capability for people to initiate
> public deliberation on their interests, to participate in
> collaborative projects together, and to publicly express dissent.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Luke
>
> Luke Feast, PhD | Postdoctoral Researcher | Department of Design |
> School of Arts, Design and Architecture | Aalto University | Finland
>
>
> -snip-
>
> Open Letter to the Design Community:
>
> Stand Up for Democracy
>
> 1. There is no need to point out that we are now in difficult and
> dangerous times. For many years we were living in a world that,
> despite its problems, has been nevertheless engaged in a
> democratization process whereby human rights, fundamental freedoms and
> opportunities for personal development were increasing. Today, this
> whole picture has changed. Attacks on democracy are active in several
> countries, including the ones where democracy seemed to be unshakable.
>
> 2. In these new times, the design community (practitioners,
> researchers, theorists, students, journalists, publishers and curators
> who are professionally involved in design- related activities) should
> stand up, speak out and act. To do that we do not have to share the
> same idea of what democracy is. It is enough to recognize the strong
> convergence between democracy and design. This convergence can be
> characterized in four ways: (1) design of democracy, improving
> democratic processes and the institutions on which democracy is built;
> (2) design for democracy, involving issues of access and transparency,
> allowing more people, especially using technology, to participate in
> the democratic process; (3) design in democracy, including projects
> that help to bring about conditions of equality and justice; (4)
> design as democracy, whereby the equitable and inclusive principles of
> participatory design set a stage on which diverse actors can come
> together to share constitutive power in shaping the present and future
> world we live in. Design has always been instrumental as a tool for
> democratization, in the four ways described above, either directly or
> indirectly. Today, these multiple commitments should continue, and
> designers need to support and increase democratic practices in their
> respective communities and countries. But now "normal" ways of
> designing are not enough. At this time it is essential that the design
> community takes a strong stand against the on-going de-democratization
> process and supports broader and richer opportunities for democracy
> and well being. In practical terms, this can be defined by as
> conceiving, developing and connecting multiple actions of resistance
> and proposals of new possibilities. It means using every possible
> arena where design has a voice, to stand up against
> de-democratization. It means conceiving of and enhancing highly
> visible and effective actions of resistance. It also means proposing
> and developing projects that address both crucial short-term problems
> such as job creation and welfare reform and long-term issues such as
> environmental and economic sustainability. These two threads of action
> should interact and support each other, resulting in a dynamic
> proactive resistance.
>
> 3. Beyond expressing and sharing our concern, this letter aspires to
> help catalyze discussions and initiatives that we know are already
> happening in the design community. We believe that it is important
> that these discussions and initiatives have more visibility and state
> clearly how the design community, with its richness and diversity, is
> standing up and taking a stance in these troubled times.
>
> To contribute to this effort, we are sending this letter to friends
> and colleagues who play different, relevant roles in the design
> community including design associations, design schools, research
> centers, design publications and media, and design-related cultural
> institutions. Our proposal to the community is that its members
> consider our open letter, and if they agree with its spirit, act in
> three ways:
>
> - write a personal statement of less than 500 words
> - make it public and circulate it in their networks
> - organize an event in the next few months
>
> The two of us are committed to collecting these statements and the
> information related to these events and to trying to find a way to
> give them visibility. How this last step will happen is still an open
> question. It will depend on how this letter is received and what new
> energies it generates. We hope that it will stimulate designers to
> stand up and fight for democratization in their own communities and
> throughout the world.
>
> Ezio Manzini and Victor Margolin
> Chicago, 5 March 2017
>
> Please, send your feedback to: [log in to unmask]
>
> -end snip-
>
>
>
>
> Anderson, E. (2006). The Epistemology of Democracy. Episteme: A
> Journal of Social Epistemology, 3(1), 8-22.
> Bohman, J. (1997). Deliberative Democracy and Effective Social
> Freedom: Capabilities, Resources, and Opportunities. In J. Bohman & W.
> Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics:
> MIT Press.
> Landemore, H. (2013). Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective
> Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many: Princeton University Press.
> Landemore, H., & Page, S. E. (2014). Deliberation and disagreement:
> Problem solving, prediction, and positive dissensus. Politics,
> Philosophy and Economics, 14(3), 229-254.
> Mackie, G. (2003). Democracy Defended: Cambridge University Press.
> Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for
> an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(02), 57-74.
> Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2017). The Enigma of Reason: Harvard
> University Press.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design>
> JISCMail - PHD-DESIGN List at WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design>
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk
> PhD-Design was created to discuss, and exchange information about PhDs
> in design.
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
