GLOBAL DEMOCRACY/EPISODE 1

  Time Horizon:  2005 - 2008

Temporary organization   (in evolution)

CONCEPT PAPER, MAY 2005

INTRODUCTION

· Mission Statement of the Global democracy Project:

This project rises from the need to recognise Democracy as a universal form of government and it will consider the possible means for the diffusion of the democratic model at the global level.

- Democracy usefulness (security-order-development-economic wealth-freedom-peace):

It is still very hard to find a full-inclusive and indisputable definition of "Democracy".

This concept represents one of the most familiar, as well as one of the most controversial, political categories ever invented.

Derived from two ancient Greek words, demos (the people) and kratos (strength), it is usually used to describe a political system where the legitimacy of exercising power stems from the consent of the people.

Democratic politics is often identified by the existence of a constitutional government, where the power of the leaders is checked and restrained; representative institutions based on free elections, which provide a procedural framework for delegation of power by the people; competitive parties, in which the ruling majority respects and guarantees the rights of minorities, and civil liberties, such as freedom of speech, press, association, and religion.

Winston Churchill argued that "democracy is far from being the perfect political system, however it is the best we found until this moment" because it still denotes a system that allows individual dignity, as well as the commitment to equal opportunities for people to develop their full potential.

Although Joseph Schumpeter demolished the romantic view of democracy in “Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy”, Democracy is always a powerful idea.

It is powerful because it respects the wish of every men to share in his own rule. Its social institutions have steadily expanded, giving to human beings opportunities they never had before to educate themselves, to enjoy the good things of life, and to take part, as free citizens, in the great enterprises of human civilization.

As Aristotle observed over two thousand years ago, such (democratic) societies tend to be tolerant and moderate, their large middle classes cushioning stresses between the wealthy and the poor. Better-educated and more secure materially people from these societies may be better equipped to make democratic decisions and more patient with the system’s flaws.

Thanks to the democratic immanent rule of law, to its political clearness as well as to its ability in reaction to changes, democracy allows the best development of a free market.

Free market, Democracy and Globalization are three different concepts strictly linked among themselves.

Wherever the free market economy, that means globalization and capitalism, has arrived, people enjoyed greater freedom of choice, greater wealth, greater consumerism that is, without any false moral prejudice, the best expression of what really men and women desire.

Globalization and capitalistic economy have developed our society as never before.

Also the latest World Bank reports recognize that global integration is a powerful force for poverty reduction and that it could be even more effective. Globalization generally reduces poverty because integrated economies grow faster and the growth is usually widely diffused.

Globalization is a powerful tool for reaching a happier and more stable society. However, to achieve its best expression it needs a political background that is perfectly represented by democracy.

Democratic systems, even with their different local adaptations, due to their flexibility, are functional to capitalism, the engine of modern wealth.

· Project’s goals:

The spreading of Democracy all over the world must be the new moral commitment of an era that has understood how important such a political system is today, and in which way its importance can grow.

We have to draw a strategy for a new active system.

A working democratic configuration assures stability and reduces the inclination to external aggressiveness.

We have to review the international community standards for guaranteeing security and order, which are th

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

· Suggestions for changes (UN Charter, EU Constitution, the inclusion of the “right of democracy” in Human Rights)

Concerning International Relations, we have the deepest respect of pragmatic-realistic school's representants, as Henry Kissinger and the others.

Bearing in mind the great importance of their theories, we appreciate their conclusions and suggestions based on the pragmatic conservation and on the balance of power.

However, sharing the same bases, we commit ourselves to go a step forward. We believe in the urgency of a more efficient moral-realistic philosophy.

Democracy is the only useful tool we have at disposal today to manage the heavy geopolitical questions we must deal with.

It is the most constructive means to build a new world order based on peace, freedom and wealth.

The current research project will evaluate the real usefulness of democratic systems from an economic, political and social point of view.

In the mean time, it will delineate the possibilities of adapting today international legal and political framework to a new "right for democracy", balancing it with the "sovereignty" as shaped until now by tradition.

We believe that an Global democracy's "powerful thinking" shall reshape the Charter of the United Nations, it shall add an amendment to EU Treaties (in particular to the Constitutional Treaty, once approved and entered in force), it shall found a new international law level, by including within Human Rights the right of a gradual democratization, in order to back a new and more homogeneous international society.

Furthermore, the Charters of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the regional lending institutions should be amended to favor democratic regimes.

In relation to the UN reform, the suggestions are not meant to replace the Charter of the United Nations; only our focus is that some of its provisions are no longer fully relevant or politically valid.

The task is to amend the operating principles of the Organization in order to stress democracy as an indispensable foundation of development and of a new collective security framework. That’s why we welcome Mr. Annan’ suggestion to create a Commission for democracy-building and a Fund for democracy.

Sovereignty, Human Rights, Democracy, Good Governance are among the values that should be at the heart of any collective security system for the 21st century, bearing in mind the increasing interdependence between security and development.

There is a strict link among peace, development, human rights and democracy.

A developed and strengthened democratic system is an essential component of the process of development.

We refuse a “development first, democracy later approach” because experience shows that democracy often flourishes in poor countries. A development-first strategy risks perpetuating the deadly cycle of poverty, conflict and oppression.

By contrast, a democracy-centered development strategy presupposes not only that poor countries can successfully democratize but also that democracy brings political checks and balances, responsiveness to citizen priorities, openness, and self-correcting mechanisms– all of which contribute to steady growth and superior living conditions.

· Model of “converging sovereignties” (different constitutions but with the same contents)

On the global stage in order to preserve, as well as to continue our economic and civil growth, we need security, order and development.

Given that we are not supporters of a utopian "global governance", because it does not and also cannot exist, the only way we see to reach such an important goal is the fostering of "Converging Sovereignties Model".

We believe that State sovereignty remains a fundamental principle of the international law, however a “responsible sovereignty”, including not only State’s privileges, but also its obligations to protect human rights, the rule of law, democracy and welfare of its own people as well as obligations towards other States, should be realized.

PRESSURE FOR DEMOCRATISATION

· Global democracy on the political – diplomatic, legal and economic issues

A "global standard" made up of common political and economic criteria, as well as behaviors, should be shared by nations over the world.

Due to the reason that democracy, as exposed before, has shown its excellence in establishing the right conditions for a market economy and for maintaining and promoting wealth, the States should balance their political models on a democratic one.

Our world needs a model allowing us to live forward on confidence, mightily based on different Constitutions, but with the same basic contents permitting the "Sovereign States" to communicate each other.

Since ever, States have to found themselves and their international relations on some common principles, it means on a common sense of belonging.

Prince von Metternich, Taillerand and the other unforgettable diplomats of the Vienna Congress, understood such need, trying to restore the ancient aristocratic legitimacy.

However, from 1815 the world pursued its path and changed the bases of the international community.

Today, notably in the so-called Western World, the homogeneity is guaranteed by liberal democracy's principles and values.

Therefore, we support the idea of revaluating the international geopolitical and law standards to grant the world with more future stability, trusting also in never totally denying Rousseau and Kant’s assumption that democracies are less aggressive, and less warriors than other social systems.

The ethics of democracy leads to peace.

Democracy is at bottom an ethical system, in which the citizens discipline themselves to the principle that it is better to decide things by the right means than to get their own way. It is much like a lesson we try to teach our children.

In the world of 1800, one democracy existed, the small United States of America . But if we look next at 1850, America had been joined in the democratic camp by Belgium , Switzerland , and to some extent England .

By 1900 England was almost fully democratic. France too was a democracy. Italy , the Low Countries, and Scandinavia were all in varying degrees democratic or well on their way to being so.

By 1950 all of western Europe, except Iberia , was democratic, including west Germany although its elected government still functioned under the aegis of the Allied occupation. The same was true for Japan . Newly independent India was democratic, as were the new States of Israel and Lebanon .

Today we find all of western Europe democratic with inroads being made into Eastern Europe . We also find nearly all of Latin America and the Caribbean democratic, as well as many of the Pacific island States and large chunks of Asia .

Taking this 200 – year vantage point, we can deduce not only that democracy has spread dramatically, but also that it seems to be growing at an accelerating pace.

Moreover, people in low-income democracies live, on average, nine years longer than their counterparts in low-income autocracies, have a 40% greater chance of attending secondary school, and benefit from agricultural yields that are 25% higher.

Higher levels of agriculture productivity mean more employment, capital, and food.

Poor democracies also suffer 20% fewer infant deaths than poor autocracies.

In addition, low-income democracies have another powerful advantage: they are better at avoiding calamities.

Since 1960, poor autocracies have experienced severe economic contractions (falls of 10% or more in annual GDP) twice as often as poor democracies. Seventy percent of autocracies have experienced at least one such episode since 1980, whereas only 5 of the 80 worst examples of economic contraction over the last 40 years have occurred in democracies.

CLOSING REMARKS

So we have to stress on a global democratisation.

Consequently, the present study is aimed to understand how to reach the above mentioned targets and whom should be the actors able to activate the "pressure for democratization", having the hard task, nonetheless the responsibility of modeling the coming global society built on a new balance between sovereignty and the interference in domestic affairs.

A State should be accepted within the international community only on the base of its “democratic merit”.

According to what we defined pragmatic-realism, each State follows national interests if linked with its own strategic priorities. Now it is necessary to rethink widely the definition of national interest.

Pressure for democratization should represent the most powerful way to maintain and increase the diffusion of wealth and stability.

Wealth does not mean only material benefits because a diffused prosperity allows people to define their autonomous life strategy without being compelled to join some collectivistic systems for surviving.

An Global democracy is useful, whether for its non-aggressiveness or for the construction of a global society: the right to vote combined with the spread of the material culture based on a diffused wealth embodies the society of the mass capitalistic accumulation.

Without the vote-institution, the guarantee that the wealth will be spread fails together with its consequent stability.

As a result, it is necessary to realize a great pressure, which can broaden globally the democratic model.

As nations do not automatically converge towards the configuration of a working democracy, it is required that the closed sovereignties will open to the democratised pressure, which can create the forms of control and civil participation.

Someone may suppose that our project tries to pursue a draft of a new colonisation but there is a great difference between a new colonisation and a new order. The former is made up of imperial acts while the latter occurs following a schema of international law, which implies the consensus of parties or the definition of standards and sanctions for people who violate them.

Finally, we ask for the sovereignties breaking in, not by applying a democratisation ideology or a contingent strategy – such as the strategy which inspires the “neo-con” moral and technically vague expressions- but by attesting the practical usefulness of the democratic model’s global diffusion.