By Marianne Magnin
Updated July 9, 2024
The political turmoil sweeping across Europe and beyond shows no signs of abating. In the UK, a dramatic swing in parliament on 4 July upended expectations, exposing once again the volatility inherent in the first-past-the-post system.
In France, the recent elections, encompassing the EU elections followed by the swift dissolution of the National Assembly, have similarly sent shockwaves through the political landscape. The results emerging on July 7 show a parliament with no clear winner, split roughly into three equivalent factions. As the nation and the President grapple with the implications of these outcomes, it becomes evident that a comprehensive overhaul of governance is not just desirable but essential.
These events are symptomatic of a deeper shift taking place - the unraveling of centralised power structures that are no longer fit for purpose in an age of polycrisis. The old orders are fighting back fiercely, exacerbating tensions, but they cannot stem the tide indefinitely. A new paradigm is emerging, one that embraces decentralised, networked forms of governance better suited to our complex, interconnected world.
This article does not delve into the specific election outcomes or the underlying societal tensions but focuses on the urgent need for reforms to restore faith in the democratic process.
Democracy won this time
France's political landscape has been tumultuous, characterised by fluctuating voter sentiments and a fragmented electorate. The latest elections have underscored this volatility, with significant shifts in voter allegiance and the emergence of new political forces. Remarkably, the highest voter turnout since 1997, exceeding 67%, demonstrates that French citizens are deeply engaged with politics. This engagement is a significant positive outcome amidst the political turmoil.
Grave Fractures Exposed
The outcomes of the EU and French legislative elections laid bare the deep fissures running through society. Perhaps most striking was the surge in what the French term "dégagisme" - a rejection of the entire political class and establishment. This manifested in an increased support for radical parties on both left and right.
We also saw a worrying rise in communautarism, with Jean-Luc Mélenchon's La France Insoumise appealing to identity politics and stoking divisions. The far-right under Marine Le Pen continued to exploit xenophobic sentiments, with echoes of Vichy-era rhetoric in proposals to exclude dual nationals from certain jobs. And antisemitism reared its ugly head once again.
These radical movements feed off society's problems, voting against solutions while simultaneously exacerbating tensions to expand their electoral base. The result is increasing polarisation around the very issues that require the most cooperation and nuanced policymaking.
It is clear that simply reforming the economy, public services, taxation or immigration policies will not be enough to quell the rising tide of discontent and anger. What is needed is a fundamental rethinking of how citizens are represented and engaged in the democratic process.
The Need for Bridging Divides
The election results have brought several critical issues to the forefront. One of the most pressing is the evident disconnect between the electorate and the political establishment. Many voters expressed dissatisfaction with the status quo, feeling that their concerns were not adequately represented by mainstream parties. This sentiment was particularly strong among younger voters and peripheral communities, who are increasingly turning to alternative political movements.
Another significant challenge is the rise of extremist factions. The election saw a notable increase in support for far-right and far-left parties, reflecting a polarised society. This polarisation poses a threat to social cohesion and highlights the need for a governance model that can bridge these divides and foster a more inclusive political environment.
Moving Beyond Confrontation
The old model of democracy based on confrontation and zero-sum politics, as illustrated by a French journalist who said this week that "bringing together the losers to prevent the winners from governing doesn't seem to be listening to the French people", is no longer fit for purpose.
This adversarial, masculine-coded approach centred on aggression and domination must give way to a more collaborative paradigm. We need to create spaces that can hold different opinions and construct consensus without compromising plurality. Only then can we build the widespread political and civic consent needed to tackle our most pressing challenges.
Dr. Tsai Ing-wen, President of Taiwan, articulated this new vision eloquently in her 2016 inauguration speech: "Before we imagined democracy as a clash, a showdown between two opposing values, but nowadays democracy must become a conversation between many diverse values."
More and more French politicians are starting to recognise the need for this shift. Jean-Louis Bourlanges, former chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, has argued that "the formation of a durable governing majority including socialists, centrists, Gaullists and liberals is possible and even necessary."
François Bayrou, leader of the centrist MoDem party, echoes this sentiment: "I've never thought that creating a single party was the solution. There may be new and more unifying ways to chart a common destiny for the country... I'm a centrist politician. I've always thought that the confrontation between left and right is not healthy for the country. I've always believed that compromises and different approaches existed."
He goes further, calling for "a government beyond the extremes", noting that "the situation we risk finding ourselves in has never been seen before. The major democratic and republican currents are obliged to come to an understanding. We are talking about the duty of each to come closer together and respect each other."
The Way Forward
So what might a new approach look like in practice?
In the immediate future,
1) A radical change in mindset among the political class to enable experimentation with new dynamics built on project-based consensus at National Assembly level. This means moving away from obstructionism and hypocrisy in plenary sessions towards more constructive work in committees. We need substantial deliberations to build rough consensus instead of superficial political theatre. We must cultivate the art of compromise, as practiced in the European Parliament and German coalition governments built on programmatic accord.
2) The media as the "fourth estate" needs to be held accountable, in particular by the French regulator (ARCOM) for public media.
3) Social media platforms must also be better regulated to ensure fair play and avoid election interference, online misinformation, and echo chambers. The new EU directives obliging platforms to regulate content and combat fake news, and detect propaganda need to be systematically enforced.
In the near future,
(1) we need to see genuine power-sharing (or more accurately, responsibility-sharing) through electoral reform towards greater proportionality. This was negotiated by MoDem in exchange for supporting Macron in 2017, but has been repeatedly delayed. We are finally seeing movement on this front, as articulated by a growing number of French political figureheads.
(2) We should also introduce more regular participatory consultations between elections, drawing inspiration from Switzerland's referendum model.
The longer-term future lies in the collective intelligence and empowerment of citizens.
Legislation alone is indeed not enough - citizens must be actively engaged to harness our collective capacity for sensemaking in the face of increasing complexity and ever faster pace of change. This will allow better coordination at all levels of society as we strive for "societal adulthood".
This means:
1) Building agency and decision-making capacity across society via decentralised architectures. Drawing inspiration from DAOs, we should create multi-agent systems with inclusive rules, sandboxes for experimentation, and tools like quadratic voting. By using participatory online platforms, we can foster genuine civic engagement and consensus-building. These new models of self-governance are essential.
For instance, the Polis conversation tool used in Taiwan bridges facts and feelings, avoiding the anonymity of social media. Their face-to-face multi-stakeholder forums, with invitations conditional on citizens' actual contributions, represent true "crowdsourced agenda setting". This keeps antisocial media tendencies at bay, countering the addiction to debate topics that can never reach consensus.
[For more on Taiwan's democratic innovations, listen to the October 2020 Harvard Business Review podcast on fostering democracy through technology, featuring Digital Minister Audrey Tang, and read the July 2024 RSA Journal piece on the Taiwan model]
2) Education for both children and adults to cultivate vigilance and media competence. This includes teaching critical thinking skills to identify fake news and disinformation, as well as crowdsourced fact-checking. We must also improve understanding of institutions at local, regional, national and European levels - where accountabilities lie, how decisions are made, and realistic timelines from consultation to implementation. System interdependencies and long-term thinking should be integral.
This is an ongoing journey of improvement and refinement. As Minister Audrey Tang of Taiwan noted, "democracy is a technology, like any social technology it gets better when more people strive to improve it."
We need an agile approach to governance architecture that reflects ground-level realities, with The Constitution that protects institutions while remaining compatible with new democratic mechanisms.
Let's not slip on the banana skin
We are in the midst of a deep societal revolution - a necessary transition for liberal democracies. Old power structures based on confrontation are resisting fiercely, but new collaborative structures are emerging to take their place.
Liberal democracies remain best equipped to allocate scarce resources, support citizens' living standards, and thereby reduce popular discontent. But they must evolve.
France's new government, if built on wider consensus, would represent a step-change worth watching closely. We should also look to the resilience of citizens forming consensus-based communities. Decentralised decision-making can be far more efficient in determining priorities, enabling agile planning, and building collective momentum compared to top-down governance systems.
This is how we can strengthen ourselves internally (at national and European levels) to better face external threats, starting with Russia's transgressions of the rule of law. The stakes could not be higher - but neither could the potential rewards of getting this transition right.
View original post here
Comments