Documents democracy 866 results

When people go to work, they cease to be citizens. At their desks they are transformed into employees, subordinate to the hierarchy of the workplace. The degree of their sense of voicelessness may vary from employer to employer, but it is real and growing, inflamed by populist propaganda that ridicules democracy as weak and ineffective amid global capitalism. At the same time, corporations continue untouched and even unremarked as a major source of the problem. Relying on 'economic bicameralism' to consider firms as political entities, this book sheds new light on the institutions of industrial relations that have marked the twentieth century, and argues that it is time to recognize that firms are a peculiar institution that must be properly organized in order to unshackle workers' motivation and creativity, and begin nurturing democracy again."

"This article presents an analysis of democratisation in countries of south-eastern Europe in the context of EU membership. After a brief theoretical overview of the EU's capacity for democratisation, the article highlights the increased attention that researchers have paid to the quality of democracy and, in particular, to the rule of law as key mechanisms guaranteeing the successful functioning of representative democracy. The purpose of the article is to find empirical evidence for whether the EU has learned lessons from the accession of Bulgaria and Romania that can apply in its relations with candidate countries from the western Balkans regarding democratisation. The research objective is the interaction between the EU and candidate countries, realised through the main instrument of pre-accession conditionality – the annual reports of the European Commission which are used to monitor and evaluate the progress of each applicant towards meeting EU membership criteria. The author concludes that this leads the Commission to a constancy of approach but which leaves aside the issue of the specificity of candidate countries. "

"Alors que les circonstances devraient y conduire, l'écologie ne parvient pas à s'imposer comme la force politique dominante du xxie siècle. Les signaux d'alarme concernant les destructions de l'environnement n'ont jamais été aussi forts, le climat est désormais une des principales préoccupations des Français, et pourtant… Alors que les activistes demandent aux gouvernements d'agir davantage pour le climat, les résultats des élections envoient un tout autre signal aux dirigeants.
Cet ouvrage expliquer les raisons de cette apparente contradiction, et pointe les limites de la démocratie représentative dans sa capacité à mener des politiques transformatrices pour la protection du climat ou de la biodiversité. S'il existe un large consensus dans la société pour reconnaître la situation alarmante de l'état de l'environnement, ce consensus disparaît dès qu'il s'agit d'évoquer les solutions, et fait volontiers place aux caricatures ou aux indignations stériles.
Si la démocratie représentative apparaît comme une impasse, la situation n'est pas désespérée pour autant : la démocratie ne se réduit pas aux élections, et l'ouvrage montre comment le changement peut advenir en explorant d'autres voies… sans passer par une « dictature verte ». A condition d'avoir les yeux grand ouverts sur les raisons pour lesquelles nous échouons."

"Rules to Win By: Participation and Power in Union Negotiations is a book for anyone who wants to understand how to build the power required to effectively challenge and reverse income inequality and attacks on democracy. Drawing insights from recent hard-won unionization and contract negotiation fights, Jane McAlevey and Abby Lawlor use lessons from some of the toughest fights today--preparing a durable, all-out strike in a union-hostile environment--to provide a masterclass in participatory social change, indispensable both within and beyond the workplaces where we spend half of our waking lives.
In an era of polarization, big lies, and massive legislative setbacks, changemakers in every arena need to learn the skills and lessons honed in pitched battles against experienced and ruthless union busters. Rules to Win By is a book for workers, unionists, racial justice and climate campaigners, academics, policymakers and everyone who wants a more fair and democratic society."

"A thousand years of history and contemporary evidence make one thing clear. Progress is not automatic but depends on the choices we make about technology. New ways of organizing production and communication can either serve the narrow interests of an elite or become the foundation for widespread prosperity.
Much of the wealth generated by agricultural advances during the European Middle Ages was captured by the Church and used to build grand cathedrals while the peasants starved. The first hundred years of industrialization in England delivered stagnant incomes for workers, while making a few people very rich. And throughout the world today, digital technologies and artificial intelligence increase inequality and undermine democracy through excessive automation, massive data collection, and intrusive surveillance.
It doesn't have to be this way. Power and Progress demonstrates that the path of technology was once - and can again be - brought under control. The tremendous computing advances of the last half century can become empowering and democratizing tools, but not if all major decisions remain in the hands of a few hubristic tech leaders striving to build a society that elevates their own power and prestige.
With their breakthrough economic theory and manifesto for a better society, Acemoglu and Johnson provide the understanding and the vision to reshape how we innovate and who really gains from technological advances so we can create real prosperity for all."

"Does Europe have an inequality problem? Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, many Europeans are certainly struggling. The rise of populist movements is another signal that something is awry. Many Europeans no longer see their economy as fair. But is this a problem of too much inequality, or just a problem of ideology? Is inequality even a bad thing? We need to consider the statistics on economic inequality, but also look beyond towards the lived experience of trying to make ends meet. We need to consider different ideas on the impact and significance of the inequality we see. Does inequality drive entrepreneurship, and thus innovation, through the struggle for upward social mobility? Or does inequality affect life chances, becoming entrenched, blocking social mobility and innovation? And does anyone really need a billion euros? If we have a euro to spare, do we create more happiness by giving it to the rich or to the poor? An old, once infamous, now oft-forgotten question in economics. Tessa Bending conducts research on social inclusion, social development and impact measurement at the Economics Department of the European Investment Bank (EIB). The department provides indepth analysis on critical investment issues to support international policy debates. This is the sixteenth essay in the Big Ideas series created by the European Investment Bank. The EIB has invited international thought leaders and experts to write about the most important issues of the day. These essays are a reminder that we need new thinking to protect the environment, promote equality and improve people's lives around the globe."

"Freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law are among the fundamental values upon which the European Union is founded. They are enshrined in the EU Treaties and lie at the heart of the EU's identity. Yet these values have come under great pressure in recent years. Europe has faced unprecedented crises, which amplified social and economic inequalities and put into question EU citizens' trust in democratic institutions. Our European values cannot be taken for granted. In these testing times, the support of civil society in gathering the voices of European citizens is key to building democratic resilience and shaping the future of Europe. At the same time, civil society itself needs greater protection. The space in which civil society operates is increasingly shrinking, limiting the capacity of civil society organisations to do legitimate work in the EU and the rest of the world. Throughout the next mandate, we at the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) will step up our unique position as a gateway between citizens, civil society and EU institutions, acting as a true platform for honest and inclusive debate. We will make sure that the doors of our house are open for a fact-based and meaningful democratic dialogue, involving a broad range of social, economic, political, cultural, and institutional actors. In our decision-making, we will strive for well-informed compromises that will strengthen the position of our Committee and provide a meaningful contribution to EU policies."

"The European Parliament started monitoring future shocks during the coronavirus crisis, and has continued to do so during Russia's unprecedented war on Ukraine. The annual 'Future Shocks' series reviews global risks, with a focus on specific risks and the capabilities and resilience of the EU system in the face of multiple challenges. It seeks to provide up-to-date, objective and authoritative information on these risks, based on risk literature from a broad range of sources. 'Future Shocks' includes, but is not limited to, areas where the EU has primary competence, and identifies the benefits of concerted action by the EU as well as the ability of its institutions and Member States to find new and effective solutions to deal with major shocks. The 2023 edition, the second in this annual series, highlights 15 risks related to geopolitics, climate change, health, economics and democracy that could occur in the coming decade, and 10 policy responses to address existing governance capacity and possible ways to enhance capabilities within the EU. Among the options set out are those previously included in European Parliament resolutions, positions from other EU institutions, and policy papers from think tanks and stakeholders."

"This article seeks to advance our thinking about better and worse work by developing a novel framework for assessing the quality of work and its implications. It does so in terms of the wider literature on job quality, while addressing the need to embrace a broader agenda and a more dynamic understanding of how to make worse work better. To this end it presents a three-dimensional framework: risk, autonomy and expressiveness. The framework assesses better and worse work and the ways in which workers navigate between these different dimensions of their lives at work. We explore implications for actor strategies and for researchers to take a better-work agenda forward."