Comparative: Similarities and Oppositions Between discourses, ideologies and network theories
Parasitic Relationships Ensuring Democracy and Democratisation
Our political systems need to be apprehended as unstable and flexible structures which is not comfortable. If the steps, processes and actions constituting a political cycle were open and receptive to interactions with elements from multiple sources then power would be circulating. But equally, we don’t want to institute all initiatives and movements. There will always be a need for positions challenging the system coming from spaces regulated by different times, (social) rules and hierarchies. This is not about standardising procedures but rather seeing conflict and parasitic relationships between parallel systems as necessary to ensure democracy and democratisation. Seeing communities as parallel networks would allow autonomy in doing and mutual inclusion. There is not a single answer to representation. It seems that we need several approaches, some coming from the system, other from the people, but also some sitting in between, some challenging the structure of the system and others playing by its rules. While animal philosophy and network theories legitimatise people’s claim to share power it also show that hierarchic structures can be necessary. Experts conversations confirm this as well.