Engendering Global Democracy

Abstract

The inadequacies of hegemonic liberal democratic ideas and institutions have been exposed by feminist theorists focusing on the marginalisation of women and by global theorists examining the impact of globalisation. These theorists have developed two distinct sets of reconstructive strategies that, until very recently, have remained in ignorance of each other. Further, both feminist and global democratic schemes have been dogged by problems in terms of their theorisation of power, politics, agency and change. Recent feminist arguments about citizenship and governance go some way to bringing together concerns about gender inequality and globalisation, but they remain centred on states and the states-system as vehicles for democratic representation and participation. This article argues that a more radical reconstructive strategy can be derived from debates about the democratisation of feminism itself. Drawing on the responses of black and third world feminists to racism in the white-dominated feminist movement, and examining their in uence on efforts to organise transnationally, the article points to innovative ways of thinking about power, politics, agency and change. Together these amount to a democratic framework which has applicability beyond feminist organising and which confronts the marginalisations of both gender and globalisation.Keywords globalisation, democracy, transnational feminist organising, black and third world feminists, transversal politics. IN TRODUCTIONLiberal democratic ideas and institutions retain a globally hegemonic grip, having apparently triumphed over their historic competitors. Although the 'third wave' of democratisation has been on the retreat somewhat over the last decade, as have the more hubristic claims about it, many commentators can still perceive

The Wisdom of the Many in Global Governance: An Epistemic-Democratic Defense of Diversity and Inclusion

“…While precise conceptualizations of democracy vary, participants in these debates share an understanding of democracy as, in broad terms, referring to "the various overlapping ways in which citizens interact and influence public decision-making processes" (Archibugi and Held 2011, 4). Scholars who examine the democratic deficit of global governance prescribe various remedies, including global parliaments (Falk and Strauss 2000), cosmopolitan institutions (Held 1995), deliberative systems (Dryzek 2009;Stevenson and Dryzek 2014), stakeholder democracy (Macdonald 2008;B€ ackstrand 2006), democratic global constitutionalism (Peters 2009), global forums of social movements (Smith et al 2016), and gender-sensitive reforms or transformations (Eschle 2002).…”

Identities in reconstruction: from rights of recognition to reflection in post-disaster reconstruction processes

“…Yet the construction of a non-gendered, non-contextual identity has also been a subject of debate for women, in both national (Phillips, 1991;Voet, 1998;Lister, 1997;Randall & Waylen, 1998;John, 2000) and global citizen discourse (Marchand & Runyan, 2000;Mohanty, 2002;Eschle, 2002). The experience of women in the public interest litigation process indicates the complexities of womenÕs position in a collective, non-gendered notion of citizenship.…”

Institutionalizing Insurgency

“…Contributors to IFjP emphasize that equitable development is inseparable from the empowerment of local women to determine their own priorities and devise means to address them (Moraes and Perkins 2007). Whether those priorities involve poverty, racism, unequal trade relations, structural adjustment policies, coercive population control mechanisms, militarism, war, environmental degradation or the politics of water, IFjP analyses tie equitable and sustainable development to expanded conceptions of democratic practice and redistributive justice (Eschle 2002; see also Special Issues on Gender and Democratization 5 (3) (2003) and the Politics of Water 9 (4) (2007)). Scholars publishing in IFjP have also documented the complex consequences of failures to adopt policies that take redistributive justice seriously.…”