*** RENE NGAMBELE NSASAY: La cosmodémocratie. Un principe de gouvernance pour la société technologique et mondialisée. Presses Interuniversitaires Européennes/Peter Lang (1 av. Maurice, B-1050 Brussels. Tel: (41-32) 3761717 - Fax: 3761727 - email: pie@peterlang.com - Internet: http://www.peterlang.com ). "Philosophie & Politique" series, No. 17. 2008, 310 pp, €35-90. ISBN 978-90-5201-463-0.
Is representative democracy still appropriate for modern times? Clearly not, and the polling stations shunned by far too many Europeans in a month's time will unfortunately demonstrate how profoundly and to what huge an extent it is not fit for purpose. At the same time, however, the very same question can be answered 'Yes, of course, more than ever!' At the start of this new millennium, humanity needs representative democracy more than ever, but a type of representative democracy that has been re-jigged to match the planetary challenges human beings are facing today, and through humanity and the actions taken (or not taken) by human beings, whether the world will even be inhabitable in the future. Representative democracy will be needed that suits a world that will be profoundly different from our world, the world that we will leave to the next generations. To this end, democracy simply has to emerge from the straitjacket of the nation state where it is being stifled and emasculated in terms of taking effective action, and this is losing it credit in the eyes of ever more people. The health of democracy (and hence the world in general) now requires a sublimation at global level, and the European project gives us a good inkling of how world democracy might be organised in the future.
This is the idea running through this impressive book following on from a doctoral thesis at the 'Université Catholique de Louvain' in Belgium. The author found the starting point for his major intellectual quest in the Principe Responsabilité by German philosopher Hans Jonas that he put forward in the 1990s as "an ethical code for the technological civilisation". He starts by echoing Jonas, sharing his "fear about what is happening to mankind". Why? Simply because left to their own devices, science, technology and industry that have shaken off all controls over the past three centuries are becoming an end in themselves and are threatening humanity with the "technological syndrome" because "the alluring promises of prosperity and freedom from omnipotent technoscience" could well turn into a nightmare: "The passionate debate about nuclear issues, the controversy around GMOs, the very topical issue of global warming, and the well-founded fears of the abuse of genetics raise doubts about whether science is wholly beneficial," writes the author, who also has a degree in theology. The ethical question raised here is therefore whether the holders of scientific knowledge will make use of it in such a way as to "risk jeopardising the future of the species and the totality of the biosphere". Particularly because globalisation, in this context, is an aggravating factor because it is only considered from its economic dimension, and the economic dimension has been the plaything in recent decades of neoliberal pensée unique "that erodes away at the sovereignty of nation states and makes frontiers permeable".
That is as far as their paths meet. In Hans Jonas's view, after having fingers burnt by the complexity of procedures and the intrinsic selfishness of the democratic system, the immanence of the huge threat facing humanity today makes it necessary to return to the old idea of the "power of the wise" to avoid the worst, basically in order to involve an element of forward-planning freed of any partisan feelings in order to evaluate current action and at the same time impose a policy of necessary moderation. It would be a good idea, the author argues, to return to Plato, who highlighted the need for making the best use of expertise in management of the City and whose thesis of a philosopher-king served as a theoretical basis for the aristocracy that dominated politics until the eighteen century. In respect of the complexity of the challenges and the relative ignorance of it demonstrated by common mortals, surely it would be a good idea to rely on the competence and impartiality of the elite? Responding to this question that is so replete with meaning and so disturbing, René Ngambele Nsasay answers a resounding and well-argued 'no'. Why does he answer 'no'? Firstly, because history is brimming with lessons about the inevitable abuses of any self-proclaimed power escaping from the control of the people in whose benefit it was initially set up. Secondly, because the collective and accumulative nature of the challenges to be dealt with does not argue for the responsibility of anyone being restricted, particularly because the technological threat is not a passing crisis that can be settled using exceptional measures by introducing, for example, a "pause in freedom" because this threat "is the condition of the postmodern humanity that we are". Rescue - if we are to be rescued - will come through democracy, as long as democracy is divested of the territoriality and sovereignty which, codified by the Westphalian Treaty of 1648, still colour international relations. "No traditional policy can be effective in the economically de-structured postmodern state, politically violated in its sovereignty and deprived of its means of action on society," argues the author, calling on readers to imagine "a new form of political regulation that can solve the tensions arising from the survival of the nation state (based on the principle of sovereignty) in a world where the economic, ecological, security and cultural interdependence of countries is constantly expanding". As the Kyoto Protocol demonstrated so well, "the Westphalian logic establishes and consecrates national state egotism and ignores the possibility of the existence of an inter-national res communis." A "cosmodemocracy" needs to be created, in other words a "cross-border democracy based on ordinary state democracy and applying these principles to more than one country in trans-national contexts". Clearly this does not mean simply a symbolic expansion of the United Nations Security Council but rather, effectively making up for "the serious democratic deficit that characterises the organisation and structures of the United Nations, an organisation responsible for guaranteeing the good governance of national states and universal peace". How? In this search, the European Union can be an example upon which to build a cosmodemocracy that encourages "the political and democratic integration of large numbers of countries". Some will reply that the very low turnout predicted for the polls next month in the European elections proves the emptiness of such a vision. Perhaps not - the problem is surely that even within the European Union, Member States continue to hang on to Westphalian mirages, even to the extent of plunging their citizens into the fog of dissatisfaction with democracy and politics.
Michel Theys
*** AMIN MAALOUF: Le dérèglement du monde. Grasset (61 rue des Saints-Pères, F-75006 Paris. Tel: (33-1) 44392200 - Fax: 42226418 - Internet: http://www.edition-grasset.fr ). 2009, 317 pp, €20-20. ISBN 978-2-246-68151-9.
Amin Maalouf is one of the finest contemporary French writers and has written numerous best-sellers. Behind this talented novelist, there is also a modern humanist. After 'Les identités meurtrières' (published in 1998), this new essay gives resounding confirmation of his humanist credentials. He has written the book for his fellow travellers on planet Earth at the start of this new millennium, outlining his worries and concerns as an aficionado of Enlightenment (the Age of Enlightenment), who can see the Enlightenment vacilating, weakening and, in some countries, about to be extinguished. The concern of an impassioned follower of freedom who sees a world forming where freedom will be squeezed out. The concern of a supporter of harmonious diversity, who is forced to sit by and witness, powerless to act, the rise of fanaticism, violence, exclusion and despair. The concern of a lover of life, who does not want to give in to the annihilation lurking around the corner. Influenced by two cultures - the Middle East because he was born in Lebanon, and the West because he lives in France, the author describes the deregulation of the world simply and in great wisdom, which makes his ideas implacably credible and therefore disturbing. He starts by talking about the pyrrhic victories of the West and of capitalism, the false victories of the United States and European countries which now have to pay the price for continually refusing to respect their own values in relations with the peoples they dominated. He then lists "lost legitimacies" like where a president wins an election based on challenged voting in the state of Florida, the right to change the face of the world, and all-powerful leaders reigning over Arab and Muslim peoples, orphans of Nasser's secular project. The author then outlines the "imaginary certainties," starting with religions, particularly Islam, that is suffering from not having a Pope and is therefore in an incestuous relationship with politics, but also the fate reserved to immigrants by the West. What can be done? Amin Maalouf says the time has come to "transcend" the various civilisations that are in their death throes. He says we have to "overcome our tribal concept of civilisations and religions, freeing civilisations from their ethnic chains and religions from the identity venom that distorts and corrupts them and leads them away from their ethical and spiritual vocation". In this manner, they would demonstrate that "our species has not reached (…) the depths of moral turpitude," in other words the risk of killing itself off in an act of collective suicide. Should we believe him? Possibly. Maalouf still has hope. Firstly because of the arrival of President Obama to power as the symbol of a United States that can make peace with the rest of the world, and with itself. Secondly, because of the European Union which is now the "home" of these "last hopes," an EU that demonstrates that "many ethnic homelands can come together to form a single ethical homeland ".
(MT)
*** ALAN PAUL FIMISTER: Robert Schuman: Neo-Scholastic Humanism and the Reunification of Europe. Presses Interuniversitaires Européennes/Peter Lang (see above). "Philosophy & Politics" series, No. 15. 2008, 284 pp, €35-90. ISBN 978-90-5201-439-5.
The basic idea behind this book is to connect the work of Robert Schuman, founding father par excellence of the European integration process, with the neo-Thomist school of thought started by Pope Leo XIII and, more generally, with the concept of European Christian democracy. The author starts by paining a picture of the Neo-Thomistic (neo-scholastic) movement from Pope Leo XIII to Pius XII, followed by a biography of former French foreign minister Robert Schuman, showing how he was influenced by the Papal Social Magisterium, and pointing out his commitment to the political Catholicism of the time. The book also discusses "Generalised Democracy" in the Christian sense of the word, with the author showing how re-introducing Christian values into politics could be beneficial to Europe.
(NDu)
*** JEAN-PIERRE GOUZY: Histoire de l'Europe. Editions de Paris (13 rue Saint-Honoré, F-78000 Paris. email: contact@editions-de-paris.com - Internet: http://www.editions-de-paris.com ). 2009, 314 pp, €24. ISBN 978-2-85162-246-4.
The author of this book is well known in European circles, in other words the individuals who think, publish and act on the question of unity of the communities of Europe. He is a journalist and an activist. As a journalist, he started writing in 1946 for a daily French newspaper. He is former president of the European Journalists' Association. As an activist, he has been unceasing in his work for sixty years now, working with the pioneers of the European project, people like Alexandre Marc and Altiero Spinelli, to mention but two. He is currently vice-president of the 'Centre International de Formation Européenne' and the 'Maison de l'Europe' in Paris.
This book will be extremely useful for all readers. For sixty years, the nations of Europe have experienced a period of history which is a mystery at times to the younger generation. The pioneers are dying off or are seen as "Euro-dinosaurs". Sober in style, the book is divided into ten chapters covering the immediate post-war period and the first federalist ideas in Europe to the current day, which the author describes as that of a "soggy Europe of the Lisbon Treaty". He uses intellectual rigour, as if writing a history text book, in describing the various epochs in the construction of Europe, from the Europe of Churchill who, in 1946, invited Continentals to build "a kind of United States of Europe." To the European Community at the time of Monnet, Schuman and Spaak, and the Europe of Jacques Delors, via the ideas of the Convention chaired by Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and the current "crossroads" that the enlarged but not yet complete EU faces today. The book is accompanied by plentiful, well marshalled documentation and a valuable chronological annex, a bibliography of 107 works and an index of 267 key players and authors. This is urgent reading for candidates for the upcoming European Parliament elections and even members of the future European Commission! A translation into other languages (with a bibliography of books in the relevant language) would be highly desirable.
(J-RR)
*** CATHERINE BARNARD, OKEOGHENE ODUDU (Eds.): The Outer Limits of European Union Law. Hart Publishing (c/o International Specialized Book Services, 920 NE 58th Avenue, Suite 300, Portland, OR 97213-3786, United States. email: orders@isbs.com - Internet: http://www.isbs.com ). 2009, 446 pp. ISBN 978-1-84113-860-2.
Written by a raft of academics specialising in European law, this book defines the outer limits of European Union law and therefore of the EU itself. The European Union is suffering from a legitimacy problem that will no doubt be aggravated with the upcoming European elections. Although still in the minority, many people regret the erosion of national sovereignty and the passing of powers from the nation to the EU. They believe that the EU has too many powers. Many other people think that the EU does not have the tools needed to respond properly to problems like terrorism, immigration and the environment, not to mention the fact that when it does have the power to act, its action often does not live up to the expectations of ambitious Europeans, partly due to an over-limitation on its powers. The authors study the origins and implications of these self-imposed and external limits on EU legislation and action by studying issues like legitimacy, justice and the free circulation of goods. They also at how the European Court of Justice and the various EU institutions try to define and change these limits.
(NDu)