Proxy of democracy? : metaphors of connection as arguments against representation

This paper aims to assess the arguments that claim representative democracy may be enhanced or replaced by an updated electronic version. Focusing on the dimension of elections and electioneering as the core mechanism of representative democracy I will discuss: (1) the proximity argument used to claim the necessity of filling the gap between decision-makers and stakeholders; (2) the transparency argument, which claims to remove obstacles to the publicity of power; (3) the bottom-up argument, which calls for a new form of legitimacy that goes beyond classical mediation of parties or unions; (4) the public sphere argument, referred to the problem of hierarchical relation between voters and their representatives; (5) the disintermediation argument, used to describe the (supposed) new form of democracy following the massive use of ICTs. The first way of conceptualizing e-democracy as different from mainstream 20th century representative democracy regimes is to imagine it as a new form direct democracy: this conception is often underlying contemporary studies of e-voting. To avoid some of the ingenuousness of this conception of e-democracy, we should take a step back and consider a broader range of issues than mere gerrymandering around the electoral moment. Therefore I shall problematize the abovementioned approach by analyzing a wider range of problems connected to election and electioneering in their relation with ICTs

Tra arbitrarietà e ragionevolezza : riflessioni analitiche di teoria politica e giuridica

Título del seminario: "50º aniversiario de The concept of law"«Ragionevolezza» – sembra superfluo rilevarlo – è un termine usato e abusato del linguaggio giuridico contemporaneo, spesso utilizzato da giudici e giuristi come chiave di volta per comprendere – cito da una monografia sul tema – «la tessitura logica (non deduttiva) e la natura politica del sindacato di legittimità tout court»

Entre arbitrariedad y razonabilidad. Hacia una teoría crítica del neoconstitucionalismo

El autor reconstruye varios de los posibles significados de la noción de “razonabilidad de la ley” y analiza en profundidad aquellos más característicos del pensamiento neoconstitucionalista con el objetivo de estudiar su incidencia en el ideal del Estado de derecho como modelo para la limitación del poder arbitrario. Se examinan, en primer lugar, la teoría de la ponderación racional de principios como instrumento para alcanzar la “decisión correcta” de un caso y, en segundo lugar, la teoría de la argumentación jurídica en relación a la flexibilidad en la toma de decisiones. Por último, se afronta la relación entre neoconstitucionalismo y cognitivismo meta-ético.Palabras clave: Razonabilidad, racionalidad, arbitrariedad, justicia, equidad, flexibilidad, discriminación, neoconstitucionalismo. Abstract: The author reviews different possible meanings of the notion of “reasonableness of the law”. He analyses the main thesis on reasonableness of the so-called neocostituzionalismo (neoconstitutionalism), focusing on the relationship between this thesis and the rule of law as a limit to arbitrary power. He discusses the theory of the reasonable balancing of principles as a way to take the “correct decision” in a judicial case as well as the theory of legal argumentation in relation to the problem of flexibility in decision-making. In conclusion, the author discusses the relationship between neo-constitutionalism and cognitivist thesis in meta-ethics. Keywords: Reasonableness, rationality, arbitrary, justice, equity, flexibility, discrimination, constitutionalism