Post-democratic Critique of Democracy: transformation or collapse of democracy

Abstract

The article reconsiders analytical value of the concept of post-democracy. The thesis of the article is that significance of the concept of post-democracy lies in its ability to be used as a tool of conceptual criticism, not in its informative value for criticism of democratic regimes. The question is: whether it is possible, from post-democratic perspective, to claim that realistic judgment on particular, democratic practices" could be wrong judgement on democracy? Three different conceptions of postdemocracy are offered as answers to the question. They are considered as reaction to self-proclaimed, triumph" of democracy and universalization of minimalistic conception of democracy. The first is the conception of English sociologist Colin Crouch which is based on criticism of participation failure and electoral policies of existing democracies. The second is Sheldon Wolin's conception which is suspicious of representativeness of representative democracy. Third conception is based on Jacques Ranciere's critique of legitimacy scheme of liberal democracy. These three critiques suggest that democracy is in bad shape as well as that the meaning of the notion of democracy is hooked by economic and political elites. The conclusion is that the concept of post-democracy is more useful as a platform of critical reconsideration of democracy than more frequently used concepts of crisis, deficit, decline or transformation. The question of adequacy of particular conceptions of post-democracy is not raised in this article.