Reflection on the “Transnational Democratic Innovations” Participedia School
Author: Carolina Earle
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this reflective piece are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the organisations, the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund or the Politics and Urban Governance Research Group (PUG Research)
In my life thus far I have encountered varied appraisals of and levels of conviction in the need to center “the local,” “community,” and “equity,” or to examine post- and neo-colonial structures, and challenge, reimagine, and undo violent global relations, orders, and epistemologies. Too many times, it has been to my disappointment that in the face of the slow death wrought upon and suffered by so many marginalized in this world, that a commitment to reimagining and reworking today’s orders is still met with distrust and, at worst, disdain. In too many spaces wielding modern, Western global power (i.e. power as capital, colonial power, patriarchal power… and this is worth specifying, for alternative, and real power lies with the people) these concepts, even when considered, are too often appraised as fantastical or as too complex to enact. This slowness of uptake is painful when considering how oppression, individualism, inequity, and violence (for example) has been forced painfully upon too many and for too long. And yet, in the face of this slowness and apathy, there exists – as there have always been – poignant, powerful, pulsing and world-changing spaces where ‘the conversation’ is already rooted in tomorrow’s imaginaries which feel graspable, real, and so very close. As a result of more and less (in)visible labour(s), the co-hosted and co-created 2024 Participedia School on Transnational Democratic Innovations became such a space.
In an era where multiscale violence reigns – structurally, and silently or massively and in genocidal terms – the School poignantly forged a counterpoint of hope, bringing together – through a mixture of local engagement, scholarships, and paid fees – human rights defenders, practitioners and scholars who are tussling with and making the world safer and more just and beautiful every day. Through a mixture of lectures, discussions, workshops, group-work and creative activities we reflected upon the exercise of power, how to ideate and realise participatory democratic processes in diverse settings, the power of social movements, and how to mediate between plural viewpoints, and between the theoretical and practical when designing for transnational democracy.
We had the honour to have these sessions facilitated and led by renowned hosts – student organisers, academics, experts in design thinking and participatory democracy, an UN Expert Rapporteur. I found home in these thinkers, and yet, it must be noted that their provocations became palpable and ever-more powerful thanks to the cohort of intergenerational and transnational students who so generously shared their experiences, frustrations, and challenges and whilst offering care and nuance to each topic at hand. I extend my awe and gratitude to each one.
Of course, it is a testament to those same facilitators and hosts, and to the many convenors of the School that such a safe and empathetic space for sharing deep and emotive realities was made real. Challenging the archaic hegemony of “rational thought,” the deeply important creation of spaces for emotion, feeling, and lived realities allowed us to better learn with one another, something which I was grateful to find a balm and home in.
Indeed, over the course of the week, it was proven how emotion can enrich evidence-based, and critical work rather than being a challenge to such work (as is sometimes argued). The importance of this blurring between the theoretical/scientific and the emotional was clearly evidenced during many of the lectures where – for example, activists, academics – shared personal stories alongside their nuanced, methodical, precise, and long-researched findings, or alternatively, shared those same findings with deep emotion. Speakers such as Lama Alarda, Lindokuhle Mandyoli, Bevil Lucas, Azucena Moran, and more, delivered their reflections with a potency that rendered the energy throughout those assembled in the UWC “School”-room both church-like and electric.
Importantly, the School’s hosts had made a deeply enriching design choice by purposefully structuring the School around case studies which small groups of students workshopped throughout the week. Each group was challenged to engage in a transnational democratic design project, and to reimagine and workshop policy and processes that are truly inclusive and participatory. Groups worked on reimagining truth and reconciliation commissions, hydrogen alliances, dignified sanitation in informal settlements, gene drives for genetically modified mosquitoes, and negotiations of a plastics treaty. Challenging the unilateral exchange of ideas, these small groups allowed us to build deeper connections with our group-mates, leading to – what I felt, at least – was a particular richness to our thinking and to our discussions. This is not to say that we all agreed, or that forging connections meant aligning our solutions completely. Rather, the experiential learnings offered by our group-work sharpened fundamental tenets of co-creation and participation that are sometimes lost in today’s polarizing political landscape(s), “democratic” processes and relations, more generally: Disagreement cannot allow for disrespect, or harm. Divergence does not prove or allow for appraisals of any one as lesser than another. Ever-more inclusive compromise and inclusion is possible, especially when taken as a serious and unshakeable objective of deliberation.
Through dialoguing with one another, we were challenged to enact such principles of participation, workshopping how to be caring whilst working through complex thematics often framed through and approached through personal experiences. This was an important education.
Finally, the School’s innovation of simultaneous transnational hosting was also an important experiment. Specifically, the school took place in two distributed locations: at the University of the Western Cape in South Africa and at the Memorial University of Newfoundland in Canada. Thanks to an adept tech team, certain sessions and discussions were shared simultaneously in both locations. Take two examples: some lectures were screened simultaneously, and questions fielded to discussants in/from both locations, and, via small video calls, case study groups from South Africa shared their thoughts and reflections with their counterparts in Canada. Indeed, having myself worked on a case examining Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, it was fascinating to gather – towards the end of the week – how and where our conclusions converged and diverged with our Canadian counterpart’s thinking (despite there being Commissions which had or were taking place in both South Africa and Canada).
This emphasised, to me, both the importance of locally rooted deliberation and transnational linkages. Local and community-based contextualization and deliberation is essential, however, much can be learnt through sharing across contexts and spaces. Indeed, I believe that the more fixed and seemingly unshakeable tenets of the global order can be shaken and displaced if we are to listen more transnationally. For one, for example, we might more quickly and more adeptly reach new inclusive futures by concertedly learning from those who have and are living in the aftermath of projects that did not seriously consider participation, justice, and inclusivity. Or at least, I hope that simultaneous local and transnational listening might help us move at least a little closer toward such inclusive futures, even whilst reality can prove a little challenging and complex.
I finish this reflection with deep gratitude and by honouring the many people whose labour and care and generosity made this week of learning possible. In particular, I thank our South African hosts, who so generously opened their schools, and homes to us with warmth and kindness. This all the while we were still – to varying degrees – imperfect visitors with much to learn.
Finally, in closing, I assert that whilst this reflection has attempted to give light to some of my thoughts and feelings, it will have failed. It will have been unable to encompass the plurality and depth of thought and feeling and months of work that went into and also emerged from the collective “Transnational Democratic Innovations” School. I note this in order to signal that we are always dealing with silences and imperfections. That so many beautiful souls past and present exist in those spaces and silences. I try to – at least – half see these souls by highlighting this silence, this failure. I also thank you/them.
Follow Us
On Social Media Platforms @PUGResearch
