|David Garcia on Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:07:41 +0200 (CEST)|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|Re: <nettime> from Meatloaf to penalty Shoot Outs|
|The relationship we have between knowledge and political decision making in the context of |
complex technological societies hss been recognised as problematic since the arguments between Dewey and Lipman in the
1920s and many of their arguments about the changing nature of democracy and the nature of the public as we moved beyond
the small communities of farmers envisaged by the founding fathers are as relevant today as they ever were.
One particularly apsoste ‘entity' that our constitutions have not yet come to terms with is the enormous growth and importance of a domain
that exists outside of normal politics (until there is a problem) and that is the vast hinterland of regulatiory bodies with quasi judicial powers
sometimes called Quangos in english.
A good example is European Medicines Agency (EMA).. Which as a direct consequence of Brexit has moved from London to
Amsterdam. EMA as is a regulatory structure for decision making about our medicines and other pharmascuticle products.
The trouble is that if you look at the UK’s Brexit political declaration all it says about the EMA and other regulatory regimes is that
we will aspire to associate membership.
What the f*%K does that mean? We will *aspire* to be in an absolutely critical regulatory framework which is regulating all the medicines and
pharmaceutical products we use. We are in effect aspiring to join something that doesn’t exist. There is no such thing as associate membership.
It is not a golf club. And even today with weeks to go we just don’t know. Manufacturers don’t know.. customs officials don’t know. We are a
knowledge free zone. This time next year will we be operating under the EMA’s regulatory regime and certification processes for their products..
that is absolutely staggering and alarming.. and the same is true of food standards.
This highlights the basic misunderstanding of the UK’s position of being prepared to leave without a deal.. It is an 19th or early 20th century
idea of political sovereignty that existed before the rules and treaty based international systems we inhabit today. And highlights perfectly the
epistemic crisis we face when we misunderstand the foundations of the world we live in.
The deep trouble we are in to some extent originates from the fact that the vital work of these agencies are opaque and lack any meaningful
interface with the publics that arise when a problem arises that demands public involvement.
I see a great deal of value in emergence of Citizans assemblies operating in conjunction with referenda. This happened successfully in the
Irish abortion referendum where expert groups were deployed in these assemblies not as decision makers but as advisors or public servants.
Although this kind of democratic experiment is not fullproof we need to persevere with experimentation in this most urgent task of building
a ‘knowledge democracy’.
In my view this begins by recognising the regulatory regime as a new arm of government as important as the judiciary, the executive and the legislature
Acknowledging this status would force us to think about how we make these bodies more transparent and accountable and ultimately improving their interface
to the citizenry. B
On 23 Aug 2019, at 12:56, Michael Guggenheim <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: email@example.com # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: