Toward the commoning of governance

Conventional political thought and practice continue to be stifled by a dilemma of choosing between the ideal imaginaries of State and/or Market solutions. Widely presupposed as the only valid possibilities in both theory and practice, this stale dilemma covers up a real multitude of actually existing alternative approaches to governance practiced in civil society. State/Market approaches are identical in the way that they construct a ‘spectator’ role for communities, who are left to choose between their preferred set of rules and norms developed elsewhere. The concept of commoning governance offers an opportunity to break free of this stalemate. It creates a new role for citizens and their communities as ‘sparring partners’; who although they operate within the limits of current State/Market institutions, create new norms and rules against and beyond them. In the paper, we first expand on our understanding of commoning governance: re-designing governance arrangements to serve the common good. That is here understood in terms of (radical) democracy, solidarity and sustainable ecological relationships. Second, we illustrate how commoning efforts on the ground contribute to the reclaiming of the democratic imaginary as a political arena by zooming in to a case study of the three cities involved in civic-led network of German Food Policy Councils. Finally, we reflect on the empirical barriers that communities of commoning endure, and call on policymakers, planners and scholars to interrogate their own normative understandings of citizenship and democracy, and begin to recognize theoretical and latent possibilities by enabling commoning with new or re-designed institutions of governance.

DECONSTRUCTING THE COLONIALITY OF THE WEST-CENTRIC DEMOCRATIC IMAGINARY

Many CDA scholars present the idea of “democracy” as a normative yardstick against which injustices of all kinds and in any type of society can be measured; many also assume there is an inherent opposition between democratization with its advances toward social justice and neoliberal marketization with its array of negative consequences. Analyzing the discourse of democratization in the context of contemporary Ukraine, this paper argues that the issue is more complicated. Neoliberal marketization can go hand-in-hand with the discourse of universal democratization, which only contributes therefore to the perpetuation of neocolonial injustice as manifested in ongoing neoliberal projects.

Indignant and Precarious Youth

Chapter 9, “Indignant and Precarious Youth,” explores Spain’s indignant “Youth Without Future” and how they are facing the post-crisis scenario by demanding the right to a dignified life and constituting a precarious political subject, “youth,” that greatly inspired the origins and development of the 15-M movement. From hunger strikers in the Puerta del Sol, to Juventud Sin Futuro (Youth Without Future, or JSF), to the Oficina Precaria (Precarious Office), these young activists creatively and passionately connect their lived experience directly with core austerity issues (education, housing, healthcare, precarious un/employment, and emigration), identifying a matrix of identifying those who are responsible for and benefit from austerity politics (bankers, etc.) against whom they direct their indignation. In so doing, they continually frame their activism in relation to the deficiencies of really existing democracy and contribute to the development of a new democratic imaginary, drawing on core elements of 15-M political culture and collective identity.

A Time for Hope in Dark Times

This article explores the political importance of embracing a notion of hope in a time of growing authoritarianism across the globe. It defines hope as the ability to both mobilize what might be called a democratic imaginary and a notion of hope rooted in a realistic assessment of what it means to engage in forms of struggle for economic and social justice, both pedagogically and politically. We argue that hope is the bases for agency and that without hope, there is no agency of possibility of civic engagement and struggle.

Conclusion

This concluding chapter reflects on how the theoretical and methodological threads running through book tie together to develop an imaginative criminology of space. It build on the authors’ previous work towards a radical democratic imaginary and, drawing on Hudson (2006), incorporates a discussion of transformative justice. The conclusion argues that an imaginative approach is necessary in order to comprehend the complexity of issues of transgression and space, and to ensure the continued reinvigoration of criminology as a discipline.