The debate, in English and Español, will especially tackle three critical venues of the democratic crossroads, the notion of citizenship as permanent constituent dimension, the intersection of epistemic violence and colonialism in political culture and the interaction of media, citizenship and deconstructive epistemological perspectives.

Speakers
Tito Marci, Sapienza University of Rome
Giovanni Ruocco, Sapienza University of Rome
Sofia José Santos, University of Coimbra (CES/FEUC)
Discussant: Silvia Rodríguez Maeso (CES)
Moderator: Cristiano Gianolla (CES)

Programme

For a “constituent” conception of citizenship
Tito Marci, Sapienza University of Rome – Department of Political Science
Abstract
The notion of citizenship, as conventionally perceived of in Western tradition, seems to loose its ability today to function as a universal and shared value. We can get a sense of this change by looking at the different political conceptions that run through the critical approach of the “Subaltern Studies” collective, and through the investigation of Balibar and Rancière. From this point of view, democratic practices based on communitarian auto-regulation can be considered as laboratories of a variety of different tools of knowledge that exist beyond the traditional boundaries imposed by the political space of sovereignty (as conventionally understood in Western culture). According to these perspectives, and also to Max Weber’s insights on the “Western city”, we have to acknowledge the notion of citizenship as dynamic and always in-the-making (let us call it “constituent”).

¿Desescencializar cansa? Consideraciones sobre la violencia epistémica y la descolonización de la cultura política
Giovanni Ruocco, Sapienza University of Rome – Department of Political Science
Abstract
Esta intervención examina el fundamento epistémico principal sobre el que la narración histórica del Occidente moderno se ha desarrollado, es decir las formas de escencialización (sujeto, nación, raza, estado, confines, soberanía, ecc.) que nuestro mundo ha estructurado legitimando su poder; a través un constante proceso de individuación/separación/inclusión/exclusión de una parte mayoritaria de la humanidad, construído sobre parejas de palabras en oposición: universal/particular, centro/perifería, alto/bajo, lleno/vacío, dentro/fuera, antes/después, civilizado/de civilizar. El objetivo, siguiendo el impulso de los estudios postocoloniales, es intentar imaginar si y de qué manera es posible trabajar a una desescencialización, o sea a la descolonización del conocimiento, del lenguaje y de las relaciones humanas; si y de qué manera es posible pensar al mundo sin estas estructuras y formas de aprender la realidad. El resultado deseado sería de pensar esta acción intelectual y política en particular como un método crítico de atención y revisión continuo de las estructuras cognitivas de la dominación de la realidad; una acción posible solo imaginando la dimensión histórica come un proceso de cambio y transformación permanentes, en el que las formas del discurso son adoptadas como provisionales y múltiples, efectivamente como nombres y no como cosas.

Lost in (hegemonic) translation: the democratic consequences of denying the existence of media ecologies
Sofia José Santos, University of Coimbra – Faculdade de Economia | Centro de Estudos Sociais
(reasearch carried on with Alexandre de Sousa Carvalho)
Abstract
Dominant literature on media and communications studies has insistently equated mediascape and high technology media as interchangeable concepts and realities instead of high technological media as part of a wider mediascape pallet and dynamic. We argue that this creates an analytical optical illusion caused by what Sousa Santos coined as the “indolent reason” (2007) which, in this case, labels dominant media as developed, highly technological, rational, modern and scientific, whereas other forms of media which do not entail high technology and which do not necessarily conform with western notions, perspectives and regulation are instead labelled as exotic, popular or alternative, among others. By so doing, existing dominant literature excludes explicitly and implicitly forms of mass communication that go beyond the media in its western liberal form and procedures and, consequently, other voices, knowledges and political dynamics. This paper intends to analyses the modern conception of media by exploring the “abyssal exclusions” (Santos, 2007) it creates and exploring the consequences it generates considering democratic participation and agency.