E-democracy as Ideological Basis of Public Administration Digitalization: Contradictions

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The electronic form of democracy carries the potential to resolve the crisis of the systems of the modern democratic structure, but recently its concept has been increasingly criticized. In this regard, researchers are interested in identifying the causes of this trend. The author suggests that the essence of the problem of e-democracy is in its internal contradictions: a) the convergence of the concept with other theories of democracy; b) ethical issues of the ICT exploitation within the political sphere. The former includes the combination in a single construction of fundamental features of both direct, deliberative and representative democracy in a single construction; substitution of the principles of direct democracy by the principles of plebiscite democracy; multidirectional aspirations expressed in involvement with the simultaneously existing internal apathy to the political sphere. Ethical contradictions: maximizing transparency with high manipulability; independence of decisions with controversial anonymity; reducing bureaucratic procedures as fraud acts increase; reduced number of absentists with persisting distrust of the system. Also, the methods of e-democracy within one society can create premises for both digital authoritarization and the strengthening of the role of civil society.

About the authors

Evgeniia A. Solina

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Author for correspondence.
Email: 1032216177@rudn.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2171-6230

MSc of the Department of Comparative Politics

6 Miklukho-Maklaya str., Moscow, Russian Federation, 117198

References

  1. Macintosh A. Characterizing E-Participation in Policy-Making. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 5–8 Jan. 2004. Big Island, Hawaii; 2004;1–10.
  2. Johnson D., Post D. Law and Borders — The Rise of Law in Cyberspace. First Monday: Peerreviewed Journal on the Internet. 1996; 1.1. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v1i1.468
  3. Berg S., Hofman J. Digital Democracy. Internet Policy Review. 2021;10(4):2–23.
  4. Froomkin M. Democracy Online: The Prospects for Political Renewal Through the Internet. Cambridge, MA, USA: In Peter M. Shane (Ed.); 2004; 300.
  5. Klimova M.I. Rol’ sovremennyh jelektronnyh tehnologij v ukreplenii predstavitel’noj demokratii [The Role of Modern Electronic Technology in Strengthening Representative Democracy]. Vestnik Volgogradskoj akademii MVD Rossii. 2016;3(38):13–16 (In Russ.).
  6. Bessette J. Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government. How Democratic Is the Constitution? 1980;102–116.
  7. Habermas J. Vovlecheniye drugogo. Ocherki politicheskoy teorii [Involvement of Another. Essays on Political Theory]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka; 2001. 417 p. (In Russ.).
  8. Samarin Ya.V. Demokratija v uslovijah setevogo obshhestva: problemy i perspektivy [The Democracy in a Network Society: Problems and Prospects of Development]. Political Expertise: POLITEX. 2020;16(2):251–262 (In Russ.).
  9. Keane Jh. Demokratiya i dekadans media [Democracy and Media Decadence]. Moscow: HSE Publishing House; 2015. 312 p. (In Russ.).
  10. Yudin G.B. Quality of Youth Employment in Russia: Analysis of job Satisfaction Estimates. A Book Review on “The Pulse of Democracy: The Public Opinion Poll and How It Works” by G. Gallup, S.F. Rae. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. 2018;3:344–354 (In Russ.).
  11. Yudin G.B. Rossija kak plebiscitarnaja demokratija [Russia as a Plebiscitary Democracy]. Russian Sociological Review. 2021;20(2):9–47 (In Russ.).
  12. Zotov V.V., Zakharov V.M., Sapryka V.A. Cifrovizacija publichnogo upravlenija: jelektronnaja demokratija vs jelektronnoe pravitel’stvo [Digitalization of Public Administration: E-democracy vs E-government]. NOMOTHETIKA: Philosophy. Sociology. Law. 2021;46(2):250–262 (In Russ.).
  13. Tkacheva K.A., Shepeleva O.S. Analiticheskiy doklad dlya Tsentra podgotovki rukovoditeley I komand tsifrovoy transformatsii: “Etika I tsifra: eticheskiye problemy tsifrovykh tekhnologiy [Ethics and Digital: Ethical Issues of Digital Technologies. Analytical Report for The Education Center for Digital Transformation Teams and CDTOs (RANEPA)]. URL: https://ethics.cdto. center/. Accessed: 04.04.2022 (In Russ.).
  14. Alekseev R.A., Abramov A.V. Problemy i perspektivy primenenija jelektronnogo golosovanija i tehnologii izbiratel’nogo blokchejna v Rossii i za rubezhom [Problems and Prospects of Using Electronic Voting and Blockchain Technology in Elections in Russia and Abroad]. Citizen. Elections. Power. 2020;1(15):9–21 (In Russ.).
  15. Vlasova O.Yu. Cifrovoj avtoritarizm i jelektronnaja demokratija: soderzhanie i granicy [Digitalized Authoritarianism and E-democracy: Content and Limitations of Concepts]. Studia Humanitatis. 2020; 3 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24411/2308-8079-2020-00012
  16. Boulianne S. Revolution in the Making? Social Media Effects Across the Globe. Information, Communication & Society. 2019;22(1):39–54.
  17. Vlasov Yu.A. Elektronnyi avtoritarism. Institut e-uchastiya v nedemocraticheskikh stranah [Electronic Authoritarianism. Institute of E-participation in Non-democratic Countries]. Politeia. 2016;4:36–55 (In Russ.).

Copyright (c) 2022 Solina E.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies