Kui lugeja on siinse uudistevoo süsteemne jälgija, siis siinviidatu ei peaks olema üllatuseks. Aga ma ei too ühtegi viidet varasematele postitustele, vaid jätan kogu fookuse siinsele artiklile. Niisiis küsimus sellest, kuidas võiks mõelda inimeste ja võimu suhetest. Ja veel täpsemalt, kes (mis) on inimesed (töötajad jms) võimusuhetes. Siiski, see lugu leidis oma koha peamiselt põhjusel, et õhutab kriitilise mõtlemise ja teooria radadele, mitte niivõrd võimuteoreetilistele arendustele.
Demokraatia erinevates tähendusvarjundites ja kontseptsioonides on inimesed ikka kesksel kohal olnud. Siinse artikli küsimuseasetus on selles, kes on või kuidas võiks mõelda inimestest võimu allikana. (PS! Lugemisel võiks mõelda nii riigile kui organisatsioonile, sest need mõttemängud aitaksid kaasa mõistmisele ja avaksid uusi küsimusi)

Kontekstiks:

Two influential accounts of constituent power famously do consider this question in more detail. […] The first, widely credited with popularising the distinction between constituent power and constituted power, is that given by Emmanuel Siey`es in his 1789 What Is the Third Estate? […] The second conceptualisation of constituent power which considers the question of who the people is, is that offered by Carl Schmitt in his 1928 Constitutional Theory.

Ambitsioon:

I then proceed to outline an alternative view of constituent power. The operative concept in my account is collective responsibility, which I interpret as a response being called for. I draw on Jacques Derrida’s conception of the undecidability of just decisions to argue that the ultimate absence of determinate ground implies that the only way for a demos to exist is for it to exist in its activity.

Derrida interpretatsioon:

Derrida argues that any just decision must go through the undecidable, for if a decision were to be based on decidable (i.e. fully determinate) ground, it is not a decision but a calculation. Something is undecidable if the grounds for answering without residue, such that no further justificatory questions could arise, are absent.

Derrida küsimus ja vastus õiglasest-asjakohasest otsustusest:

when a decision can be said to be just […] Derrida’s answer seems simple yet confusing: it must be a decision.

Viimane vihje lugemisisu suurendamiseks:

The point is that constituent power can only turn into constituent authority, and therefore represent a successful attempt at legitimisation, if it goes through the process of legitimisation and keeps that process alive.

Kokkuvõtteks: seda teksti oleks hea lugeda rahulikult, kiirustamata ja midagi vahelejätmata.

van Asseldonk, M. (2021). Who, the people? Rethinking constituent power as praxis. Philosophy & Social Criticism.