The EU does not suffer from a lack of ambition on digital policy. From ‘strategic autonomy’ to ‘technological sovereignty’, European leaders like to portray the EU as a geopolitical heavyweight on ...digital. In practice, however, the European digital single market continues to be exposed to many of the fundamental challenges that have plagued it since its inception. The ongoing European effort to draft the global rulebook on tech regulation remains a laudable endeavour, but this has contributed little to boosting the competitiveness of the European digital sector. Many European tech companies still struggle to offer their services outside of national borders and expand their reach to a genuinely European customer base. The EU must tackle inconsistent regulations, close infrastructure gaps, promote investment, and facilitate secure, yet speedy data flows. These issues are integral to helping to turn the digital single market into a tech hub for global business. This article puts forward a number of policy proposals for upgrading the European digital agenda as one of the main conduits for ensuring European economic growth and improved global standing.
La hipótesis que se presenta es que la relación entre gobierno y pueblo, en Francisco Suárez (1548–1617), se establece a través de una representación por responsabilidad de derecho limitado. Es ...decir, el granadino establece al gobierno como aquel que habla y actúa por su pueblo, en todo, sino para alcanzar un fin específico estipulado con anterioridad a su regla, a saber: el bien común. Si el gobierno sobrepasa los límites establecidos inicialmente, por la soberanía del pueblo, es responsable y castigado por el pueblo mismo, en cuyo caso el tiranicidio es menos que el daño a la vida bajo un régimen tiránico.
L’évolution législative récente relative à la fin de vie, qui tend à substituer la procédure à la relation, interroge. Aujourd’hui, chaque question semble devoir être obstinément transformée en ...problème à résoudre, et donc à résoudre techniquement. Nous évoluons dans un contexte marqué par la primauté de la technique et du droit sur le sens et sur le rapport humain. Ce paradigme, confronté à nos limites, accentue la double angoisse de la fin de vie : la peur de souffrir et la peur de mourir. Il favorise également une compréhension nominaliste de la liberté : l’autonomie n’est plus comprise comme un accomplissement, mais comme un refus, une émancipation du réel. La loi du 2 février 2016 rend compte de ce déplacement, elle qui nous invite à placer notre confiance non plus dans la personne mais « dans le dispositif ». Ainsi des directives anticipées, dont la finalité est de faire droit à l’autonomie, réduite à la maîtrise, au contrôle des conditions du mourir. Le dispositif, qui fera dépendre l’autonomie d’une exigence de conformité à la technique, devient le symptôme d’une profonde désubjectivation. La médicalisation de la mort obère la question de la mort. Et cette désymbolisation de la mort va de pair avec son individualisation, le sujet étant laissé de plus en plus seul. Il conviendrait de rendre à la parole et au sens leur souveraineté. Car les enjeux de la fin de vie sont des enjeux de sens — non de moyens.
The recent French legislative evolution concerning the end of life, which tends to substitute the procedure for the relationship, raises questions. Today, every question seems to have to be obstinately transformed into a problem to be evolving in a context marked by the primacy of technique and law over meaning and human relationships. This paradigm, when confronted with our limitations, accentuates the double anguish of the end of life: fear of suffering and fear of dying. It also favors a nominalist understanding of freedom: autonomy is no longer understood as an achievement but as a refusal, an emancipation from reality. The French law of February 2, 2016, reflects this shift, inviting us to place our trust not in the person but “in the device”. Thus, the advance directives, whose purpose is to give the right to autonomy, are reduced to mastery, the control of the conditions of dying. The device, which makes autonomy depend on a requirement of conformity to technique, becomes the symptom of a profound de-subjectification. The medicalization of death fetters the question of death. And this desymbolization of death goes hand in hand with its individualization, the subject being left more and more alone. It would be advisable to give back to speech and the meaning of their sovereignty. The issues at stake at the end of life are issues of meaning —not of means.
Considerando a la praxis como eje del cuestionamiento a los supuestos y prácticas de la Modernidad los indicadores aquà presentados son resultado de un proceso dialógico de saberes y haceres que ...visibilizan los aportes teórico-polÃticos entrañados en la cotidianidad territorial para el diseño de modelos civilizatorios que superen los presupuestos modernos y la separación humano-naturaleza. Son indicadores culturales porque dan cuenta de las subjetividades que dan sentido a la acción a favor de la soberanÃa alimentaria, son pistas que dan otras formas de entender y habitar que subyacen en los imaginarios y luchas campesinas, indÃgenas y afrodescendientes del Cauca, por la vida, en defensa de los territorios ancestrales y por la Madre Tierra en aporte a la construcción de la figura de otro mundo posible.
In the German political debate, the principle of subsidiarity plays an important role in the acceptance of the European multilevel system. In such a system, there is a collision of historically ...diverging, systematically inconsistent and qualitatively different needs. This combination demands an "active subsidiarity" and a "subsidiarity routine" in order to dynamically shape the heterogeneous EU. This way, we may find a balance between the needs of the citizens (acceptancy), the EU institutions (efficiency) as well as of the different levels of decision making and acting (reason for being). Above all, subsidiarity must start at home, it can be strengthened in the EU if it does not erode in the member states. This challenge has been regularly neglected til now. JEL Classification: H77, K40, N44 Der Subsidiaritatsgedanke sollte von den politischen Entscheidungstragenden sowie von im europaischen Mehrebenensystem mitwirkenden Akteur:innen beachtet werden. Dazu gehort die Beachtung bei der legislativen Planung, dass die Einhaltung des Subsidiaritatsprinzips bedingungslose Voraussetzung ist. Zudem sollten alle an der europapolitischen Willensbildung Beteiligten fur die Wahrung des Subsidiaritatsprinzips eintreten, wenn hieran Zweifel bestehen. Die Debatte um Anspruch und Wirklichkeit des europaischen Subsidiaritatsgedankens begleitet uns seit vielen Jahren, ist aber aktueller denn je.
Abstract
Rahel Süß (2022), “The right to disidentification: Sovereignty in digital democracies,”
Constellations
, 1–17,
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467‐8675.12626
. The above article from
Constellations
..., published online on May 5, 2022 in Wiley Online Library (onlinelibrary.wiley.com), has been retracted by agreement between the author, Rahel Süß, the journal Editors in Chief, Simone Chambers, Cristina Lafont, and Hubertus Buchstein, and John Wiley and Sons Ltd. The retraction has been agreed following concerns regarding insufficiently attributed overlap in this paper with the publications listed below.
PDF
