Türkiye'de Demokrasiyi Yeni Bir Yurttaşlık Anlayışıyla Düşünmek: Tekno-Bilimsel Yurttaşlık

Öz

Günümüzde tartışılan önemli konulardan biri bilimsel ve teknolojik gelişmenin demokrasiye etkisidir. Genel olarak bu etkileşimin sonuçlarına ilişkin iki görüş öne çıkmaktadır. İlk görüşe göre elde edilen teknolojik imkanlarla bilginin daha geniş ve kolay biçimde paylaşımı gerçekleşmiş ve böylece eskisinden daha katılımcı bir demokrasi elde edilmiştir. İkinci görüşe göre ise teknolojiye ulaşamayan çok geniş bir kesimin varlığı ve siyasetin neredeyse tamamen bilimsel ve teknik bir faaliyet haline geldiği düşünülürse katılımcı demokrasiyi yeniden düşünmek gerekmektedir. Bu görüşü savunanlar, günümüzde ekonomi, kentleşme, çevre, halk sağlığı, enerji, endüstriyel tarım, gıda, bilim ve teknoloji gibi alanlarda kalıcı ve kapsamlı politikalar üretilememesini bilimsel fakat toplumsal desteği olmayan siyasete bağlamakta ve çözümü bilimsel ve teknik olanla toplumsal olanın dengeli etkileşiminin gerçekleştiği bir kamusal alanda ve bu alanı inşa edecek yeni bir yurttaşlık anlayışında görmektedirler. Bu anlayışı bireyin teknolojik toplumdaki hak ve sorumluluklarının genel çerçevesini çizen tekno-bilimsel yurttaşlık anlayışı şeklinde ifade etmek mümkündür. Bu çalışmada tekno-bilimsel yurttaşlık anlayışının bir teknolojik toplum haline gelen Türkiye için önemi, anlamı ve muhtemel içeriği ele alınacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yurttaşlık
• Demokrasi
• Teknolojik Toplum
• Politika
• Tekno-bilimsel Yurttaşlık

Thinking About Democracy with a New Understanding of Citizenship in Turkey: Techno-Scientific Citizenship

Öz

One of the important issues discussed today is the impact of scientific and technological progress to democracy. Generally, two views stand out on the consequences of these interactions. According to the first opinion, by technological means, wider and easier sharing of information occurred and thus democracies have become more participatory. According to the second opinion, there is a wide range of population that cannot be reached technology, and at the same time politics has become almost a purely scientific and technical activity. For this reason, rethinking democracy is necessary. Proponents of this view assert that today permanent and comprehensive political solutions cannot be found in economy, science and technology, environment, public health, energy, agribusiness, nutrition etc. According to them, the reason of this is politics that lack of social support, and the solution is a new citizen type and public sphere where the interaction between scientific-technological and social is happened. Techno-scientific citizenship is a new perspective to construct new citizen and new democratic and well-informed public sphere. In this paper, it’s examined that the importance, meaning and the possible content of techno-scientific citizenship for Turkey

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Citizenship
• Democracy
• Technological Society
• Politics
• Techno-scientific Citizenship

Kaynakça

1. Almond, Gabriel ve Sidney Verba (1989), The Civic Culture (Newbury Park: Sage Printing).
2. Andrews, Clinton J. (2006), “Practicing Technological Citizenship”, Technology and Society Magazine, 25 (26).
3. Árnason, Vilhjálmur (2012), “Scientific Citizenship in a Democratic Society”, Public Understanding of Science, 22 (8): 927–940.
4. Bäckstrand, Karin (2003), “Civic Science for Sustainability: Reframing the Role of Experts, Policy- Makers and Citizens in Environmental Governance”, Global Environmental Politics, 3 (4): 24-41.
5. Ball, Stephen J. (2013), Foucault, Power, and Education (New York: Routledge).
6. Barber, Benjamin R. (1999), “Three Scenarios for the Future of Technology and Strong Democracy”, Political Science Quarterly, 113: 573–590.
7. Barry, Andrew (2001), Political Machines Governing a Technological Society (New York: The Athlone Press).
8. Beck, Ulrich (1999), World Risk Society (Cambridge: Polity Press).

9. Benhabib, Seyla (1994), “Deliberative Rationality and Models of Democratic Legitimacy”, Constellations, 1 (1): 26–52.
10. Best, Stephen and Kellner, Douglas (1997), The Postmodern Turn (New York: The Guilford Press).
11. Budge, Ian (1996), The New Challenge of Direct Democracy (Cambridge: Polity Press).
12. Callon, Michel (1999), “The Role of Lay People in the Production and Dissemination of Scientific Knowledge”, Science, Technology and Society, 4 (1): 81–94.
13. Carens, Joseph H. (2000), Culture, Citizenship, and Community: Contextual Political Theory and Justice as Evenhandedness (New York: Oxford University Press).
14. Crowe, Alicia R. (2006), “Technology, Citizenship, and the Social Studies Classroom: Education for Democracy in a Technological Age”, International Journal of Social Education, 21 (1): 111-121.
15. Çevik, Hasan Hüseyin (2004), “Türkiye’de Kamu Yönetimi Başarısızlığına Teorik Bir Yaklaşım”, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 59 (3).
16. Dagger, Richard (1997), Civic Virtues: Rights, Citizenship, and Republican Liberalism (New York: Oxford University Press).
17. Dahl, Robert A. (2013), A Preface to Democratic Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
18. Dahl, Robert A. (1989), Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press).
19. DeGeorge, Richard T. (1985), The Nature and Limits of Authority (Westbrooke: University Press of Kansas).
20. Dewey, John (2004), The Essential Dewey: Pragmatism, Education, Democracy (Bloomington: Indiana University Press).
21. Dewey, John (2007), The School and Society (New York: Cosimo).
22. DPT (1989), Plânlama (Ankara: DPT. Yayınları No. 1).
23. Durant, John (1999), “Participatory Technology Assessment and the Democratic Model of the Public Understanding of Science”, Science and Public Policy, 26 (5): 313–19.
24. Ellul, Jacques (1964), The Technological Society (New York: Jonathan Cape Publish).
25. Ellul, Jacques (1980), The Technological System (New York: The Continuum Publishing Corporation).
26. Ellul, Jacques (1992), “Technology and Democracy”, Winner, Langdon (Der.), Democracy in a Technological Society (Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers): 35-50.
27. Estlund, David (2003), “Why Not Epistocracy?”, N. Reshotko (Der.), Desire, Identity and. Existence: Essays in Honor of T. M. Penner (Berrima NSW: Academic Printing and Publishing): 53- 69.
28. Falk, Richard (1994), “The Making of Global Citizenship”, Bart van Steenberg (Der.), The Condition of Citizenship (London: Sage):127-141.
29. Feenberg, Andrew (1995), Alternative Modernity: The Technical Turn in Philosophy and Social Theory (Berkeley: University of California Press).
30. Feenberg, Andrew (2011), Agency and Citizenship in a Technological Society, Lecture presented to the Course on Digital Citizenship, http://www.sfu.ca/~andrewf/copen5-1.pdf (23.02.2016).
31. Feldblum, Miriam (1999), Reconstructing Citizenship: The Politics of Nationality Reform and Immigration in Contemporary Frances (New York: SUNY Press).
32. Fielder, John (1992), “Autonomous Technology, Democracy and the Nimbys”, Winner, Langdon (Der.), Democracy in a Technological Society (The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers): 105-123.
33. Fiorino, Daniel J. (1990), “Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 15: 226-243. Foe.org (2013),
34. http://www.foe.co.uk/what_we_do/about_us/friends_earth_works.html (20.08.2013).
35. Frankenfeld, Philip J. (1992), “Technological Citizenship: A Normative Framework for Risk Studies”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 17 (4): 459-484.
36. Frevert, Ute (2005) “Civil Society and Citizenship in Western Democracies: Historical Developments and Recent Challenges”, Rajeev Bhargava, Helmut Reifeld (Der.), Civil Society, Public Sphere and Citizenship: Dialogues and Perceptions (California: Sage): 59-83.
37. Fuchs, Dieter (2007), “Participatory, Liberal and E-Democracy”, Zittel, Thomas ve Dieter Fuchs (Der.), Participatory Democracy and Political Participationn Can Participatory Engineering Bring Citizens Back In? (New York: Routledge): 119-144.
38. Fukuyama, Francis (1992), The End of History and The Last Man (New York: The Free Press).
39. Galston, William. A. (1999) “(How) Does the Internet Affect Community?”, Kamarck, E.C. ve J.S. Nye, Jr. (Der.), Democracy.Com. Governance in a Networked World (Hollis, NH.: Hollis Publishing): 45-61.
40. Grossman, Lawrence K. (1995), The Electronic Republic: Reshaping Democracy in the Information Age (Portland: Viking).
41. Habermas, Jurgen (1989), Scientization of Politics/Public Opinion: Toward a Rational Society (Boston: Polity Press) (Çev. Jeremy J. Shapiro).
42. Habermas, Jurgen (1996), Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy (Cambridge: MIT Press) (Çev. William Rehg).
43. Habermas, Jürgen (2001), İdeoloji Olarak Teknik ve Bilim (İstanbul: YKY) (Çev. Mustafa Tüzel).
44. Haldane, John B.S (2004), Daedalus or Science and The Future (Montana: Kessinger Publishing).
45. Harrington, Jan L. (2011), Technology and Society (London: Jones & Bartlett Publishers).
46. Haskell, Thomas L. (1984), The Authority of Experts: Studies in History and Theory (Bloomington: Indiana University Press).
47. Held, David (2013), Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance (Cambridge: Polity Press).
48. Hosking, Geoffrey (2005), Epochs of European Civilization: Antiquity to Renaissance. Lecture 3: Ancient Greece (UK: The Modern Scholar via Recorded Books).
49. Howard, Philip N. (2010), The Digital Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy:Information Technology and Political Islam (New York: Oxford University Press).
50. Huntington, Samuel P. (1991), The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (USA: University of Oklahoma Press).
51. Inoguchi, T., Edward Newman ve J. Keane (1998), “Introduction: The Changing Nature of Democracy”, Inoguchi, T., Edward Newman ve J. Keane (Der.), The Changing Nature of Democracy (New York: United Nations University Press): 1-21.
52. Irwin, Alan (2001), “Constructing the Scientific Citizen: Science and Democracy in the Bioscience”, Public Understanding of Science, 10 (1): 1-18.
53. Jonas, Hans (1984), The Imperative of Responsibility (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
54. Juan J. Linz ve Alfred Stepan (1998), “Toward Consolidated Democracies”, Inoguchi, T., Edward Newman ve J. Keane (Der.), The Changing Nature of Democracy (New York: United Nations University Press): 48- 69.
55. Kauppi, Niilo (2005), Democracy, Social Resources and Political Power in the European Union (Manchester: Manchester University Press).
56. Kavruk, Hikmet (2009), Türk Kamu Yönetiminde Bağımsız İdari Otoriteler ve Ajanslar, http://iibfdergisi.ksu.edu.tr/Imagesimages/files/10(2).PDF. (20.08.2015).
57. Kymlicka, Will (1995), Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
58. Kymlicka, Will (2004), Çağdaş Siyaset Felsefesine Giriş (İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları) (Çev. Ebru Kılıç).
59. Leary, Virginia (2000), Citizenship. Human Rights, and Diversity, Cairns, Alan C., John C. Courtney, Peter MacKinnon, Hans J. Michelmann, David E. Smith (Der.), Citizenship, Diversity, and Pluralism: Canadian and Comparative Perspectives (Canada: McGill- Queen's Press): 247–264.
60. Lelieveldt, Herman ve Sebastiaan Princen (2011), The Politics of the European Union (New York: Cambridge University Press).
61. Lowi, Theodore J. (2009), The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States (New York: W. W. Norton & Company Incorporated).
62. Majone, Giandomenico (1996), Regulating Europe (London: Routledge).
63. Manin, Bernard (1987), “On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation”, Political Theory, 15 (3): 338– 368.
64. Manville, Brook Philip (2014), The Origins of Citizenship in Ancient Athens (New Jersey: Princeton University Press).
65. Margolis, Michael ve David Resnick, (2000), Politics as Usual: The Cyberspace “Revolution” (London: Sage Publications).
66. Marsh, Ian (1998), “Political Representation and Economic Competitiveness: Is a New Democratic Sythesis Conceivable?”, Inoguchi, T., Edward Newman ve J. Keane (Der.), The Changing Nature of Democracy (New York: United Nations University Press): 136-156.
67. Mumford, Lewis (1964), “Auhoritarian and Democratic Technics,” Technology and Culture, (5): 1-8.
68. Mumford, Lewis (2010), Technics and Civilization (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
69. Nardi, A. Bonnie ve Vicki L. O’day (1999), Information Ecologies: Using Technology with Heart (Cambridge: MIT Press).
70. Oates, Sarah (2013), Revolution Stalled: The Political Limits of the Internet in the Post-Soviet Sphere (New York: Oxford University Press).
71. Ober, Josiah (2001), Political Dissent in Democratic Athens (New Jersey: Princeton University Press).
72. Offe, Claus (1997), Varieties of Transition: The East European and East German Experience (Cambridge: MIT Press).
73. Parekh, Bhikhu (2005), “Principles of a Global Ethic”, Eade, J. ve D. O'Byrne (Der.), Global Ethics And Civil Society (Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing): 15-33.
74. Pateman, Carole (2003), “Participation and Democratic Theory”, Dahl, Robert A., Ian Shapiro ve José Antônio Cheibub (Der.), The Democracy Sourcebook (Cambridge: MIT Press): 40- 48.
75. Pateman, Carole (2012), “Participatory Democracy Revisited”, Perspectives on Politics, 10 (1): 7- 19.
76. Perinçek, Doğu (1965), “Teknokrasi Meselesine Genel Bir Bakış”, Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 66 (22-23): 1-4.
77. Pierson, Robert (1994), “The Epistemic Authority of Expertise”, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, (1): 398-405.
78. Poster, Mark (1995), The Second Media Age (Cambridge: Polity Press).
79. Rawls, John (1993), Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press).
80. Riesenberg, Peter (1992), Citizenship in the Western Tradition: Plato to Rousseau (USA: The University of North Carolina Press).
81. Sakalsız, Ömer (1988), “Teknokrattan Yurttaş Mühendise”, Elektrik Mühendisliği, 33 (355): 773.
82. Sartori, Giovanni (1996), Demokrasi Teorisine Geri Dönüş (Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları) (Çev. Tunçer Karamustafaoğlu ve Mehmet Turhan).
83. Schmidt, Lawrence ve Scott Marratto (2008), The End of Ethics in a Technological Society (Canada: McGill-Queen's Press).
84. Shirky, Clay (2009), Here Comes Everybody: How Change Happens When People Come Together (UK: Penguin).
85. Schwarzmantel, John J. (2003), Citizenship and Identity: Towards a New Republic (NewYork: Routledge).
86. Sclove, Richard (1995), Democracy and Technology (New York: Guilford Press).
87. Taylor, David (1994), “Citizenship and Social Power”, Turner, Bryan ve Peter Hamilton (Der.), Citizenship: Critical Concepts (Canada: Routledge): 136-147.
88. Tester, Keith (1993), The Life and Times of Post-Modernity (New York: Routledge).
89. Turner, Stephen (2003), Liberal Democracy 3.0: Civil Society in an Age of Experts (London: Sage Publication).
90. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (2012),TÜİK Haber Bülteni Sayı: 10880 (Ankara).
91. Türkiye Sanayici ve İşadamları Derneği (2002), Bağımsız Düzenleyici Kurumlar ve Türkiye Uygulaması (Ankara: TÜSİAD-T/2002–12/349).
92. Uçkan, Özgür (2010), “Politika Yapım Süreci ve Yönetişim: Türkiye’de Bilgi Toplumu ve Bilgi Ekonomisi Politikalarının Üretiminde Yönetişim Fobisi”, Çukurçayır, M. Akif, H.Tuğba Uğuz Eroğlu ve Hülya Eşki (Der.), Yönetişim Kuram, Boyutlar, Uygulama (Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi): 103-140.
93. Valkenburg, Govert (2012), “Sustainable Technological Citizenship”, European Journal of Social Theory, (15): 471-487.
94. Walzer, Michael (1983), Spheres of Justice: In Defense of Pluralism and Equality (New York: Basic Books). Weforum (2013), (20.08.2015).
95. White, Cameron ve Roger Openshaw (2005), Democracy at the Crossroads: International Perspectives on Critical Global Citizenship Education (Oxford: Lexington Books).
96. Wilhelm, Anthony G. (2000), Democracy in the Digital Age (New York: Routledge).
97. Williams, Bruce A. ve Michael X. Delli Carpini (2009), “The Eroding Boundaries Between News and Entertainment”, Wilkins, Lee ve Clifford G. Christians (Der.), The Handbook of Mass Media Ethics (New York: Routledge): 177-189.
98. Winner, Langdon (1986), The Whale and The Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology (Chicago: Chicago Press).
99. Ziman, John (1998), “Why Must Scientists Become More Ethically Sensitive than They Used to Be?”, Science, 282 (5395): 1813–1814.