AKIŞKAN DEMOKRASİ VE LIQUIDFEEDBACK YAZILIMI

Yıl 2024, , 534 - 558, 31.05.2024

İhsan Konak

https://doi.org/10.53092/duiibfd.1403105

Öz

Demokrasi, sürekli yenilenen ve yinelenen bir kavram olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Kavrama yüklenen değer ve anlam sürekli değişmektedir. Dönemin ihtiyaçları kavramın önüne getirilen sıfatlarla karşılanmaya çalışılmaktadır. Değişen ihtiyaçlar ve koşullar farklı sıfatları gerekli kılmaktadır. Günümüzde bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin gelişmesi ve yaygınlaşmasıyla ortaya çıkan fırsatların siyasal katılımı nasıl arttırabileceği ve demokratik süreçlere nasıl dâhil edilebileceği soruları soruluyor. Demokrasinin temsili modeline ilişkin şikâyetlerin ve memnuniyetsizliklerin arttığı bu dönemde demokrasi kavramına farklı açılımlar ve yaklaşımlar getirilmektedir. Akışkan demokrasi modeli bunlardan bir tanesidir. Doğrudan demokratik katılımı esnek bir temsil modeliyle birleştiren akışkan demokrasi, kökeni eskilere dayandırılabilecek yeni bir kavramdır. Bu çalışmada demokrasi akışkan tabiriyle (sıfatıyla) kavrama yüklenen anlamı bağlamında ele alınacaktır. Akışkan demokrasinin kavramsal geçmişini aydınlatmak amacıyla ilgili yabancı literatür taranacak ve kavramın fikri kökenlerine değinilecektir. Ardından akışkan modele uygulama alanı sağlayan LiquidFeedback yazılımı ortaya konulacak ve akışkan demokrasiye ve LiquidFeedback’e yöneltilen eleştiriler değerlendirilecektir. Bu çalışmanın neticesinde sınırlılıklarına karşın dinamik yapısıyla akışkan demokrasinin üzerine düşünülmesi ve geliştirilmesi gereken bir model olduğu ve mevcut temsili demokratik sistemlerin yerini al(a)masada bireyler ve yönetim mekanizmaları arasında yeni bir iletişim kanalı işlevi görebileceği tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Demokrasi, Akışkan Demokrasi, LiquidFeedback Yazılımı.

LIQUID DEMOCRACY AND LIQUIDFEEDBACK SOFTWARE

Öz

Democracy is a concept that is constantly renewed and repeated. The value and meaning attributed to the concept is constantly changing. The needs of the period are tried to be met with the adjectives brought before the concept. Changing needs and conditions necessitate different adjectives. Today, questions are being asked about how the opportunities created by the development and widespread use of information and communication technologies can increase political participation and how they can be incorporated into democratic processes. In this period of increasing complaints and dissatisfaction with the representative model of democracy, different perspectives and approaches to the concept of democracy are being introduced. The fluid democracy model is one of them. Liquid democracy, which combines direct democratic participation with a flexible representation model, is a new concept that can be traced back to ancient times. In this study, democracy is examined with its liquid structure. In order to illuminate the conceptual background of liquid democracy, the relevant literature is reviewed and the intellectual origins of the concept are revealed. Then, LiquidFeedback software, which provides an application area for the liquid model, is presented and the criticisms against liquid democracy and LiquidFeedback are evaluated. As a result of this study, it is determined that despite its limitations, liquid democracy with its dynamic structure is a model that needs to be thought about and developed and that it can serve as a new communication channel between individuals and governance mechanisms, even if it cannot replace the current representative democratic system.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Democracy, Liquid Democracy, LiquidFeedback Software

Kaynakça

• Akbulak, Y. (2023). Kurumsal yönetimde oy hakkı: Tarihi ve politik ekonomi. https://legal.com.tr/blog/genel/kurumsal-yonetimde-oy-hakki-tarihi-ve-politik-ekonomi/
• Bayra, E. (2022). Liberal demokrasinin meşruiyet krizine bir çözüm önerisi olarak akışkan demokrasi: Değeri ve ulusal ölçekte uygulanabilirliği. Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2), 659–690. https://doi.org/10.56701/shd.1197279
• Behrens, J. (2017). The origins of liquid democaracy. The Liquid Democracy Journal, 5, 7–17. https://liquid-democracy-journal.org/issue/5/The_Liquid_Democracy_Journal-Issue005-02-The_Origins_of_Liquid_Democracy.html
• Behrens, J., & Deseriis, M. (2015). Liquid democracy, its challenges and its forebears | openDemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/liquid-de/
• Behrens, J., Kistner, A., Nitsche, A., & Swierczek, B. (2014). The principles of liquidFeedback. Interaktive Demokratie e. V., Berlin, Germany.
• Blum, C., & Zuber, C. I. (2016). Liquid democracy: potentials, problems, and perspectives. Journal of Political Philosophy, 24(2), 162–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopp.12065
• Dege, M. (2016). Liquid democracy and other fixes to the problem of democracy. İçinde M. Denecke, A. Ganzert, I. Otto, & R. Stock (Eds.), ReClaiming Participation (ss. 157–174). Media Studies.
• Deseriis, M. (2022). Is liquid democracy compatible with representative democracy insights from the experience of the Pirate Party Germany. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 15(2), 466–481. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v15i2p466
• Dodgson, C. L. (1884). The principles of parliamentary representation. Harrison and Sons.
• Donoso, J. W. (2003). Liquid Democracy - Pound Python Wiki. http://web.archive.org/web/20030801115328/http://twistedmatrix.com/users/jh.twistd/python/moin.cgi/LiquidDemocracy
• Ford, B. (2002). Delegative democracy. https://bford.info/deleg/deleg.pdf
• Hainisch, R., & Paulin, A. (2016). Civicracy: Establishing a competent and responsible council of representatives based on liquid democracy. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government, CeDEM 2016, 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1109/CeDEM.2016.27
• Huntington, S. (1991). Democracy's third wave. Journal of Democracy, 2(2), 12-34.
• Johnson, S. (2012). Future perfect: The case for progress in a networked age. Riverhead Books.
• Kashyap, S., & Jeyasekar, A. (2020). Binary voting with delegable proxy: An analysis of liquid democracy. 2020 2nd Conference on Blockchain Research & Applications for Innovative Networks and Services (BRAINS), 202–203. https://doi.org/10.1109/BRAINS49436.2020.9223308
• Kurtuluş, Ö. (2018). Bir Yazılım Olarak Demokrasi. https://medium.com/türkiye/bir-yazılım-olarak-demokrasi-bdaea8db5c1a
• Mendoza, N. (2015). Liquid separation: Three fundamental dimensions within liquidfeedback and other voting technologies. EJournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 7(2), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v7i2.408
• Miller, J. C. (1969). A program for direct and proxy voting in the legislative process. Public Choice, 7(1), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01718736
• Ramos, J. (2015). Liquid democracy and the futures of governance. İçinde J. Winter & O. Ryota (Eds.), The Future Internet: Alternative Visions (ss. 173–191). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22994-2_11
• Sala, J. F. A. (2022). The liquid proposal facing democratic challenges. EJournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 14(1), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v14i1.692
• Schwanholz, J., & Zinser, L. (2020). Exploring german liquid democracy – Online-Partizipation auf der lokalen Ebene. Zeitschrift Für Politikwissenschaft, 30(2), 299–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s41358-020-00220-9
• StreetDogg. (2011). The tale of liquid feedback. https://streetdogg.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/the-tale-of-liquid-feedback/
• StreetDogg. (2012). Senatus populusque piratus | StreetDogg. https://streetdogg.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/spqp/
• Valsangiacomo, C. (2022). Clarifying and defining the concept of liquid democracy. Swiss Political Science Review, 28(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12486