Student profile
When you’re nine, most parents will sign you up for a team sport, martial arts, or an instrument. My dad? He insisted that my sister and I watch BBC news each night before dinner.
He knew we wouldn’t understand everything, but hoped we’d be somewhat informed about current events. He was right, but he failed to consider one thing: children will barrage you with endless questions about everything they don’t understand. Consequently, I bombarded my dad with inquiries about what I witnessed in the news, though it was difficult for him to explain foreign policy to a nine-year-old. Through watching BBC as a child, I vividly remember learning about the Arab Spring, a series of pro-democracy uprisings in the Middle East. Seeing swarms of people crowding streets holding up banners and hearing reporters with British accents giving updates on the state of the protests only spawned more questions my dad couldn't answer.
The opportunity to answer these questions for myself came in the form of a third-grade research project, where we presented on an important social issue. I chose to discuss the uprisings in Libya against Muammar Gaddafi. Gathering most of my information from a TIME magazine article given by my dad (who understandably declined to be my source for the project), I presented to my classmates. After reciting various statistics, I concluded my speech by saying, “There are protests going on in Libya. It’s not fair for people to suffer when they didn’t do anything bad. Treat others how you want to be treated, and the world will be a better place.”
I went back to my desk, beaming proudly. In my mind, I had singlehandedly found the solution to social unrest.
My interest in the Arab Spring stayed dormant for a while after this, but when a debate topic on democracy promotion in the Middle East came in 2016, I jumped at the chance to delve back into the material. This time, though, my perspective on the matter changed entirely. In preparing for debate tournaments, I realized that the situations at hand were far more complex than I’d imagined. Every time I found an answer, there was always another possible answer, another perspective to consider. No longer was I the child who believed kindness would bring about democracy; I was the debater who realized the world wasn’t black or white, that numerous factors intertwined to produce social issues, and that the answer wasn’t always as clear as we would like it to be.
As I’ve matured, I’ve realized social problems require complex, multifaceted solutions that cannot be found with a single question. Thus, my questions have evolved accordingly. I now know that a single question can spawn multiple responses or even more questions–many of which may not have a clear answer. Though I previously sought clarity and simplicity, I now thrive in nebulous situations, because it means I can delve deep into the convoluted nature of the issue and devise multiple answers with my research. In asking questions, I still channel my childhood curiosity. But in realizing my questions often have ambiguous answers, I channel my current understanding about the world: I can leave my questions open-ended, but still contribute to conversations about social change by recognizing the intricacies of each issue.
On November 8th, 2016, I went to sleep anxiously, waiting to see who would win the presidential election. The next morning, I woke up to find that Donald Trump had won the election. As someone who is politically liberal, I wasn’t too happy about the outcome of the election, but more than being upset, I was confused. Didn’t everyone–pollsters, pundits, reporters–say that it would be a landslide for Hillary Clinton?
Later on, I was even more surprised when I learned that far-right leaders were being elected across the world, in countries like the Philippines, the UK, Brazil, Hungary and many more. It seemed that there was a deeper, more complicated issue that led some people to vehemently support far-right leaders, whilst others shunned them entirely. I have since learned that political polarization across the world is rising, testing the guardrails of democracy. In a system built upon embracing differences of opinion, these differences were so profound that politics was becoming less about promoting the common good and more about tribalism.
As a debater myself, I value the importance of healthy discussion within a democracy. When I debate, I come into each topic with my own predispositions, but upon thorough discussion on each topic, I’m able to formulate an informed opinion. As I researched various issues, it was clear to me that it would be impossible to take action on them whilst there was constant political deadlock or polarization. Drawing on my own debate training, I realized that deliberation was a means of reaching consensus (or at least coming closer to a consensus) on political issues, and I began to investigate ways that it could be implemented into political systems. Deliberative democracy, a system wherein political decisions are made after fair and reasonable debate amongst citizens, looked to be a promising solution.
Implementing deliberative democracy could benefit democracies across the world greatly. Deliberative democracy does not have one specific format; it has been and can be implemented in multiple different ways. Examples include implementation on a local scale, such as through village-level deliberations that helped mobilize civic agency among the poor in South Indian gram sabhas, on a state scale such as the Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership (WRTP) that brought together labor, business, and government to help workers assemble jobs in volatile economic times, and on a national scale, such as in Brazil’s National Public Policy Conferences – widely regarded as one of the largest nationally successful exercises in public deliberation. Similar deliberative processes have proved successful in divided societies such as South Africa, Bosnia, and Northern Ireland.
The implementation of deliberative democracy is something that both governments and civil society can work towards. The United Nations Electoral Assistance Division (UNEAD) can involve in deliberative democracy promotion as part of its electoral assistance efforts. Similarly, governments (at all levels) interested in mitigating political polarization can engage in the creation of councils, citizen-government partnerships, and deliberation efforts to engage voters directly. Fundamentally, deliberative democracy is about enlisting everyday citizens in working towards the solutions for problems that affect their daily lives–democracy should not be marred by political polarization and tribalism; it needs to directly engage people in decision-making processes and encourage interaction with opposing perspectives.