Democracy and Social Contracts in Times of the Anthropocene Concepts, Challenges, Practices

The Section aims to explore the links across three ongoing debates in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: the one on the crisis of liberal democracy and the crisis of social contracts, and the one on the Anthropocene. This seeks to connect three fields and strands of debate that have been rather disconnected so far. The objective is to explore the (future) common ground and to turn this discussion into a resource for innovative debates, joining theoretical, conceptual and empirical perspectives. Liberal democracies are frequently understood to be in crisis, or even in a “polycrisis”. The crises have numerous facets: Events ranging from the sovereign debt crisis over migration, COVID, and the War against Ukraine have challenged democratic governance especially in modern Western democracies. Established forms of governance fail to tackle these complex challenges. (Liberal) democracy both as a concept and in practice is currently contested and challenged in numerous ways - by autocratic politicians and states, via democratic deconsolidation, and via democratic backsliding by right-wing populist and autocratic politicians and governments that destroy liberal democratic norms and institutions. Moreover, (liberal) democracy both as a concept and in political practice has always been contested. The term “contested” in this respect refers to a number of aspects: On one hand, democratic theorists, politicians and citizens put forward different ideas about what democratic rule implies and requires, and how to interpret (liberal) democracy. These controversies have been taking place since decades, and they continue today. There are debates inside and outside parliaments and institutions about what (liberal) democracy is or is not, what are its benefits and pitfalls, and whether it is to be judged positively or not, and there are political actors and movements of all sides of the political spectrum that criticize (liberal) democracy. on areas of ideational and political influence. The War against Ukraine has repeatedly been framed as a war between an autocracy and the liberal western European democracy. Social contract theories conceptualise the implicit agreements that form the basis of modern societies. Pioneers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau conceptualized the social contract as an agreement among autonomous individuals to form a society and abide by common rules to ensure mutual protection and benefit. In social contract theories, a prior state of nature served as a key heuristic for thinking about legitimate forms of governance. The concept of the Anthropocene is relatively recent. Coined in 2000 in the natural and earth sciences, it is today used in different understandings. On one hand, the Anthropocene names a new geological era, signaling that after the era of the Holocene earth has, since about 70 years, entered the Anthropocene, a period where human-induced changes mark the planet decisively. The planetary ecological and geological system is becoming increasingly unstable and vulnerable and this directly affects humans and their lives. Backfire effects such as climate change underline humans are part of nature themselves. On the other hand, the Anthropocene indicates a challenge of modern thinking and ontology. Two core ideas of modern thinking are questioned in particular: the ideas of a separation between humans/culture and nature, as said above, and the ideas of linearity and simple causality in human action and in politics. Instead, we have to face that all life on the planet functions in complex systems and entanglements that models of causality and linearity fail to grasp. In sum, the Anthropocene refers to a changing global, human and natural condition that challenges modern conceptions of both knowledge and agency. The Anthropocene and (liberal) modernity – and liberal democracy and social contracts with them - are accordingly often discussed as irreconcilable. But does the Anthropocene really mark an irreconcilable divide that we cannot bridge? And what is the purpose of political theory and critical Social Sciences within the current condition? How do we rethink modernity while we criticize it? Against this backdrop, the section aims to discuss the manifold and complex theoretical, conceptual, and empirical questions raised above. The various, contradicting relations between democracy, social contracts, modernity, and the Anthropocene form the overarching theme. We invite debates across disciplinary and political divides on both empirics, practices, and concrete challenges of (democratic) politics and governance and social contracts in the Anthropocene as well as theoretical-conceptual approaches to the issues outlined above. The section will comprise the following panels Social Contracts in and beyond crisis Conceptualising Ecosocial Contracts The crisis of liberal democracy Contesting liberal democracy Conceptualising the Anthropocene European Governance of the Anthropocene Democracy in the Anthropocene Social Contracts in the European Union