EPALE interview: How can democracy education succeed, Ms Fridrik?
Reading time: roughly 7 minutes
According to the Democracy Index compiled by the British magazine The Economist, 74 of 167 countries and territories around the world are democracies, but only 24 countries are considered full democracies. Thus, 50 countries are incomplete democracies that exhibit deficiencies – including the USA and our neighbouring country of Italy. Is the age of democracy over? What can we do to counteract this? In the search for solutions, one is bound to come across democracy education, which is intended to help prevent the dissolution of democratic structures. What can it achieve? And how can it succeed? CONEDU talked to Stefanie Fridrik from the Demokratiezentrum Wien about this.
There are currently many questions of concern for society with regard to our democracy: Is it democratic to exclude anti-democratic politicians from elections? What is democratic? How big is the threat to our democracy? And what can we do about it? How can more trust in democracy be fostered? There is a wide range of answers to these questions. One of them is that we as a society need more democracy education – is that true?
Stefanie Fridrik: In this context, it’s important to take a closer look at the term “democracy education”. If we generally define this as the development of competences for democratic co-existence, then democracy education doesn’t just describe a dedicated education offering that people can either take part in or not. As social beings, we develop these competences when we live in a democratic system and engage in a relationship with our social and political surroundings. So, this exchange with our fellow humans and our relationship to the world already gives rise to a mode of democracy education. What I’m trying to say is that it isn’t like a person only becomes a political and democratic subject through democracy education offerings. However, these offerings – and this is also their designated goal – provide central support for the ability to face contemporary social questions and challenges as a responsible member of society. This means that they empower us to think about, discuss, and evaluate these aspects critically and, on this basis, to take part in the political workings of the democratic system. Without falling too deeply into a scholarly debate here, when I talk about democracy education I mean civic education as part of democracy.
So, we’re already political beings without democracy education, but education helps us to deal with challenges critically.
Exactly. Although it has to be noted that democracy education as an education offering cannot be used as an emergency parachute for social problem areas. When we as a society feel overwhelmed because the social order and value systems seem to be threatened by anti-democratic tendencies, this demand and hope is expressed especially loudly. Expecting democracy education to rapidly achieve a particular effect would not only be based on a misunderstanding of such educational processes, but would also contradict its fundamental goal of strengthening critical citizenship. To put it bluntly: Traditional lecture-based instruction in a seminar room on the ideal form of government of democracy will not promote the democratic awareness we need for a lively democratic society. This is a much more complex and lengthy process.
So, you’re saying that democracy education is necessary, but on an integrated basis and not as a short-term measure.
Yes, our society needs more democracy education. However, it’s not because we’re currently facing an increase in mutually reinforcing crisis situations, but because democracy, democratic awareness, and democracy education are dependent on one another and we constantly have to update what democracy is in a continuous process of negotiation and learning. We have to have the necessary tools for this.
And what does it take for democracy education to be able to succeed?
Naturally, there is no ONE recipe for success for democracy education, nor can there ever be. Democracy education itself is in a constant state of transformation in the form of civic education. Because civic education is guided and continuously challenged by social changes, transitions, and rifts, it constantly has to be open to change and has to be reoriented.
One key factor is being able to gather tangible experiences with regard to democracy in everyday life as part of educational processes in order to facilitate reflection on sociopolitical processes. The focus here should primarily be on the visible and invisible power and governance structures that shape our society and our everyday lives.
What does this mean specifically for education offerings?
We need educational settings that provide enough space and time to be able to discuss and critically analyse current issues on a deeper level. It also has to be possible to take a targeted look at places where anti-democratic, authoritarian, and misanthropic tendencies are on the rise and are taking hold. It’s important to shed light on and make it possible to assign labels to these developments so we can individually consider questions such as: What consequences do these tendencies have for our society, but also for my personal day-to-day life? How are the people around me affected by this? Do I really want things to be that way?
Educational settings in democracy education should be designed as practice situations in which such moments of experience and reflection are induced and guided on a substantive and didactic-methodological level. It’s also important to discuss contradictions openly and learn strategies for how to tolerate them. This is absolutely necessary in order to develop and maintain a tolerance to ambiguity.
Tolerance to ambiguity means being able to deal with contradictions and uncertainties.
Exactly. Such civic education practices have a lot to do with emotions, not least because politics always has something to do with emotions, too. Particularly fear and anger are consciously put to use for political purposes, and populist communication relies heavily on manipulation through emotionalising language. Democracy education in the form of civic education is also increasingly facing the question of what approaches and strategies are suitable for dealing with the emotional dimension of political issues on an adequate and sensitive basis. This represents a major challenge for democracy education and its practitioners. In this educational context, dealing with emotions and emotionalisation in an appropriate and constructive manner means maintaining the necessary critical and analytical distance. This type of balancing act harbours a great deal of potential for frustration for everyone involved.
This issue is nothing new in research, and an in-depth, nuanced approach will be needed in the future. For me, the scientific work of Anja Besand, director of the John Dewey Research Center for the Didactics of Democracy at the Technical University of Dresden, is a central reference point.
So, democracy education is also about working with emotions. You conduct research on critical civic education at the intersection between artistic and activist practices. Do you see art as a chance to deal with emotions?
Art allows us to confront topics on not only a rational, discursive level, but also on an emotional, sensory, and subconscious level. In art, I don’t learn things, but rather experience them aesthetically. Art opens up space for feelings in all of their complexity, ambivalence, and contradictory nature. This is a crucial component that art can add to democracy education.
In my research, I’m primarily interested in artistic practices that are concerned with highlighting structural social problem areas and inspiring people to get active politically. For example, critical action art in public spaces uses aesthetic and performative means in order to make social needs and political demands tangible in a very direct way. This can have an unbelievably inspiring effect on people who witness the work of art and contribute to empowering them to take political action.
Personally, I believe that in the face of structural conditions that lead to an imbalance of power, discrimination, and social exclusion, democracy education should motivate people to take action and help actively shape change. Artistic practices can have an impact in exactly this regard.
Based on what you’re saying, art can help to actively shape politics and society. Are there good practice examples at the intersection between art and democracy education? If so, what are they?
In my research, I work with the NGO Radikale Töchter, which was founded in 2019 in reaction to the growing right-wing populist trend in Germany. In their artistic and creative approach, the members of Radikale Töchter combine civic education with aspects of action art. Their focus is on rural areas in eastern Germany, especially places that are heavily affected by growing extreme right-wing movements.
At the workshops conducted by Radikale Töchter, participants examine various international examples of action art. They discuss them in terms of their content, but also analyse them using a methodology toolbox developed by Radikale Töchter. This in turn forms the basis for the participants to develop their own ideas for political art actions. During the workshops, the participants have the opportunity to confront their own issues and, on this basis, to formulate their own political concerns and demands. They learn how their own political anger can be used as an emotional competence and transformed into courage and action art. Creative strategies are developed in a collaborative process in order to then articulate these concerns publicly, as well. The members of Radikale Töchter use artistic and activist approaches in order to create spaces in their educational work for critical reflection about social norms, power structures, and visions of the future. Using these methods, they create free spaces in which young people in particular can explore radically democratic forms of political participation and action.
In my opinion, the education work of Radikale Töchter thus demonstrates how art can be used to convey and reflect on political content on one hand and to encourage people to be politically active themselves on the other. With their work, the members of Radikale Töchter promote political discourse, self-efficacy, and political activeness.
Thank you very much for these insights!
Further information:
Text/Author of original article in German: Lucia Paar/CONEDU
Redaktion/Editing of original article in German: Bianca Friesenbichler/CONEDU
