The principle of democracy is one of equal dignity for all cultures. But today the relationship between culture and politics, though close, often appears tense and occasionally contradictory. The introduction to this issue of Diogenes sketches the work done by UNESCO in the frame of the ‘Pathways of Thought' Programme, particularly relating to the way in which a pluralist identity is created in multicultural nations, and to the relationship between non-material heritage, democracy and the quest for new forms of governance.

This paper claims that what needs reinventing is not democracy as an ideal model, but rather the prevailing reality in terms of a set of obstacles hindering the realization of this model. Democracy can only be adapted to the new realities of the world if these realities are also transformed in such a way as to make it possible for democracy to properly function. The absence of norms on an international scale is manifested by a de facto hegemonic power accruing to certain states. This paper attempts a philosophical description of this situation through the difference between globalization, that tends to reduce all individual difference, and universalization, pluralist as its purposes can only be attained through a rationality of communication. Their respective actors are also different, as well as the different models provided for the evolution of the UN system.

This paper presents a way of building social cohesion open to diversity, assuming that democracy is alive only when it is reinvented. It challenges social trust to welcome diversity, thus allowing for a continual reinvention of democratic cohesion. Articulating cultural diversity and trust represents a major challenge for democratic coexistence. Philosophy is called to take into account the existing models of social cohesion and trust, and to reinvent democracy by defining a new paradigm of trust integrating social and cultural diversity.

Is, or has, democracy a universal value? This is the main question raised by this paper, which distinguishes between two aspects of democracy: political institution in opposition to despotism, and political belief against any kind of slavery and subordination. The role played by intellectuals in the development of contemporary democracy, and the relation of democracy to mass culture and the influence of mass media on a true democratic attitude, are studied within the frame of an overall ‘mass aesthetization' which characterizes contemporary societies.

This contribution intends to examine the role of democracy in the evolution of international law, and equally the role of the latter in the advancement of democracy, or, one might say, in its ‘reinvention'. Two aspects of this broad theme are addressed: the influence of processes of democratization at the level of the individual nation on the evolution of international law, and the extent of penetration of democracy and democratic mechanisms within the processes of creation and application of international law. A rich record of examples drawn by international jurisprudence is used to illustrate these complementary processes.

This paper argues that the idea of inclusion is linked to the democratic tradition rather than to the republican one. By analyzing the origins and meaning of these two concepts, the author holds that democracy is rather linked to desire and republic to will (and to the expression of desire), and concludes that, since North Atlantic political tradition has not given a key role to desire, democracy, in order to overcome the difficulties it has been encountering in all parts of the world, should take more account of desire and of the social struggles it brings to the fore.

This paper analyzes the relations between public space, language, and democracy. It describes how dissensus, democratic citizenship, domination, and political speech are linked together in contemporary French political philosophy, referring in particular to Jacques Rancière, Miguel Abensour, Alain Badiou and Claude Lefort. Hannah Arendt's political thought represents a theoretical frame or reference for most of these authors, who relate to her work in different, and often discrepant, ways.

This paper compares Tocqueville's concept of democracy to the social and political evolution of Brazil. It draws attention to the different points of departure which marked the establishment of American and Brazilian societies, through the works of authors such as Laura de Mello e Souza, Gilberto Freyre, Florestan Fernandes, Celso Furtado, and Sérgio Buarque de Holanda. It notes that, despite conditions being more favourable for the formation of a democratic society in the United States than in Brazil, subsequent to the founding periods a certain coming together occurred in the process of formation of the two societies. The ‘similarity of differences' between American and Brazilian societies becomes clear as soon as one brings together the roles played by the three constituent ethnic groups of these societies, which, by their simple existence, link difference to inequality.

This paper analyzes how cultural diversity in Argentina is calling into question modern political concepts like republic, nation or democracy. The phenomenon of population movements, the demand for recognition of indigenous people's rights, or the conflicts arising from claims to regions' right to life and identity - as in the case of the town of Gualeguaychú in Argentina - challenge the logic of the nation-state and its sovereignty as well as the republican principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. The author examines how far the representation of the Argentinean republic at the time of its foundation included a standardizing vision of diversity, and how the legacy of this representation brought about an ambivalence between a universalist wish to take part in the progress of humanity and the reality of an exclusive democracy that valued one culture over others. It studies the narrative of national identity and attempts to describe how, proceeding from this narrative, the opposition between civilization and barbarity affects the way Latin Americans see the great challenges presented by the future of democracy, and by the recognition of the plurality of cultural allegiances.

In contemporary African cultures women are going beyond domestic areas and getting involved in public affairs. They are acting in the social sphere. They are taking an active part in campaigns during the election process. Although in contemporary Africa these new ways of participating in public affairs are still closely associated with the religious domain, women are a major factor of social change in today's Africa.

This paper presents some thoughts focusing on the problems of ethnico-cultural communalism, its meaning in the current global socio-political context and its implications with regard to principles of democracy, citizenship and the nation-state. It gives particular attention to the issues of interculturality and intercultural communication (IC) as central markers in the contemporary socio-political landscape. The author claims that IC (particularly in its communal and ethnic forms) may prevent or resolve the communal separation that threatens many groups throughout the world. Apart from the essential role it has in production, reproduction and circulation of meaning within, as well as outside, the group, the discourse developed by communal communication media is an ideological, reflexive construction whose aim it is to create an impact on the social cognition of its receivers. This is why ethnicocultural groups scattered around the world generally have effective communal media that reinforce their social, cultural and political cohesion at local, national and global levels. Because, as well as expressing their positions and views on the issues facing a nation's society, this formal discourse provides group members with a legitimate and coherent framework for action and argument.

This short paper deals with the difficult articulation of a diverse cultural heritage within a society and the democratic forms of assuring its social cohesion. Special attention is paid to the links between immaterial culture and the environment that transforms it into a structural element of social cohesion. Culture is seen as a ‘mould' which shapes a shared behaviour, and democracy can be conceived as a system made up of elements of a cultural nature that go as far as implying safeguarding pluralism, respect and tolerance of all kinds of difference. This is the case with those countries where the structures of the modern state are in the process of disappearing and being redefined in new forms, whose essential feature is acceptance of cultural diversity. If we conceive democracy in terms of heritage and in terms of non-exclusion of cultures dominated by a dominant culture, then it results that Mexico has not experienced true democracy - either in the past or nowadays.

This paper studies the relation between modern democracy and Chinese cultural patterns. It introducing the concept of ‘Multiple Others' to explain how the classical concept of harmony can help integrating cultural and social differences within a social body, thus allowing social cohesion to integrate diversity. The main classical concepts of ren, li, and yi are analyzed in both Confucianism and Daoism, and compared to the concepts of recognition and dialogue developed by modern political theorists like Ch. Taylor and J. Habermas.

With the disenchantment with independence in Africa, economic failure, the crimes of the elites from the independence years, the paralysis of symbolism, and finally the states' loss of dynamism, the 1990s ushered in a so-called phase of democratization. This was about rethinking citizenship and the relationship to politics. This democratization was a response to the notion of diversity. This paper claims that the answer to this diversity issue fell far short of expectations and proceeds different examples taken from social, cultural and political life, including the struggle for recognition and the appearance of terrorist violence in sub-Saharan Africa. Multiparty systems designed to respond to the diversity question produced only many versions of the same by ignoring that true diversity is the encroachment on the same of the strange, the different and the unexpected.

This paper illustrates the demand for recognition by peoples through an analysis of the partnerships between researchers and Inuit communities in Canada and Alaska. One of the great questions concerns work in the field, namely to identify the most appropriate forms of interaction between researcher and informant, to recognize the multiplicity of indigenous voices, to avoid inappropriate generalizations, and to approach generational disparity.