The idea that its existence is essential for freedom to work. In Last Database other words, it is a "crisis" (of a wound, of individual.
Soon I will explain better these differences between ancient (direct) democracy and modern (representative) democracy, which are the very essence of classical liberalism and which allow me to reformulate the idea of a crisis of Last Database representation. But what interests me the most about this reinterpretation of the idea of crisis of representation, no longer anecdotal, but essential, is that it can help us better understand the historical meaning of the advent of digital mass public Last Database conversation.
And to glimpse the deep meaning of the fact that we perceive it as Last Database barbaric or as a threat against democracy. My hypothesis is that if we understand well what the crisis of representation consists of, as something intrinsic and insurmountable in modern Last Database democracy, we will also better understand what is at stake in the mass public conversation that seems to arouse so much concern. My suspicion is that the crisis of Last Database representation required (due to a drive to close a constitutive wound, a false closure, perhaps) the appearance of something similar to that mass public conversation that digital technology made hatch.
The beautiful totality in crisis
But what does the reformulation of the crisis of Last Database representation as the essence of representative democracy consist of? What does the distinction between ancient and modern democracy crystallized in classical liberal political theory have to do with it. A brief and Last Database superficial historical review of the way in which the device of representative democracy was conceived in the liberal tradition can be useful when answering these Last Database questions.
As its most lucid critics (Carl Schmitt among them) correctly pointed out, liberalism is a political ideology that is against it, reactive; It is not born from a positive proposal for the foundation of society.