Abstract

Citizenship must be redefined, not simply adapted to technological practice, as an open field where freedom and equality face each other in search of a practicable equilibrium, along with the awareness that (systemic) social change cannot be imposed from above, nor can it be achieved exclusively through technological innovation or by adherence to a regulatory framework—which is by no means a definition of democracy. Democracy is complexity: it is open dialectics, plurality of opinions, thoughts, cultures, and visions of society. Democracy is conflict, openness, order and chaos. “Connected citizens” will not suffice: what we need are citizens—not vassals—educated in critical thinking, complexity, liberty, and responsibility. Currently, the risk is that of building an illusory form of citizenship without citizens, through processes of “simulation of participation” in which social actors represent the weakest link: a simulation of participation that leads inevitably to a simulation of citizenship and ultimately, to a simulation of democracy. The very concepts of participation and citizenship call into question a fundamental issue: the urgency of rethinking the “social contract” and, consequently, through education, of redefining the rules of engagement regarding citizenship and inclusion, because, once again, “democracy is complexity”.