In the framework of the 11th International Scientific Conference of the Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences entitled “Communities of Creation- Participation and Initiative in Institutional Colleges: Society, Education, Political Consultation”, the former President of the Republic, the A academic and the Honorary Professor In his speech, Mr. Pavlopoulos pointed out, among other things, the following:

Responding with feelings of honor to the invitation of the organizers of the Annual International Conference of the Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, and taking into account its more specific themes regarding the creation communities and the emergence of participation and initiative in my institutional collectives in the field. Modern, critical, importance of the intervention of civil society in the direction of defending representative democracy as an institutional and political amalgam of freedom and, by legal regulation, of the fundamental rights of man.

A. This is because, as it turns out through its historical evolution and, above all, through the study of its institutional and political components, after a hundred years of euphoria – which we could characterize, poetic license, doctrine – our democracy has now followed us, especially in the past, Institutional and political decline. Decline that is so dangerous, especially for democratic institutions, as it appears with subcutaneous and creepy characteristics that the quasi -inherent, social complacency consumes with the elements of a catalytic mate. Certainly, when there is talk of the decline of democracy, it is the decline of representative democracy, a dominant system of democratic governance in modern times, with a privileged field of development in the West in the West and, in advance, in Europe. And this decadent phenomenon in the field of representative democracy directly affects the very – by its nature – core, which is none other than freedom, as a field of defending the value of man and the free development of his personality through the exercise of all kinds of institutional rights. In simple words, the above phenomenon responds, Lato Sensu, and to the characteristics of a modern institutional and political mutation, the style and rhythm of which bring to light the size of the shrinkage of the shrinkage of the regulatory and regulatory range as well as its political prestige. When the signs of decline of representative democracy and freedom are visible on a global scale, when one by one, their forts either collapse with authoritarian regimes-referring to the darkest forms of despotism of the distant past-or they gradually lose their defenses. Invocation of the ignorance of risk, whatever it comes from, that is, either from political society or civil society, it is not permissible to have the slightest justification and tolerance.

B. This decadent course of representative democracy and freedom can and should be prevented. This stake is existential, both for representative democracy and for freedom, but for humans. The following thoughts are aimed, after a summary of the causes of the decadent course of representative democracy and freedom, to show who and why most of the responsibility for their defense should be attributed. And to be precise- I emphasize this part- this part must be attributed to civil society as the most important and potentially more influential community of creation and, in essence, peculiar institutional collectivity. Especially in the sense that when the state in our time has, in a demonstration of historically unprecedented defeatism, it almost unconditionally assigns its democratically legitimacy to private bodies without a trace of similar democratic legitimacy, it is now the time for civil society to stand up to the public. Economically powerful actors representing an institutionally uncontrolled private intervention and influence. And civil society can accomplish the above mission due to its inherent institutional and political constitution and temperament, as it was first regretted, as a distinction between political society and civil society, initially by Friedrich Hegel. And much later, in the 20th century, by Antonio Gramsci, who had the starting point of Marxist thought, but he largely adapted his relevant positions to Hegelian perception. By combining the prenatal thoughts of Hegel and Gramsci about the needs of the following analysis, we can accept that the mission of civil society in defense of representative democracy stems and is explained by its own socio -political ontology. This is because in this ontology, civil society, at least generally, is organized for the purpose of individuals and / or groups of members of the social community development forms of social action, completely independent of states and all kinds of bodies. Action, which is evolved on the one hand by keeping democratic processes and to serve Lato Sensu social interest and social cohesion. And, on the other hand, it ensures the necessary mediation interventions between citizens.

Read the full speech of Prokopis Pavlopoulos here: