Democracy as Telecracy?

Bernard Stiegler on the Erosion of Democracy

Authors

  • Piotr Rutkowski Civitas University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.23.2026.102.13

Keywords:

democracy, telecracy, Bernard Stiegler, citizen, consumer

Abstract

This paper examines Bernard Stiegler’s concept of telecracy as a structural threat to democracy, analyzing its epistemological, political, and ontological consequences. Stiegler argues that modern democracies are increasingly dominated by media and algorithmic perception management, transforming active citizens into passive consumers. Drawing on classical political thought – from Plato’s critique of democracy’s susceptibility to demagoguery to Aristotle’s emphasis on civic virtue – the study highlights how contemporary information systems undermine deliberation and participatory governance. The shift from citizen to consumer, driven by drive-based capitalism and psychopower, erodes democratic engagement, reducing politics to a market-driven spectacle rather than a space for rational discourse. The paper further explores how noetic entropy, the decline of critical thinking, results in a political landscape shaped by algorithmic control rather than informed decision-making. Ultimately, it argues that democracy’s survival depends on reclaiming the public sphere from media-driven manipulation through an ‘ecology of attention’ – restructuring digital and educational institutions to promote reflective political engagement. Without such reforms, democracy risks degenerating into a technocratic system where sovereignty is nominal and political agency is merely a symbolic gesture. The study contributes to political philosophy and media theory by critically evaluating the contemporary transformation of democratic subjectivity under telecratic conditions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Piotr Rutkowski, Civitas University

    Holds a master’s degree in political science from the Faculty of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Warsaw. He is currently a doctoral candidate at the same institution. His research focuses on political theory, political philosophy, anthropology, and psychology, particularly on critical theories – e.g. Michel Foucault’s, Bernard Stiegler’s or The Frankfurt School. He is especially interested in the transformations driven by modern technologies and their implications for politics.

References

Aristotle, The Athenian Constitution, Public Domain Books, 2009.

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, trans. R.C. Bartlett, S.D. Collins, Chicago 2011.

Aristotle, Politics, ed. by M. Deslauriers, P. Destrée, Cambridge 2013.

Baranzoni S., “After Politics: Governing through Affect,” Deleuze and Guattari Studies, vol. 18, no. 1 (2024), pp. 120-142, https://doi.org/10.3366/dlgs.2024.0545.

Baudrillard J., The Consumer Society. Myth & Structures, London–Thousand Oakes–New Delhi 1998.

Bauman Z., Consuming Life, Cambridge 2007.

Bauman Z., Globalization. The Human Consequences, Cambridge 1998.

Bevir M., Rhodes R.A., “Interpretive Theory,” in D. Marsh, G. Stoker (eds), Theory and Methods in Political Science, Houndmills 2002.

Chambers S., “Deliberative Democracy and the Digital Public Sphere: Asymmetrical Fragmentation as a Threat to Democracy,” Constellations, vol. 30, no. 1 (2023), pp. 61-68, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.12662.

Dahlberg L., “The Internet and Democratic Discourse: Exploring the Prospects of Online Deliberative Forums Extending the Public Sphere,” Information, Communication & Society, vol. 4, no. 4 (2001), pp. 615-633, https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180110097030.

Dahlberg L., “Rethinking the Fragmentation of the Cyberpublic: From Consensus to Contestation,” New Media & Society, vol. 9, no. 5 (2007), pp. 827-847, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807081228.

Deleuze G., Guattari F., Anti-Oedipus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia, Minneapolis 1983.

Deleuze G., Guattari F., A Thousand Plateaus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia, Minneapolis 1987.

Filipowicz S., “Idola Theatri. Interpretacja i zagadnienie realizmu,” Teoria Polityki, no. 3 (2019), pp. 103-121, https://doi.org/10.4467/25440845TP.19.005.10288.

Filipowicz S., “O fundamentalnej roli interpretacji,” Politeja, vol. 12, no. 4 (36) (2015), pp. 191-204, https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.12.2015.36.12.

Gadamer H.G., Truth and Method, London 2004.

Habermas J., A New Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere and Deliberative Politics, Cambridge 2023.

Heawood J., “Pseudo-public Political Speech. Democratic Implications of the Cambridge Analytica Scandal,” Information Polity, vol. 23, no. 4 (2018), pp. 429-434, https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-180009.

Hobbes T., Leviathan, Oxford 2014.

Hobbes T., Writings on Common Law and Hereditary Right, Oxford 2005.

Horkheimer M., Critical Theory. Selected Essays, trans. M.J. O’Connell, New York 2002.

Hu M., “Cambridge Analytica’s Black Box,” Big Data & Society, vol. 7, no. 2 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720938091.

Kassner M., “O pierwszeństwie interpretacji przed ontologią. Przyczynek do krytyki realizmu w filozofii nauk społecznych,” Teoria Polityki, no. 3 (2019), pp. 123-145, https://doi.org/10.4467/25440845TP.19.006.10289.

Kułakowska M., “Interpretive Theories in Political Science,” Teoria Polityki, no. 4 (2020), pp. 31-41, https://doi.org/10.4467/25440845TP.19.014.11780.

Locke J., An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. A. Campbell Fraser, introd. W.R. Ott, 2004.

Locke J., Two Treatises of Government and a Letter Concerning Toleration, ed. and introd. I. Shapiro, New Haven 2008.

Plato, The Republic, Cambridge 2018.

Rousseau J.J., The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings, Cambridge 2019.

Rutkowski P., “Homo Cōnsūmēns. Kulturowy model człowieka w epoce zglobalizowanego kapitalizmu kognitywnego,” Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis, Studia Politologica, vol. 22, no. 297 (2019), pp. 37-52, https://doi.org/10.24917/20813333.22.3.

Schäfer S., Muller P., Ziegele M., “The Double-Edged Sword of Online Deliberation. How Evidence-based User Comments Both Decrease and Increase Discussion Participation Intentions on Social Media,” New Media & Society, vol. 23, no. 3 (2024), pp. 1403-1428, https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211073059.

Stiegler B., The Age of Disruption. Technology and Madness in Computational Capitalism, Newark 2019.

Stiegler, B., The Decadence of Industrial Democracies, Cambridge 2011.

Stiegler B., La Télécratie contre la Démocratie, Paris 2006.

Stiegler B., The Neganthropocene, London 2018.

Stiegler B., States of Shock. Stupidity and Knowledge in the 21st Century, Cambridge 2015.

Stiegler B., Taking Care of Youth and the Generations, Stanford 2010.

Stiegler B., Technics and Time, vol. 1: The Fault of Epimetheus, Stanford 1998.

Zuboff Sh., The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power, New York 2019.

Downloads

Published

29-05-2026

How to Cite

“Democracy As Telecracy? : Bernard Stiegler on the Erosion of Democracy”. 2026. Politeja 23 (2(102): 233-53. https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.23.2026.102.13.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 172

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.