Democracy Takes Time: Intersectional Temporalities in Participation and Deliberation

This paper examines how the concept of time shapes participatory and deliberative democracy, with a focus on intersectional experiences. Time is neither neutral nor equally distributed; structural inequalities based on race, gender, class and migration status create divergent experiences of time. For marginalized communities, precarity often results in accelerated time, leaving little opportunity for reflection, care or collective action. Conversely, privileged groups enjoy greater temporal autonomy, enabling them to engage more easily in participatory processes. Drawing on temporal theories, including Hartog’s concept of regimes of historicity (2015) and Ricœur’s phenomenology of time (1984), we analyze how these disparities hinder inclusivity in democratic processes. Cynthia Fleury’s framing of care as the "truth of democracy" (2020) and Tsing’s notion of friction (2005) guide us in exploring how deliberative practices might better accommodate diverse temporal realities. The paper proposes rethinking participatory processes to foster equitable engagement. This includes creating "temporal zones" that allow participants to reconcile competing rhythms, slowing down processes to enable the inclusion of those whose time is constrained. Strategies such as radical leisure, spaces of care and processes of unlearning are explored as practical interventions for democratizing time. We connect these theoretical insights to participatory practices, presenting co-creation strategies and tools to restructure democratic processes in ways that amplify the voices of those most affected by systemic oppression, as well as results from semi-structured interviews to diverse participants in participatory democracy processes. The analysis will also draw on insights from social movement studies (e.g., Pomatto & Bobbio, 2007; Polletta, 2019; Wagner-Pacifici, 2019, ) and futures studies ( Gökmenoğlu & Manley, 2023) to propose ways of aligning temporal regimes with the rhythms of diverse participants. Addressing “temporal blind spots” within deliberative processes, the paper suggests strategies for creating timeframes that enable reflexivity, creativity and collaborative problem-solving across socio-economic divides. References Fleury, C. (2020). Répétition générale. Gallimard Gökmenoğlu, B., & Manley, G. (2023). Hope and time work in dystopian contexts: Future-oriented temporalities of activism in post-referendum Scotland and Turkey. Time & Society, 0961463X231191614. Hartog, F. (2015). Regimes of Historicity: Presentism and Experiences of Time. Columbia University Press. Polletta, F. (2019). Freedom is an endless meeting: Democracy in American social movements. University of Chicago Press. Pomatto, G., & Bobbio, L. (2007). Il coinvolgimento dei cittadini nelle scelte pubbliche. Meridiana: rivista di storia e scienze sociali. N. 58, 2007, 1000-1024. Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and narrative (Vol. 3). University of Chicago press. Tsing, A. L. (2005). Friction: An Ethnography of Global Connection. Princeton University Press. Wagner-Pacifici, R. (2019). What is an Event?. University of Chicago Press.