Search results

Abstract
The paper deals with the paradox of the incommensurability of the demands of responsiveness and performativity in representative democracy. To solve this puzzle, the paper first analyzes Pitkin's concept of symbolic representation. Pitkin sees symbolic representation as a caricature of democracy because of its performativity, non-rationality and vagueness. The paper argues that these are indeed the key characteristics of every single representative act and that their presence does not make representation undemocratic. Using the work of Claude Lefort, the second part of the paper attempts to set out the conditions that would enable us to differentiate between the performativity of representation appropriate in a democratic society and the sheer falsification of the popular will. The paper claims that such a distinction would demand that we extend our understanding of representation to go beyond the relation between the representative and the represented and focus instead on the contestability of governmental claims to represent

Niccolò Machiavelli has acquired a prominent position in the history of political thought. Machiavelli is probably most notorious as a teacher of evil, a political realist advising tyrants and a proud proponent of Machiavellism, a devilish politics that astoundingly bears his name. This image, however, is far from being the only one. Sorting through the history of political thought, Machiavelli suddenly appears ubiquitous and dressed in various disguises. Historical interpretations of Machiavelli's writings range from a predecessor of totalitarianism to a proponent of subversive republicanism or even radical democracy, from the first political scientist to have discovered the ideal of value-free political analysis, to a liberal, a fascist, or a communist avant-la-lettre to name just a few.

Zdá se, že v soucasné dobe prožíváme krizi liberální demokracie. Symptomy jsou neprehlédnutelné: pokles volební úcasti, nebývalá schopnost oligarchií využívat fungování státu ve svuj prospech, vlády tvrdošíjne prosazující neoliberální reformy i pres vytrvalý odpor obcanu, odumírání sociálního státu a v neposlední rade úspech nového populismu pravice. V této knize se hledá protilék. Príciny krize autori nespatrují ve výzvách globálního kapitalismu, natož v pohnuté ceské historii. Zajímá je vnitrní napetí v liberální demokracii samotné, které spatrují v nedostatecné artikulaci vztahu mezi libera