Political justice in a complex global order: rethinking pluralist legitimacy
In: International affairs, Band 99, Heft 1, S. 61-79
ISSN: 1468-2346
48 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: International affairs, Band 99, Heft 1, S. 61-79
ISSN: 1468-2346
World Affairs Online
In: Journal of refugee studies, Band 35, Heft 2, S. 1060-1065
ISSN: 1471-6925
In: European journal of political theory: EJPT, Band 22, Heft 1, S. 181-191
ISSN: 1741-2730
Over the last several years, democratic citizens and theorists have been grappling with an upsurge in political commentary on the crisis and decline of democratic legitimacy around the world. Increasingly, theoretical attention is turning from the philosophical justification of ambitious moral ideals of democracy, to the interpretation of potentials within existing political practice for democratic renewal and repair. This review article examines three new books at the forefront of this theoretical turn towards engagement with the real-world political dynamics of democratic crisis and revival: Open Democracy by Hélène Landemore; Hope for Democracy by John Gastil and Katherine Knobloch; and Mending Democracy by Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan and John Boswell. It begins by surveying the new contributions of these books – highlighting the importance all attribute to creative political agency as a source of revival in democratic practice. It then discusses several questions left unresolved by these books – concerning the problem of democratic legitimacy, the normativity of democratic standards and the power dynamics undergirding democratic agency – which jointly mark out an important agenda for future theoretical work on pathways out of democratic crisis.
In: Journal of international political theory: JIPT, Band 12, Heft 2, S. 134-151
ISSN: 1755-1722
How should the content and justification of action-guiding normative 'principles' in political life be responsive to social 'facts'? In this article, I answer this question by sketching a contextualist methodology for identifying and justifying principles for guiding international institutional action, which is based on an original account of the regulative role and conceptual structure of principles of political legitimacy. I develop my argument for this approach in three steps. First, I argue that a special non-utopian category of normative political principles has the regulatory role of helping solve collective action problems that emerge in practice among actors engaged in shared institutional projects. Next, I argue that analysis of such normative political principles can be helpfully framed by what I call a collective agency conception of political legitimacy. Finally, I draw out the implications of these claims to show how the content and justification of normative political principles should vary across institutional contexts, in response to a particular set of motivational and empirical social facts. This contextualist methodology has useful applications to international politics insofar it can help to account for the widespread intuition that standards of political legitimacy for institutions may vary both across domestic and international levels and among international institutions operating in different functional domains.
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 21, Heft 4, S. 621
ISSN: 1942-6720
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 21, Heft 1, S. 181
ISSN: 1942-6720
In: European journal of political theory: EJPT, Band 14, Heft 4, S. 409-428
ISSN: 1741-2730
In this article, I address the question: what kind of normative principles should regulate the governance processes through which migration across international borders is managed? I begin by contrasting two distinct categories of normative controversy relating to this question. The first is a familiar set of moral controversies about justice within border governance, concerning what I call the ethics of exclusion. The second is a more theoretically neglected set of normative controversies about how institutional capacity for well functioning border governance can best be achieved, concerning what I call the constitution of control of international borders. I argue that progress can be made in resolving controversies of the latter kind by applying a new normative theory of political legitimacy, distinct from the moral theories of justice routinely applied to ethics of exclusion controversies. On the 'collective agency' model of political legitimacy that I propose here, principles of political legitimacy have the regulatory role of combating complex collective action problems that may otherwise impede an institution's collectively valuable functions. Through applying this theory, I sketch some provisional prescriptions for the design of international border governance institutions that may follow from the demand for strengthening their political legitimacy.
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 21, Heft 1, S. 181
ISSN: 2468-0958, 1075-2846
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 20, Heft 4, S. 625-630
ISSN: 1942-6720
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 488-489
ISSN: 1942-6720
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 20, Heft 2, S. 346-347
ISSN: 1942-6720
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 488-489
ISSN: 2468-0958, 1075-2846
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 488-487
ISSN: 2468-0958, 1075-2846
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 20, Heft 1, S. 167-167
ISSN: 2468-0958, 1075-2846
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 20, Heft 2, S. 346-346
ISSN: 2468-0958, 1075-2846