Search results

Argues that democracy has succeeded in establishing itself as the "normal" form of political organization & as the political dimension of a modernity founded on secularization & a market economy. It is further contended that if democracy is to ameliorate the growing opposition between the North, which identifies rationality with power, & the South, which is increasingly shaped by cultural defense & the collapse of subjectivity, it must be redefined & defended against both liberal & revolutionary misconceptions. It is shown that democracy is above all a political condition for the existence of the subject -- a notion that refers to the conflictual unity of freedom & tradition, & to the efforts of human beings to become creators of their collective & individual lives. W. Howard

"Democracy" published on by Oxford University Press.

Originating with the ancient Greeks, democracy has taken many forms through the centuries. The beginning of modern democracies is traced to the Magna Carta in 1215, and afterward the increasing rights of individuals in their governments. The Constitution of the United States embraced the idea of democracy, becoming the great experiment that inspired democratic forms of governments through the years and across the world. This insightful volume includes relevant sources, images, and a timeline to trace the history and permutations of democracy as it has been practiced by different countries.

"Populär Democracy" - eine pluralistische "populäre" Demokratie aller Bevölkerungsschichten - das fordern die Anhänger des Pater Edicio de la Torres mit der im Juni 1986 gegründeten Organisation* "Volunteers for Populär Democracy" - VPD Der aus der Zeitschrift "Peacemaker" vom April-Juni 1986 übernommene und übersetzte Artikel ist eine programmatische Ableitung aus den konkreten politischen Machtverhältnissen in den ersten Monaten nach den Februarereignissen. Die VPD entwerfen darin das Konzept einer Demokratie für alle politischen Strömungen in der philippinischen Bevölkerung. Damals hatte es noch keine Putschversuche des Militärs, keine Schüsse auf für ihre Rechte demonstrierende Bauern und streikende Arbeiter, keine gescheiterten Waffenstillstandsverhandlungen und keine Verfassung gegeben.

The current populist challenges in western liberal democracies should not be seen as evidence of their decline, but as a constituent part. The history of democracy shows us that such challenges enable democracy's growth and evolution. As these modern conflicts and crises see populists seek to capitalise on the discontent of the people, it is evident that much of the conflict comes from tensions between the rule of law and majority rule. Elites seeking to preserve the liberal democratic system need to make their arguments in defence of the rule of law and democratic values, rather than assuming them to be self-evident. We should only become concerned over the fate of liberal democracy when the conflict moves from dialogue into physical violence, or as in Hungary, where the executive has dismantled counter-majoritarian checks. It is only then that the departure from democracy truly begins.

The essays in this volume, first published in 2000, explore questions about democracy that are relevant to political philosophy and political theory. Some essays discuss the appropriate ends of government or examine the difficulties involved in determining and carrying out the will of the people. Some address questions relating to the kinds of influence citizens can or should have over their representatives, asking, for example, whether individuals have a duty to vote, or whether inequalities in political influence among citizens (measured in terms of campaign contributions) can be morally justified. Other essays analyze democratic institutions, discussing what role deliberation should play in the democratic process, and asking whether it is legitimate to use laws and public policies to express approval or disapproval of various kinds of conduct. Still others examine the relationship between democracy and value pluralism, or consider the suitability of democracy as a form of government in non-Western societies

Democracy is a term that is used to denote a variety of distinct objects and ideas. Democracy describes either a set of political institutions or an ideal of collective self-rule. Democracy can also be short for a normative principle of either legitimacy or justice. Finally, democracy might be used to denote an egalitarian attitude. These four uses of the term should be kept distinct and raises separate conceptual and normative issues. The value of democracy, whether democratic political institutions or democratic self-rule, is either instrumental, non-instrumental, or both. The non-instrumental value of democracy derives either from the alleged fairness of majority rule or from the value of the social relationships enabled by participation in democratic procedures. The instrumental value of democracy lends support from a growing body of empirical research. Yet, the claim that democracy has a positive causal effect on public goods is inconclusive with respect to the moral justification of democratic institutions. Normative reasons for democracy's instrumental value must instead appeal to the fact that it contributes to equality, liberty, truth, or the realization of popular will. Democracy as a principle of either political legitimacy or justice is a normative view that evades concerns with the definition and value of democracy. Normative democracy is a claim about the conditions either for legitimacy or justice of either public authority or coercion. Debates in normative democracy are largely divorced from the conceptual and empirical concerns that inform studies of democracy elsewhere. The boundaries of the people entitled to participate in collective decisions is a question that applies to all four uses of democracy. The boundary question raises three distinct issues. The first is the extent of inclusion required among the members of the unit. The second is if membership in the unit is necessary for inclusion or if people that are not recognized as members are on certain conditions also entitled to participate. The third and final issue concerns the boundaries of the unit itself. ; Artikel publicerad i Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics [online].

The main argument of this paper is directed against the thesis that we are in a post-democratic era. I consider that we are rather in a post-political era, that is to say, one in which the demands expressed in moments of democratic explosion do not often find a political channel that translates them into effective transformations. To this is added the fact that some of the current forms of activism have given rise to what could be called an "intermittent citizenship" that has seduced some with the possibility of establishing that negative sovereignty at the core of the construction of the general will, which has depolitizing effects. This is the context in which the great rift between technocratic reasons and populist reasons has been constituted. I end up defending a concept of "indirect democracy" or "complex democracy" that attempts to politically integrate both moments.

IN A TRUE DEMOCRACY, THE TENSION BETWEEN UNITY AND DIFFERENCE OF CITIZENS IS UNRESOLVABLE -- AS THE AUTHOR SAYS IT SHOULD BE. SHE CONTENDS THAT THE MOST FERTILE TERRAIN FOR CONSTRUCTING PROGRESSIVE POLITICS IS THAT OF A RADICAL DEMOCRACY THAT RECOGNIZES THE CENTRALITY OF DIFFERENCE AND CONTESTATION TO POLITICAL LIFE. SHE EXPLORES SCHMITT'S DEMOCRATIC ANTI-LIBERALISM AS WELL AS KANT AND THE COMMON GOOD. THE CONCLUSION IS THAT THE VERY EXISTENCE OF MODERN DEMOCRACY FORBIDS THE POSSIBILITY OF ITS FULL REALIZATION.