Search results

The triumphalist thesis that liberalism has proven to be a superior form of political & economic organization is examined in light of recent events in Eastern Europe. It is argued that the demise of communism is not evidence that liberalism has triumphed nor does it preclude some alternative set of allocation principles from being superior to either communism or liberalism. Two ways in which the liberal triumph is cast are explored: as one of historical necessity, according to which liberalism & communism are world-historical opposites; & as a situation in which worldwide consensus is reached on the superiority of liberalism. Other issues explored are: democracy & oligarchy in relation to the triumphalist thesis, the myth of the autonomous state, & alternatives to capitalism & socialism. It is concluded that the financial, technical, & managerial resources of the West could go far in bringing Eastern Europe to a state of material sufficiency "without mortgaging the minds of the citizenry.". 1 Reference. W. Howard

The study of the experiences of 12 Tunisian municipal councilwomen elected in May 1985 suggests that the development of a general sense of efficacy, facilitating full integration into the sphere of public action, is not best advanced by a socialization process exclusively governed by females. With regard to women's networks it appears that the very structures that might support women in political activity can effectively hamper them and can instead reinforce the patriarchical status quo. (DÜI-Hns)

THE AUTHOR CITES NUMEROUS REASONS FOR THE "TEMPORARY" SILENCING OF IDEOLOGY IN GORBACHEV'S ERA: THIS LEADER'S DESIRE TO DISASSOCIATE HIMSELF FROM HIS PREDECESSOR AND THE FACT THAT THE IDEOLOGICAL LEGACY WHICH HE INHERITED, OF DEVELOPED SOCIALISM, HAS LITTLE RELEVANCE TO CONTEMPORARY CONDITIONS OR ABOUT HOW TO RESTUCTURE THE SOVIET SYSTEM. THE AUTHOR ALSO PROPOSES THAT, AS LONG AS THE COMMUNIST PARTY PURPORTS TO PLAY A LEADING ROLE IN SOVIET SOCIETY, SOMETHING AKIN TO IDEAOLOGY WILL BE REQUIRED TO JUSTIFY AND LEGITIMATE THE ONE-PARTY RULE. THE INCREASING SIGNIFICANCE OF THE NON-RUSSIAN REPUBLICS IS WEIGHED, AS POSSIBLE SCENARIOS OF FUTURE IDEOLOGIES ARE EVALUATED FOR THE SOVIET UNION, WITHIN A HISTORICAL CONTEXT.

POLITICAL THINKING IN THE ACADEMY HAS CHANGED SINCE THE EARLY 1960'S IN AT LEAST THREE SIGNIFICANT WAYS. FIRST, MOST RIGHTS ADVOCATES NOW EMBRACE PART OF THE MARXIST CRITIQUE AND DEFEND NOT ONLY THE TRADITIONAL LIST OF CIVIL AND POLITICAL LIBERTIES BUT ALSO MORE EQUAL DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME, WEALTH, EDUCATION, JOB OPPORTUNITIES, HEALTH CARE, AND OTHER GOODS ESSENTIAL TO SECURE THE WELFARE AND DIGNITY OF THE DISADVANTAGED. SECONDLY, MOST PROMINENT POLITICAL PHILOSOPHERS ARE NOW RIGHTS THEORISTS. THIRDLY, GRAND POLITICAL THEORY IS ONCE AGAIN ALIVE IN THE ACADEMY. ALL OF THESE CHANGES ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE INFLUENCE OF "A THEORY OF JUSTICE" BY JOHN RAWLS.

A review essay on a book by Jurgen Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne ([The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity] Frankfurt-Main, 1985 [see listing in IRPS No. 52]). The influence of G. W. F. Hegel, Friedrich Nietzsche, & Martin Heidegger on the work are examined. Hegel, an insurgent within the confines of Enlightenment thought, inaugurated modern discourse in its broad multidimensionality; but Habermas's remedial proposal for Hegel's use of public sphere & consensus harkens to the contractarian tradition rebuked by Hegel elsewhere. Nietzsche, at the dividing line of modernity & postmodernism, is treated by Habermas as the pivot between defenders of modern reason & proponents of counter-Enlightenment. Contradictions are found in Habermas's treatment of Heidegger, the leading representative of the post-Nietzschean perspective. J. White