Search results

Call for Applications of Frankfurt University. Deadline: February 29, 2024

The issue of financing political campaigns has been a topic of discussion for a while, especially against the background of the ongoing deliberations within the EU surrounding the adoption of the draft Political Advertisement Act (PAA). The recently concluded Polish parliamentary campaign and the assistance offered by State Owned Companies, along with the weak level of oversight on these actions, have highlighted certain shortcomings in the proposed framework that remain unaddressed in the current EU draft legislation. In particular, I argue that the PAA does not adequately regulate the methods and extent of financing for political campaigns such as microtargeting and mistakenly assumes the independence of regulatory bodies tasked with enforcing its requirements. An independent institutional system warranted by the European Commission to enforce the proposed rules is pivotal for PAA to achieve its goals.

The Indonesian Constitutional Court has handed down a highly controversial decision lowering the minimum age requirement for presidential candidacy. It raises further alarms about the Court's independence, as the petitioner sought to allow President Jokowi's son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, to run in the 2024 presidential elections. Worse, the current Chief Justice is married to the President's younger sister, and the Court's legal reasoning it not sound.

Call for Papers for a Special Issue of Sociological Research Online. Deadline: June 12, 2023

im kommenden Wintersemester richten Sophie Loidolt (Darmstadt), Thomas Bedorf (Hagen), Steffen Herrmann (Hagen) und Thiemo Breyer (Köln) gemeinsam eine Online-Vorlesungsreihe zu kritischen und politischer Phänomenologie aus. In dieser sollen Vorzüge und Vorteile einer kritisch-politischen Phänomenologie gegenüber konstruktivistischen und normativen Theorien des Sozialen und Politischen diskutiert werden. Unter anderem tragene Johanna Oksala zur kritischen Phänomenologie des […]

Anlässlich des Erscheinen des Sammelbandes Decolonising Political Concepts organisieren die beiden Herausgeber*innen Marie Wuth und Valentin Clavé-Mercier zwei Podiumsdiskussionen in Hamburg und Berlin. Im deren Rahmen sollen die theoretischen Konstrukte und Praktiken, die politisches Leben und koloniale Welten prägen, kritisch betrachtet und die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Transformation mit und von politischen Konzepten hinterfragt werden. […]

Call for Papers for a Workshop in München on September 17–18, 2024. Deadline: April 4, 2024

Call for Abstracts for a Theme Issue of the Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy. Deadline: December 15, 2023

In a pivotal judgment delivered by the Grand Chamber, the European Court of Human Rights held that the conviction of a former teacher Yüksel Yalcinkaya violated Articles 6,7 and 11 of the Convention. The applicant Yalcinkaya was a teacher who was dismissed with an emergency decree enacted during the state of emergency rule between 2016 and 2018 and was subsequently prosecuted and convicted for his use of the ByLock app and for his membership in a teachers' union and an association which were also closed down with an emergency decree. In Erdogan's ever more repressive Turkey, usage of said app or membership in organizations and unions may lead to arrest. Especially anything that appears remotely related to the oppositional Gulen movement carries the risk of persecution.

Im Rahmen der jährlichen Konferenz der Britain and Ireland Association for Political Thought, die 2024 vom 4. bis 6. Januar am Jesus College (Cambridge) stattfindet, organisiert die Theoriesektion der DVPW ein Panel zum Thema "Popular Sovereignty and Constituent Power". Beitragvorschläge (Abstracts im Umfang von 400-500 Wörtern) können bis 30. Juni 2023 beim Sektionsvorstand (theoriesektion@dvpw.de) eingereicht […]

It must be acknowledged: in Italy, a judgment such as that delivered by the German Federal Constitutional Court on 24 January 2023 on party financing is currently constitutional science fiction. The Italian constitutional judges have never theorised, unlike their German colleagues, the need for closer scrutiny in certain matters where a 'conflict of interest' of the legislature can be discerned. This also partly reflects a different understanding of their own role within the constitutional system.

I draw on Nora Berenstain's concept of "epistemic exploitation" and present a series of precisions to consider the asymmetric relation between marginalized groups and public and private institutions. I am particularly interested in those interactions in which the former are called upon to collaborate, under conditions that sustain and reinforce the asymmetry, with institutional projects that will affect their communities and will be executed with or without their participation. I will focus on trans groups, but epistemic extortion is not exclusive to them.
Der Beitrag Epistemic extortion, between epistemic obligation and political duty erschien zuerst auf Philosophie InDebate.

Recently, Baptiste Charvin wrote on this blog that the right to abortion has become the subject of political instrumentalization in France. In his view, it illustrates a general phenomenon of 'constitutional desacralization' and underlines the division the French people are experiencing, 'despite being governed by a Constitution that enshrines a set of values that should be shared by all.' I argue that the French parliamentary debate on the right to abortion is anything but a phenomenon of recent political opportunism. Instead, it reflects – for once – a majority opinion, not the division of French society.

Online hate speech is a topic that has gained importance in recent years. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) made an important ruling in this context on 15 May 2023 in Sanchez v. France. From a democratic theory and individual rights' perspective, I would endorse the first decision because it tackles the so-called "silencing" and "desensitization effect" of hate speech. The second decision, however, runs the risk of adversely affecting free political debate, especially when individual politicians are called upon to delete comments by third parties.