Suchergebnisse

Advantages & disadvantages of three political science approaches to democracy (old, & new, institutionalism; & behaviorism cum developmentalism) are comparatively examined in light of recent political changes. None of these perspectives addresses the transformation from high coercion to high information systems during democratization, political risk factors, & other issues. It is hoped that institutionalists will develop a new understanding & interpretation of democracy from a detailed analysis of current events. 3 Photographs. M. Malas

TAKE AWAY ITS EXOTIC AND ITS MAGIC, THE MARVELLOUS despair ofCien Años de Soledad, the Latino troubadours like Atahualpa Yupanqui who sing of peasant rebellions, love of land and patrimony, and sudden death; take away as well the tourists, the scenery, the churches, the romantic rebels and the outrageouscaudillos, and indeed the whole vast mad throng of images which foreigners hold about Latin America, and we come to the heart of the matter, one unique theme, one common denominator, or perhaps better, one refrain, or one implicit major premise about the hemisphere. It is that everything has been tried and nothing works. Or, nothing works as it should. Even that which starts well won't last. Enterprises fail unless foreign owned and operated.

THE TEST OF A THEORY IS IN ITS APPLICATION. THE DIFFICULTY IS that in political theory, application is rarely a sufficient test. This is especially true of the kind of theory in which I am interested. It is abstract, highly generalized, and for this reason, tends to be illustrated by means of applications which neither prove nor disprove. A lack of clear guides for disproof is one of the more serious deficiencies of highly general theory. If that is so, what is the point of doing it? One answer is that if such theory can lead in an a priori way to logically inferred predicaments which repeat themselves in many forms in the real world, this should allow us to anticipate events. This, in turn, allows us to compare these common predicaments in diverse settings to discover the necessary and separate it from the contingent. This can represent a big step forward if it results in new types of data and different forms of linkages between variables. The 'tests' then are more insightful generalizations rather than 'validations'. If such generalizations can be made subject to quantitative proof, so much the better. In any case, the route to validation is bound to be indirect. Propositions locked into a logical structure of thought will remain for long cumbersome and wearisome. Despite this, as long as not too many people waste their time with it, a general theory approach seems worth the effort.

ANARCHISM AS A DOCTRINE HAS A PECULIAR FASCINATION FOR scholars. It both repels and attracts. It attracts because it embodies rage – the particular rage people have when they see man as an obstacle to his own humaneness. It is the ultimate statement of how outrageous the human condition can be. But it is precisely because man does not live by rage alone, but must master it by discovering proximate means to solving the ordinary problems of daily life, that anarchism repels. It seem a romantic luxury at best – a cry of pain for the future, just as nostalgia is for the past and, like nostalgia, this cannot fail to be attractive.Perhaps because of this anarchism is not a mere reflection of anger but also a contributing source. It is thus more than a lightning rod for the anger that exists. Anarchism is associated with unreason and bombs, violence and irresponsibility.