Thomas Hobbes in His Time. Edited by Ralph Ross, Herbert W. Schneider, and Theodore Waldman. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1975. Pp. 150. $7.50.)
In: American political science review, Band 71, Heft 2, S. 660-661
ISSN: 1537-5943
49 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: American political science review, Band 71, Heft 2, S. 660-661
ISSN: 1537-5943
In: Political theory: an international journal of political philosophy, Band 3, Heft 4, S. 402-405
ISSN: 1552-7476
In: Political theory: an international journal of political philosophy, Band 3, Heft 4, S. 372-384
ISSN: 1552-7476
In: Political theory: an international journal of political philosophy, Band 3, Heft 2, S. 232-235
ISSN: 1552-7476
In: Political science quarterly: a nonpartisan journal devoted to the study and analysis of government, politics and international affairs ; PSQ, Band 89, Heft 4, S. 871-873
ISSN: 1538-165X
In: American political science review, Band 67, Heft 3, S. 982-984
ISSN: 1537-5943
In: Polity, Band 5, Heft 1, S. 95-111
ISSN: 1744-1684
In: American political science review, Band 65, Heft 1, S. 97-110
ISSN: 1537-5943
The article defines indirect government as self-government through intermediaries authorized by the people, as opposed to the direct rule of the people. It requires that the people abstain from government after authorizing it, and hence that political debate center on whether or how the government is representative, not on what it should do. Almost all modern government is indirect and based on the indirect question of representation. Hobbes, though not the founder of indirect government, was the founder of the science by which men could be induced to consent to be governed not in accordance with their opinions of good and bad but on the basis of their passions, particularly fear. To achieve a form of consent that was voluntary and yet not based on opinion, he was forced to understand consent almost as resigning to the inevitable, yet his purpose in attempting to expel opinions from politics was to clear away divisions of opinion, especially religious opinion, and thus remove the obstacle to progress in human power. Hobbes' doctrine and modern representative government must both be understood from the historical standpoint of Hobbes' hostility to Christianity.
In: Political science quarterly: a nonpartisan journal devoted to the study and analysis of government, politics and international affairs ; PSQ, Band 84, Heft 4, S. 678-680
ISSN: 1538-165X
In: Political science quarterly: a nonpartisan journal devoted to the study and analysis of government, politics and international affairs ; PSQ, Band 83, Heft 3, S. 473-474
ISSN: 1538-165X
In: Political science quarterly: a nonpartisan journal devoted to the study and analysis of government, politics and international affairs ; PSQ, Band 81, Heft 4, S. 673-674
ISSN: 1538-165X
In: Political science quarterly: a nonpartisan journal devoted to the study and analysis of government, politics and international affairs ; PSQ, Band 80, Heft 4, S. 517-542
ISSN: 1538-165X
In: American political science review, Band 58, Heft 4, S. 933-946
ISSN: 1537-5943
The purpose of this essay is to consider what kind of compromise is produced by party government. Its method is to discover what kind of compromise was produced by the socalled Settlement of 1688, the compromise which laid the foundation for party government in Britain. It will be suggested that the kind of compromise which laid the foundation for party government is the kind which party government, in turn, chiefly produces.
In: Perspectives on political science, Band 31, Heft 1, S. 46-47
ISSN: 1045-7097
In: Revue française de science politique, Band 45, Heft 4, S. 699
ISSN: 0035-2950