Suchergebnisse

Over the years, historians have engaged in various disputes concerning the origins, nature, and results of the progressive movement that dominated the political imagination of Americans during the first two decades of the twentieth century. No one set of categories has dominated those disputes, but much of the controversy has focused on a fundamental tension in progressive thought: the conflict between a liberalism centered in humanitarian and moral passion and one based in an ethos of scientific analysis.

The aim of this article is to analyze the interpretations about liberalism presented in Controversia (1979-1981), a review created in México by some exiled Argentinean intellectuals during the latest Argentinian military dictatorship. As we will try to argue, this object implies two different analysis' levels: on the one hand, the meanings associated to the "liberal idea", which appear in Controversia as a strong rejection to Argentinean liberal tradition. Rejection that collected the arguments of a cultural and political anti-liberalism built along the XX century. On the other hand, the analysis of the theoretical and political assumptions that hold these interventions. In these assumptions is where we understand takes place a relevant conceptual displacement: the distinction "formal democracy/ substantive democracy" becomes a subsidiary moment from a new decisive political distinction between democracy and authoritarianism. Is particularly in this second level of the analysis where we consider necessary to understand the impact of the liberal matter in Controversia. ; El objeto de este trabajo es analizar las interpretaciones que circularon en torno al liberalismo en la revista Controversia (1979-1981), una revista creada por intelectuales argentinos exiliados en México en el contexto de la última dictadura militar. Según argumentaremos, este objeto implicar distinguir dos niveles de análisis: por un lado, el de los significados asociados con "idea liberal", que en la revista se expresan a través de un profundorechazo de la tradición liberal argentina que recogía muchos de los motivos de un "anti liberalismo" cultural y políticamente construido en etapas previas; por otro lado, el análisis de los supuestos teóricos y políticos que sostienen estas intervenciones, donde acontece un desplazamiento conceptual a nuestro entender sumamente relevante: aquel a través del cual la distinción entre "democracia formal" / "democracia sustantiva" pasa a convertirse en un momento subsidiario de una nueva distinción política ...

Introduction -- Imagining Great Britain : Union, Empire, and the burden of history, 1800-1830 -- Imagining a British India : history and reconstruction of Empire -- Imagining a Greater Britain : the Macaulays and the liberal romance of Empire -- Re-imagining a Greater Britain : J.A. Froude: counter-romance and controversy -- Greater Britain and the "lesser breeds" : liberalism, race, and evolutionary history -- Indian liberals and Great Britain : the search for union through history -- Epilogue : from liberal imperialism to conservative unionism : losing the thread of progress in history

This text reflects on the book written by Milorad Stupar, Political
Philosophy. Based on the perspectives given in Stupar?s book, the author?s
intention is to illustrate the problems regarding certain topics such as:
citizenship, the dispute about the nature of Hobbes?s philosophy, as well as
social, political and historical background of Kant?s political philosophy.
The article points at dilemmas related to the meaning of citizenship in
modern states, to the compatibility between absolutism and certain elements
of liberalism in Hobbes?s work, and to the possible reconstruction of the
context within which Kant produced his last works.

Argues that the defeat of the liberals was due to the size and strength of their parties, the quality of their campaigns, and the behavior of their politicians in power; Dec. 17, 1995 elections.

This article looks at how Reinhold Niebuhr and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. drew on themes in Edmund Burke's conservative writings to express ambivalence about equality and populism on behalf of progressive goals, and how they offered an alternative understanding of liberalism as the pursuit of progressive values restrained by respect for conservative virtues. The article pays particular attention to Niebuhr's and Schlesinger's views on successful leadership. Like Burke, these mid-century liberal theorists advocated the adoption of the virtues of the British aristocratic ruling class to check leftist populism. On the surface, their praise of aristocratic virtues may seem incompatible with their undeniable celebration of American democracy during the mid-twentieth century. Closer examination suggests, though, that their praise of democracy has a Burkean tinge. Adapted from the source document.