Liberalism, Constitutionalism and Democracy
In: Politicka misao, Band 39, Heft 4, S. 168-170
In: Politicka misao, Band 39, Heft 4, S. 168-170
Ideologija liberalizma obilježena je protuslovljima. U ime slobode nametano je ropstvo jednih drugima. Odnos liberalizma prema državi obilježen je protuslovljem između negativne i pozitivne slobode. Državu blagostanja razvijenu na Zapadu u drugoj polovini 20. stoljeća, zasnovanu na konceptu pozitivne slobode, zamijenio je neoliberalizam zasnovan na konceptu negativne slobode. Rezultat je povećanje ekonomskih razlika između bogatih i siromašnih. Na međunarodnom planu liberalizam je obećavao svijet bez rata uređen na načelima razuma. Nakon prestanka Hladnoga rata, kad su stvorene pretpostavke za ostvarivanje liberalnih obećanja, bogate zemlje Zapada odlučile su ostatku svijeta nametnuti neoliberalne modele funkcioniranja ekonomije i društva. Umjesto win-win situacije svijet je suočen sa sukobima i krizama. Liberalizam može opstati kao kredibilna ideologija ako se na unutrašnjem i na međunarodnom planu budu primjenjivale sve njegove sastavnice. ; The ideology of liberalism is marked by contradictions. Slavery has been imposed to some in the name of liberty for others. The relationship of liberalism toward the state is determined by the contradiction between negative and positive liberty. Welfare state was developed in the West in the latter half of the 20th century and based on the concept of positive liberty, but it has since been replaced by neoliberalism based on the concept of negative liberty. The result was the exacerbation of the economic gap between the wealthy and the poor. On the international level, liberalism promised a world with no wars and arranged according to reason. Following the end of the Cold War and the realization of the preconditions for the fulfillment of liberal promises, the rich countries of the West decided to impose the neoliberal model of society and economy on the rest of the world. Instead of a win-win situation, the world is faced with conflicts and crises. Liberalism can survive as a credible ideology only if all of its components are implemented both on the domestic and international levels.
BASE
In: Politicka misao, Band 34, Heft 2, S. 267-270
U članku se tvrdi da John Rawls u svojoj kritici perfekcionizma sa stajališta liberalističke neutralnosti razmatra koncepcije dobra bez demarkacije između njih, odnosno bez njihova razlikovanja. Naime, Rawls ne razrješava pitanje o tome je li tu riječ o sveobuhvatnoj religijskoj odnosno filozofsko-etičkoj koncepciji ili je riječ o parcijalnom poimanju lokalnih vrijednosti, dobara i ciljeva. Bez obzira na spornu upotrebu pojma sveobuhvatnosti, neophodno je zadržati koncept razložnosti jer poimanja dobra, da bi bila relevantna u političkoj raspravi, trebaju biti relativno dobro zasnovana, konzistentna i koherentna. Kada se pođe od danih razlikovanja, može se tvrditi da u pojedinim slučajevima uvođenje razmatranja određenih dobara u rasprave o osnovnim principima političkog ustrojstva može biti dobro potkrepljeno i, sa stajališta razložnog pluralizma, moralno opravdano. Ipak, umjereni liberalistički perfekcionizam treba precizirati odnose li se političke odluke na stvaranje opcija, na promociju vrijednih ili na odvraćanje od bezvrijednih dobara i u skladu s tim treba odrediti doseg perfekcionističkih mjera. ; The paper argues that Rawls' critique of perfectionism from the standpoint of neutral liberalism scrutinizes the conceptions of the good without demarcation between them, that is, without distinguishing whether they are comprehensive religious or philosophical conceptions, or whether they are piecemeal comprehensions of local values, concepts and goods. In addition to the high contestability in the use of the concept of comprehensiveness, it is necessary to retain the concept of reasonableness, as comprehensions of the good have to be to some extent well-founded, consistent and coherent to be considered relevant in a political dispute. Considering these distinctions, it can be claimed that, in particular cases, the application of considerations of the good in disputes concerning constitutional essentials can be supported and, considering reasonable pluralism, morally justified. Nevertheless, moderate perfectionism has to specify whether political decisions create and support options, promote valuable goods or they discourage worthless goods. It is necessary to delineate the limits of perfectionistic measures accordingly.
BASE
Članak obrazlaže potrebu eksplicitnoga uključivanja civilnoga društva u Rawlsov sustav političkog liberalizma. Članak identificira tri problema u Rawlsovu sustavu i tada kroz definicije civilnoga društva Keanea, Taylora, Gellnera i Rosenblum izlaže mogućnosti njihova rješavanja. Prvi je problem onaj stabilnosti demokratskih sustava, koji je Rawls riješio uvođenjem preklapajućeg konsenszusa. Rawls, ipak nije dostatno objasnio dinamiku interakcije između razložnih doktrina, čime je ostavio prostor za gubitak potpore trenutnoj političkoj koncepciji pravde u slučajevima u kojima politički predstavnici previše često ignoriraju stavove razložnih doktrina. Drugi je problem onaj nerazložnih doktrina: Rawls planira da ih se riješi uobičajenim pravnim mehanizmima, ali ne elaborira kako se mogu nadzirati njihove aktivnosti. Posljednji je problem onaj stvaranja i mijenjanja javnoga uma, u kojem Rawls ne daje dostatne načine na koji javnost može utjecati na odluke zakonodavaca, sudstva i državnih dužnosnika. Esej identificira elemente definicija civilnoga društva koji rješavaju ova tri problema i zaključuje da bi Rawlsov sustav bio ojačan uključivanjem civilnoga društva. ; The essay argues for explicit inclusion of civil society into Rawls's system of political liberalism. It identifies three problems in Rawls's system and then using the definitions of civil society by Keane, Taylor, Gellner and Rosenblum presents the opportunities for their solution. The first problem is the one of stability of democratic systems, which Rawls solved by introducing overlapping consensus. The essay argues that Rawls does not sufficiently account for the dynamics of the interaction between reasonable doctrines, which can conceivably result in the withdrawal of support for the current political conception of justice if the citizens' representatives too often ignore the views of too many reasonable doctrines. The second problem is the one of unreasonable doctrines: Rawls plans that they be kept under check by legal mechanisms, but does not elaborate on how their activities can be supervised. The final problem is the one of the (re)creation of public reason, in which Rawls offers insufficient means through which the public can influence the actions of law-makers, the judiciary and state officials. The essay identifies the elements of the definitions of civil society that address the three problems and concludes that Rawls's system would be made stronger by the introduction of civil society.
BASE
In: Politicka misao, Band 49, Heft 4, S. 27-44
Until the first half of the 19th century, two major contending families were predominant in political theory, namely republicanism and liberalism. The early 19th century unambiguously resolved this theoretical contestation in favor of liberalism. In the last two centuries, liberalism has been the leading political theory. The paper analyzes the revival of republican political theory within the framework of the "historical school" and puts forward the theoretical views of Quentin Skinner and John Pocock. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 31, Heft 3, S. 114-120
The author analyzes the long-, medium-, & short-term prospects of liberalism in Croatia. The long-term prospects are determined by the global future of liberalism; however, agreement among liberal theoreticians as to what that future might look like has not yet been reached. It might be said that the clout of liberals in relation to the other two major political groups -- conservatives & social democrats -- depends on the type of mixture of the value of freedom, equality, & solidarity in Croatian political culture. The medium-term prospects are determined on the basis of the analysis of the social structure of Croatian society, which displays a powerlessness of educated & economically independent social strata as the traditional addressees of liberal politics. The author thinks that major short-term changes in the Croatian political scenery are unrealistic. 2 Figures, 10 References. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 31, Heft 3, S. 92-98
The dispute between liberalism & protectionism is analyzed on two levels: theoretical & practical. First, there is the conflict between A. Smith's liberalism & F. List's economic nationalism. Over the years, Milton Friedman & James Tobin have become leaders of opposing camps. The cutting edge of the debate has been blunted, but the remaining bones of contention are still micro- & macro-issues of national & international economy. The global conflict between liberalism & protectionism has for now ended in a stalemate between regional liberalism & global protectionism. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 38, Heft 3, S. 27-51
The author probes into the epistemological roots of Rorty's liberalism & describes the mental evolution by which the unpolitical ideas presented in Philosophy & the Nature's Mirror obtained political meaning in Rorty's philosophical-political writings. Focusing on Rorty's usage of the notion of incommensurability, the author claims that Rorty fails to explain to the liberals of enlightenment why his postmodern liberalism is better than modern liberalism. 18 References. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 31, Heft 3, S. 5-19
The author's thesis is that in the 19th century, Croatia was going through a process of liberalization parallel & similar to that in the rest of Europe. The liberal idea in its political & economic forms played a major role in the platforms of the leading Croatian politicians of the time. The staunchest adversaries of liberalism were the top ecclesiastical echelons. Political liberalism received a mortal blow in 1918, while economic liberalism was smothered by the planned economy after 1945. 30 References. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 20-31
The author tries to show which social & political processes in modern postindustrial society underlie the above mentioned deliberation. Upon enumerating some of the key characteristics of the contemporary information society, the author shows the way in which communitarianism & new liberalism have tried to counter these challenges. The author shows that communitarianism & liberalism, unlike the earlier theories of democracy, are not models for the organization of a society or a state that deserve to be applied, but open-ended projects by which it is possible to democratically solve open political & social issues in the present-day information age. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 44, Heft 4, S. 3-16
The author's starting assumption is the domination of two undemocratic ideological orientations: liberalism & republicanism. The author sees republicanism & liberalism as the ideas proximate to the political or the democratic. These ideas operate semantically but cannot be identified with the political or the democratic. This is not possible as they are not commensurable structures. By providing a theoretical account of various historical traditions the author shows that European republicanism ignored democracy & considered it to be the worst form of government. This is partly true of the liberal political doctrine that evolved later. The author argues it is possible to convert republicanism to democratic pluralism i.e. that this is the biggest common good today. In this way republicanism may be spared its controversies. References. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 111-122
The author writes about MacIntyre's usage of the concept of incommensurability in the sphere of the philosophy of politics. The concept was first used by Feyerabend who based it on his relativist attack on liberalism. MacIntyre also focuses on the criticism of liberalism, not from the anarchodadaist but from the neo-Aristotelian-Thomistic perspective. The essay consists of four short sections: Section A gives a short review of MacIntyre's understanding of the concept of incommensurability in the books After Virtue & Whose Justice? Which Rationality? Section B compares MacIntyre's thinking about the incommensurability with Kuhn's & Fayerabend's solutions of the same problem. Section C describes the use of incommensurability in the book Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry; section D tries to see how dangerous MacIntyre's criticism is when directed at nonuniversalistic liberals. If incommensurability is a fact, does that make it an insurmountable problem for liberals? This text is an attempt to answer that question. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 111-122
The author writes about MacIntyre's usage of the concept of incommensurability in the sphere of the philosophy of politics. The concept was first used by Feyerabend who based it on his relativist attack on liberalism. MacIntyre also focuses on the criticism of liberalism, not from the anarchodadaist but from the neo-Aristotelian-Thomistic perspective. The essay consists of four short sections: Section A gives a short review of MacIntyre's understanding of the concept of incommensurability in the books After Virtue & Whose Justice? Which Rationality? Section B compares MacIntyre's thinking about the incommensurability with Kuhn's & Fayerabend's solutions of the same problem. Section C describes the use of incommensurability in the book Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry; section D tries to see how dangerous MacIntyre's criticism is when directed at nonuniversalistic liberals. If incommensurability is a fact, does that make it an insurmountable problem for liberals? This text is an attempt to answer that question. Adapted from the source document.
In: Politicka misao, Band 49, Heft 4, S. 45-61
Is Rousseau unquestionably an enemy of political liberalism, as per the famous irrevocable judgment of I. Berlin? In other words, is he a representative of radical (even "totalitarian") democracy, an apologist of popular sovereignty and a vicious plebeian "friend of the people" (of so-called "positive freedom"), who overlooks the importance of negative freedom of individuums and the separation of powers? Are Rousseau as republican political theorist on the one hand and political liberalism on the other advocates not only of different, but opposite perceptions of political freedom? The first part of the paper recalls the fact that Rousseau's political theory is shaped in a deliberate and complete opposition with regard to the physiocratic economic liberalism, which reduces freedom to its economic and legal aspects, and the modern man to a bourgeois. In this Rousseau is very close to Tocqueville, who questions the physiocratic doctrine from the standpoint of political liberalism. The second part provides a concise presentation and evaluation of the critique of Rousseau's political doctrine (of political freedom and popular sovereignty) from the standpoint of B. Constant's classic political liberalism. In the third, final and most important part, the author shows that an adequate comparison of Rousseau's doctrine with the liberal political doctrine must carefully distinguish between the conceptual clusters reflecting affinity (the people and the separation of powers) and the ones reflecting opposition (the people, the law, the general will and the citoyen). On the basis of this distinction, Rousseau turns out to be both frere and ennemi -- i.e. frere ennemi -- of political liberalism, but not of economic liberism as well. Adapted from the source document.