Suchergebnisse

De problemen waarmee Europa sinds de economische crisis van 2007 worstelt, roepen meer dan ooit vragen op naar de verhouding tussen economie en politiek. Het Westen is er altijd op uit geweest deze twee categorieën strikt van elkaar te scheiden. Economie en politiek zijn steeds opgevat als tegengesteld: noodzaak versus vrijheid, privaat belang versus algemeen belang, maatschappij versus staat, markt versus politiek, globalisering versus soevereiniteit. Het ging erom de prioriteit van de politiek veilig te stellen en aan te geven dat zij zich niet laat herleiden tot de economie. In de huidige crises is de staat zich gaan inlaten met het beheer van de markten en hij doet dit onder dwang van die markten zelf. Dit betekent niet dat de economie de politiek opgeslokt heeft, zoals beweerd wordt door het neoliberalisme, integendeel. Economie en politiek staan niet meer tegenover elkaar, maar zijn wederzijds afhankelijk, zonder dat hun verschil is opgeheven. Hun verhouding is breekbaar. Maar noch de economie noch de politiek is in staat om concreet gestalte te geven aan de samenleving. De samenhang van de samenleving is niet louter economisch te begrijpen, zoals het neoliberalisme stelt, noch louter politiek, zoals de traditionele politieke filosofie poneert. De poreuze verbinding tussen economie en politiek stelt juist in staat om nieuwe vormen van samenleven uit te vinden

The development of a strict methodology of observation & analysis in soc sci has always met with resistance. In the current debate on this topic in the US, 2 positions can be distinguished. There are the 'theorists,' who find their inspiration in the work of recent philosophers such as H. Marcuse & J.-P. Sartre; they rate the formation of a pol'al theory as a 1st priority. Then there are the 'behaviorists,' whose first care is for sci'fic method. This contrast is reviewed on the basis of the document, "Political Science at Berkeley, An Invitation to a Discussion," which was published anonymously by a group of students. The criticism of these students can be summarized under the headings 'commitment' & 'relevance.' As far as commitment is concerned, the critics reproach the behaviorists for not taking stands in important contemporary moral issues, & for identifying with the status quo. It is argued here that what leads to acceptance of & identification with the existing pol'al order is not behaviorist methodology as such, but rather the mood of the behaviorists. As far as 'relevance' is concerned, the critics are impatient with the futile detail analysis & data collecting of the behaviorists. The behaviorists' use of a strict methodology of explanation by generalization leads to a reduction of the scope of analysis. Then only the 'easy' aspects ('easy' to quantify, 'easy' to collect, etc) are analyzed, & discontinuous developments are neglected. The argument presented here is that the lack of a dynamic theory of the pol'al process is an impediment indeed for pol'al sci, but that, again, behaviorism as such cannot be accused of being 'conservative' or 'conformistic': the refutation of race theories, for example, was rather a radical undertaking. It is concluded that for the time being it is not necessary to lay other bounds on pol'al sci than those that follow from the claims of rational debate & intellectual honesty. HA.

"How to navigate the rapidly changing digital geopolitics of the world today? How do we make sense of digital transformation and its many social, political, cultural, and environmental implications at different locations around the world? Vertical Atlas brings together the insights of a diverse group of internationally renowned artists, scientists and technologists from different backgrounds and places. From an investigation into the lithium mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo to maps of the fiber-optic submarine cables in the Atlantic and the ride-hailing platforms of China. Vertical Atlas is not a classic atlas that depicts the world in a uniform manner and it is not a simple collection of traditional maps. This book is a tool that enables comparisons, connections and contradictions between different and diverse visions, realities and worlds – through newly commissioned diagrams, interviews, essays and works of art by leading experts from around the world."--

The relationship between voters' perceptions of party leaders' personality traits & their subsequent party identification & voting behavior was examined in the Nov 1981 Belgian national elections based on evaluations made by 201 voters of 4 well-known leaders of the main Flemish political parties. Factor analysis reveals 3 main dimensions of personality traits -- reliability, expertness, & self-control -- & 4 types of voters -- convinced, policy-oriented, routine, & indifferent. Party leaders' personality traits variably affected voting behavior depending on voter type. Overall, the personality profiles of each leader were quite similar; however, Rs identified with a certain party tended to rate politicians from that party more favorably, particularly on reliability & attractiveness dimensions. 6 Tables, 1 Figure. Modified HA