Suchergebnisse

Established institutions and policies of dealing with religious diversity in liberal democratic states are increasingly under pressure. Practical politics and political theory is caught in a trap between a fully secularized state (strict separation of state and politics from completely privatized religions based on an idealized version of American denominationalism or French republicanism) and neo-corporatist or 'pillarized' regimes of selective cooperation between states and organized religions. The book offers an original, comprehensive conceptual, theoretical and practical approach to problems of governance of religious diversity from a multi-disciplinary perspective combining moral and political philosophy, constitutional law, history, sociology and anthropology of religions and comparative institutionalism. Proposals of associative democracy - a moderately libertarian, flexible version of democratic institutional pluralism - are introduced and scrutinized whether they can serve as as plausible third way overcoming the inherent deficiencies of the predominant models in theory and practice.

Established institutions and policies of dealing with religious diversity in liberal democratic states are increasingly under pressure. Practical politics and political theory is caught in a trap between a fully secularized state (strict separation of state and politics from completely privatized religions based on an idealized version of American denominationalism or French republicanism) and neo-corporatist or 'pillarized' regimes of selective cooperation between states and organized religions. The book offers an original, comprehensive conceptual, theoretical and practical approach to problems of governance of religious diversity from a multi-disciplinary perspective combining moral and political philosophy, constitutional law, history, sociology and anthropology of religions and comparative institutionalism. Proposals of associative democracy - a moderately libertarian, flexible version of democratic institutional pluralism - are introduced and scrutinized whether they can serve as as plausible third way overcoming the inherent deficiencies of the predominant models in theory and practice. - Gevestigde liberaaldemocratische instituties en beleid staan door nieuwe religieuze minderheden, met name moslims, onder toenemende druk. Het lijkt alsof praktische politiek en politieke theorie moeten kiezen tussen een volledig geseculariseerde staat - een strikte scheiding tussen staat/politiek en volledig geprivatiseerde godsdiensten, gebaseerd op een geïdealiseerd model van de VS of van Frans-republikeinse laïcité - enerzijds, of verzuilde systemen van selectieve samenwerking tussen staat en kerken anderzijds. Secularism or Democracy presenteert een nieuwe conceptuele, theoretische en praktische benadering van oude en recente problemen in de omgang met religieuze diversiteit. Het verbindt ethische en politiek-filosofische perspectieven met constitutioneel recht, geschiedenis, godsdienst-sociologie en -antropologie, en vergelijkend institutionalisme. Voorstellen uit de traditie van associatieve democratie - een vrijzinnige, flexibele versie van een democratisch, institutioneel pluralisme - bieden een 'derde weg' die belooft de tekortkomingen van de dominante modellen in theorie en praktijk te vermijden.

Cover -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Contributors -- Introduction -- Part I: Citizenship and Exclusion: Philosophical Perspectives -- 1 Migration and Poverty -- 2 Fairly Open Borders -- Part II: Citizenship, Migration and Incorporation: Historical Perspectives -- 3 The 'Nature' of Nationality -- 4 Segmented Macrosystems, Networking Individuals, Cultural Change: Balancing Processes and Interactive Change in Migration -- Part III: Modes of Incorporation and Politics of Multiculturalism: Sociological Perspectives -- 5 Beyond Multiculturalist Citizenship: The Challenge of Pluralism in Canada -- 6 Multicultural Citizenship: The Australian Experience -- 7 Modes of Incorporation: Towards a Comparative Framework -- Part IV: Dilemmas of Migration and Incorporation Policies -- 8 The Arts of Forecasting and Policy Making -- 9 Conclusion -- Bibliography -- Index.

Associative Democracy (AD) has been developed as a specific response to statist socialism and neoliberal capitalism, drawing on older traditions such as associationalism, democratic socialism, and cooperative socialism. As the 'real third way', it is distinct from neoliberal privatization and deregulation in the Blair–Schröder varieties of social democracy and in the conservative Reagan–Thatcher–Cameron varieties. This article summarizes what seemed to make AD an attractive realist utopia: its combination of economic, societal and political democracy; its focus on democratic institutional pluralism in all these regards; its considered moral/political minimalism; and its practical experimentalism. It recapitalizes some of the important economic, societal and political changes during the last decennia that seem to make AD plainly utopian again. It focuses on an outline of basic principles and institutions of socio-economic alternatives to capitalism because, if neoliberalism rules supreme, no viable alternatives can emerge and grow. Even if there is not one institutional design that fits all countries and contexts, we can show what the basic tenets of such alternatives are and how such a colourful democratic socialism relates to and can integrate other approaches such as 'circular economy', 'foundational economy' and 'radical social innovation'. The hope is that AD's broad institutional pluralism and its emphasis on practical experimentalism show new ways of thinking which are urgently needed for sustainable and socially fair economic development and for renewing representative democracy.

The battles between proponents and opponents of judicial supremacy have recently intensified in the US and also in Europe. I summarise the debates in political philosophy, legal theory and comparative constitutionalism and argue that both judicial supremacy and parliamentary supremacy claims are empirically and normatively indefensible: no one actually has or should have the last word. Instead, we need adversarial judicial, political and public dialogues stimulated by cooperation/competition between parliaments and courts and other actors. I focus on judicial review in two contexts. I ask whether the Canadian notwithstanding clause might provide a rational way forward, if properly amended. For the EU I analyse new forms of dialogue, cooperation and competition between parliaments and constitutional courts in Member States, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Learning from these comparisons, I submit, can profit from two non-legal discussions: first on 'democratising expertise' in the traditions of critical pragmatism and experimentalist governance and, second, on the traditions of democratic institutional pluralism and associative democracy.