Suchergebnisse

Abstract: The following article takes aim at the deeply contested relationship between the secular and the religious in the contemporary: in its conceptual but also genealogical dimensions. Toward this end the essay analyzes Hobbes's Leviathan and Kant's Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason by adopting a bifocaled lens in exposing what is seen as two interrelated forms of universality. One consisted in the (historical and pre-Christian) image of Judaic law and the Jewish people in the self-understanding of what claimed to be a universalizing (moral) Christianity, while the other consisted in a notion of reason that articulates and expresses human morality as a characteristic and index of freedom therein constituting a political society and its laws. The essay argues that the secular-religious dialectic is best understood in terms of this relationship between the image of the Judaic as it operates within Christian and "modern" aspirations toward universality. This dialectic is thereby shown to be essential to thinking and reflecting about the modern emergence of categories like the secular, the national, and the religious in their distinctions: their development as much as their ruin. In such an analysis a critique of the contemporary forms of political-theology—prominently in Schmitt and reiterated in Agamben and Badiou—is also undertaken as conclusion.

This article analyses B. R. Ambedkar's works written between 1941 and 1948, and it discerns a central set of concerns and arguments in this otherwise diverse corpus. It argues that since universal franchise as a political principle is uncontroversial, Ambedkar's primary concern is geared towards the danger of democratic majoritarianism in a society riven by historically, legally and ideologically determined forms of inequality and their logic—a danger that can only be addressed at the dual levels of institutional design and ideological critique. Reading together Pakistan or the Partition of India and What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables, the initial sections argue that Ambedkar was critical of Congress and Muslim league politics because he saw in them both, albeit in distinct ways, the affirmation of religious identity as central to the formulation of political identity. Such an orientation, in the actual mechanics of mass politics and constitutional negotiation, is therefore read as inevitably leading to conflicts including demands for Partition, but at the same time such politics avoided fundamental questions of internal critique and instituted forms of socialized inequality. It is in this context, and the imminence of Partition, that the article analyses Ambedkar's argument for the need of both a specific institutional design (constitutional provisions) and an ideology critique (his historical research including Who were the Sudras and The Untouchables). The analysis of the demand for partition and the category of the minority can only be understood through Ambedkar's acute historical and theoretical understanding of the nation and its history, as well as the normative demands required for institutional justice, as will be shown through a reading of this corpus.

Ravi K. Mishra and N. Shukla (Eds.), Selected Works of C. Rajagopalachari, Vol. VI, 1936-39. New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan, 2021.

This paper attempts to establish that capital punishment is not rational and cannot be rationalized without suicidally destroying the very ground on which lawful and rational punishment bases itself. It argues that in capital punishment, just as in any lawful punishment, the criminal is both held (humanly) rational and therefore culpable. But, unlike other forms of punishment, in capital punishment, the condemned is at the same time, held as irrational and irredeemable, beyond reform, and therein outside the ambit of rationality and humanity. In this sense a fundamental aporia is reached in rationalizing capital punishment because of the contradiction between the basis of punishment (the human as rational) and its operational logic (the condemned person as beyond reform therein irrational). Expressed another way, the judge proclaims a form of infallibility in their reasoning where the incorrigibility of the judgment is horrifically demonstrated and ironically reflected (and projected) in the incorrigibility of the condemned. This broad argument is pursued in two parts; one part interprets canonical texts such as Hobbes, Hegel and Foucault, while the second part interprets the Supreme Court of India's jurisprudence around the death penalty. While these are very different discourses it will be shown that they share much common ground in their expressing—and negotiating—the fundamental problem as described above.

MANU BHAGAVAN, ed., Heterotopias: Nationalism and the Possibility of History in South Asia, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 203.

This article argues that in the mid to late eighteenth century, political economy, through writers such as Francois Quesnay, David Hume and Adam Smith, saw a discussion of 'despotism', which stood for thinking through the political arrangement within which economic productivity was formulated; even as the distinction between the two was not always self-evident. This theoretical function of despotism disappears in the 'mature' phase of political economy (David Ricardo), precisely when it was taking shape—in institutional and conceptual-lexical terms—in the subcontinent through Britain's conquest of India via the East India Company. We argue that the disappearance of despotism at the conceptual level in this phase in Britain is not only questionable from a theoretical standpoint but also played its historical role as a decoy in occluding attention toward imperialism in India wherein the distinction between the political and the economic was becoming more and more difficult to make. Through such an investigation we thus hope to examine the emergence of the economy (and by implication the state-political) as an independent analytic site as well as evaluate its categories and historical significance. We base our argument on a reading of the canonical texts of figures such as Adam Smith, William Blackstone and David Ricardo, Land Revenue Settlement sources in India and the hitherto neglected economic writings of W.H. Sleeman.

The following essay is an investigation into the nature of the contract the way in which the contract indexes right and equality, and the textual and historical expressions -- as well as echoes -- that this has taken from Thomas Hobbes to Karl Marx. It will be argued that only an attention to Marx's reformation of the older problematic as found in Hobbes will help us understand the significance of his critique of the French Revolutionary theory of abstract right, and the consequent development and critique of political economy. Adapted from the source document.

Purpose
This study aims to examine the role of hope and hate in political leaders' messages in influencing liberals versus conservatives' social-distancing behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the increasing political partisanship across the world today, using the appropriate message framing has important implications for social and public policy.


Design/methodology/approach
The authors use two Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods – a pretrained package (HateSonar) and a classifier built to implement our supervised neural network-based model architecture using RoBERTa – to analyze 61,466 tweets by each US state's governor and two senators with the goal of examining the association between message factors invoking hate and hope and increased or decreased social distancing from March to May 2020. The authors examine individuals' social-distancing behaviors (the amount of nonessential driving undertaken) using data from 3,047 US counties between March 13 and May 31, 2020, as reported by Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports and the New York Times repository of COVID-19 data.


Findings
The results show that for conservative state leaders, the use of hate increases nonessential driving of state residents. However, when these leaders use hope in their speech, nonessential driving of state residents decreases. For liberal state leaders, the use of hate displays a directionally different result as compared to their conservative counterparts.


Research limitations/implications
Amid the emergence of new analytic techniques and novel data sources, the findings demonstrate that the use of global positioning systems data and social media analysis can provide valuable and precise insights into individual behavior. They also contribute to the literature on political ideology and emotion by demonstrating the use of specific emotion appeals in targeting specific consumer segments based on their political ideology.


Practical implications
The findings have significant implications for policymakers and public health officials regarding the importance of considering partisanship when developing and implementing public health policies. As partisanship continues to increase, applying the appropriate emotion appeal in messages will become increasingly crucial. The findings can help marketers and policymakers develop more effective social marketing campaigns by tailoring specific appeals given the political identity of the consumer.


Originality/value
Using Neural NLP methods, this study identifies the specific factors linking social media messaging from political leaders and increased compliance with health directives in a partisan population.