Suchergebnisse

Recent academic debates concerning the WPS agenda have highlighted the existence of several cracks undermining the conceptualisation as well as the operationalisation and implementation of the principles and actions stemming from the WPS framework. After proposing to consider the WPS Agenda as a norm lab and recognising the urgency to repair its conceptual cracks, this article critically analyses two main conceptual weaknesses limiting the emancipatory potential of the Agenda, namely the conceptualisation of identity and agency that it reflects and projects, arguing that the former reveals a stereotypical and ambiguous formulation, while the latter is thin and unfit for sustaining a transformative political project. The article discusses insights from the discussion on epistemic (in)justice, which originated from the work of Miranda Fricker, arguing that they are valuable heuristic resources for developing a WPS conceptual framework able to escape the essentialist trap, identifying the injustices done to women and men as discriminated and marginalised subjects in their capacity as knowers and active contributors to the dialogues concerning the planning and deployment of measures for conflict and post-conflict management.

For decades, the theoretical discussion on justice has been unsuccessfully looking for convincing solutions to the moral problems connected to the persistence of (porous) borders in international politics. These problems are especially striking when one looks at the mismatch between the claims of international migrants and the arguments deployed by several contemporary liberal states in order to justify the rejection of those claims. Critically analysing how the most influential accounts of domestic and global justice deal with the issue of migration, the essay reveals the main weaknesses of the two approaches. It is argued that while theories of justice focusing on domestic justice seem unable to transcend the dichotomous logic of inclusion and exclusion because of their partial and biased interpretation of the phenomenon of migration, theories of global justice offer a multidimensional and well-balanced reading of international migration, but the solutions they propose do not rely on an accurate reading of the impact of global political dynamics on the management of international migration. In order to overcome the weaknesses of both approaches, a new research agenda is needed. ; Durante décadas la discusión teórica sobre la justicia ha estado buscando sin éxito soluciones convincentes a los problemas morales relacionados con la persistencia de fronteras (permeables) en la política internacional. Estos problemas son particularmente sorprendentes cuando se observa el desfase entre las reclamaciones de derechos (legales) de los migrantes internacionales y los argumentos esgrimidos por algunos estados liberales contemporáneos para rechazar estas. Analizando de forma crítica cómo las teorías más influyentes de justicia nacional y global afrontan la cuestión de las migraciones, el ensayo destaca los principales puntos débiles de los dos enfoques. Se expone que mientras que las teorías que se concentran en la justicia nacional no parecen ser capaces de trascender la dicotomía lógica inclusión/ exclusión a causa de su interpretación parcial y sesgada del fenómeno de las migraciones, las teorías de justicia global ofrecen una lectura multidimensional y equilibrada de las migraciones internacionales, pero no consiguen proponer soluciones basadas en una lectura adecuada del impacto de las dinámicas de la política global en la gestión local de los migrantes. Para superar las debilidades de las dos visiones es necesario un nuevo programa de investigación.

For decades, the theoretical discussion on justice has been unsuccessfully looking for convincing solutions to the moral problems connected to the persistence of (porous) borders in international politics. These problems are especially striking when one looks at the mismatch between the claims of international migrants and the arguments deployed by several contemporary liberal states in order to justify the rejection of those claims. Critically analysing how the most influential accounts of domestic and global justice deal with the issue of migration, the essay reveals the main weaknesses of the two approaches. It is argued that while theories of justice focusing on domestic justice seem unable to transcend the dichotomous logic of inclusion and exclusion because of their partial and biased interpretation of the phenomenon of migration, theories of global justice offer a multidimensional and well-balanced reading of international migration, but the solutions they propose do not rely on an accurate reading of the impact of global political dynamics on the management of international migration. In order to overcome the weaknesses of both approaches, a new research agenda is needed.

From Kant's plan for perpetual peace to Rawls's proposal of a law of peoples, liberal projects for world order assume the homogeneity of states' regimes as a determinant factor for bringing about peace and moral progress. Particularly, at the foundations of Rawlsian internationalism is the 'fact' of democratic peace, considered to be a sound and immutable feature of the international system. This article questions this oversimplified reading of Michael Doyle's hypothesis about the apparent existence of a 'separate peace' among democratic states. It argues that liberal projects for global order should consider the 'separate peace' merely as a working hypothesis and they should address also the problematic aspects related to it, namely the unnecessary aggressiveness that democratic states show towards non-democracies and the coercive – and possibly illiberal – nature of the Society of Peoples.

Introduction : in search of paradigms : disinformation, fake news, and post-truth politics / Serena Giusti and Elisa Piras -- Reading Arendt to rethink truth, science and politics in the era of fake news / Federica Merenda -- Inequality in the public sphere : epistemic injustice, discrimination and violence / Elisa Piras -- Incorporating intersectionality into AI ethics / Liza Ireni-Saban and Maya Sherman -- How post-truth politics transformed and shaped the outcome of the 2016 Brexit referendum / Jennifer Cassidy -- Information and democracy : fake news as an emotional weapon / Matthew Loveless -- Searching for a unicorn : fake news and electoral behaviour / Luigi Curini and Eugenio Pizzimenti -- Once upon Covid-19 : a tale of misleading information going viral / Alice Hazelton -- Lie to live : the production of a faked reality as an existential function of Putin's regime / Anna Zafesova -- Playing the Russian disinformation game : information operations from Soviet tactics to Putin's sharp power / Francesco Bechis -- Myths and realities of Putinism in post-truth politics / Mara Morini -- Responding to alleged Russian interference by focusing on the vulnerabilities that make it possible / Giorgio Comai -- Information spreading and the role of automated accounts on Twitter : two case studies / Guido Caldarelli, Rocco De Nicola, Marinella Petrocchi, and Fabio Saracco -- Radical-right political activism on the Web and the challenge for European democracy : a perspective from Eastern and Central Europe / Manuela Caiani and Pál Susánszky -- When a credible source turns 'fake' : the Relotius affair and the German system for combatting fake news / Mihail Stojanoski -- "But verifying facts is what we do!" : fact-checking and journalistic professional autonomy / Urban Larssen -- The EU Code of Practice on Disinformation and the risk of the privatisation of censorship / Matteo Monti.

This book explores the challenges that disinformation, fake news, and post-truth politics pose to democracy from a multidisciplinary perspective. The authors analyse and interpret how the use of technology and social media as well as the emergence of new political narratives has been progressively changing the information landscape, undermining some of the pillars of democracy. The volume sheds light on some topical questions connected to fake news, thereby contributing to a fuller understanding of its impact on democracy. In the Introduction, the editors offer some orientating definitions of post-truth politics, building a theoretical framework where various different aspects of fake news can be understood. The book is then divided into three parts: Part I helps to contextualise the phenomena investigated, offering definitions and discussing key concepts as well as aspects linked to the manipulation of information systems, especially considering its reverberation on democracy. Part II considers the phenomena of disinformation, fake news, and post-truth politics in the context of Russia, which emerges as a laboratory where the phases of creation and diffusion of fake news can be broken down and analysed; consequently, Part II also reflects on the ways to counteract disinformation and fake news. Part III moves from case studies in Western and Central Europe to reflect on the methodological difficulty of investigating disinformation, as well as tackling the very delicate question of detection, combat, and prevention of fake news. This book will be of great interest to students and scholars of political science, law, political philosophy, journalism, media studies, and computer science, since it provides a multidisciplinary approach to the analysis of post-truth politics.

The essay investigates Raymond Aron's attitude towards European integration, through a critical analysis of primary sources, in order to problematise the interpretations recently offered by scholars working on Europeanism. The evidence offered supports the argument that, compared to Jean Monnet's federalism and to Charles de Gaulle's nationalism, Aron's perspective presents original traits. Notwithstanding his belief that European states ought to create a framework for enhancing cooperation in crucial sectors (trade, security) which could lead to a certain degree of political integration, Aron was not convinced that this process would eventually produce a federation. Furthermore, he thought that further integration ought to be pursued with the active involvement of European peoples, together with the reconciliation with Germany and its inclusion within an anti-Soviet Atlantic alliance. The conclusion is that, as far as Europe is concerned, Aron's position cannot be simplistically labelled as Europeanist or anti-Europeanist. Rather, it might be described as a realistic scepticism.

Central Asian countries seem to be immune from the 'virus' of democratization. Without denying the importance of the factors that are considered to account for authoritarian resilience elsewhere, this article focuses on the ongoing process of establishment of an 'authoritarian cartel' at the regional level, sponsored by major authoritarian powers and embodied by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Evidence to support this claim can be found through a qualitative content analysis of SCO's official documents, including official statements, from the end of 2010 to mid-2013, that is, during the development of the 'Arab Spring' events. This article develops a tentative analysis of these data and envisages possible avenues for future research. Adapted from the source document.