Suchergebnisse

En el presente trabajo hago un balance entre las concepciones de lo político de Hannah Arendt y John Rawls. Sobre esa base, reviso la posición de estos dos autores respecto del pluralismo. En primer lugar, señalo los aspectos básicos de la noción de pluralismo en la concepción de lo político de Arendt. Hago esto teniendo en cuenta el análisis de su distinción entre vita activa y vita contemplativa. En segundo lugar, analizo los principales aspectos de la propuesta política de Rawls. Centro la atención en los conceptos de "imparcialidad" y "razonabilidad" como nociones nucleares de su concepción de lo político en Liberalismo político (2011). Abordo la noción de pluralismo razonable junto con tres de las críticas que se hicieron a la concepción rawlsiana de pluralismo. Finalmente, contrasto las dos posiciones en un diálogo que destaca las diferencias entre los planteamientos de estos dos autores y doy razones para optar por las ideas de Arendt acerca de lo político. ; Abstract. In this work I make a balance between the conceptions of politics by Hannah Arendt y John Rawls. To accomplish this purpose, I review their position with respect to pluralism. First, I point out the basic aspects related to pluralism in the political conception of Arendt. I do this by taking into account the analysis of the distinction between vita activa and vita contemplativa. Second, I analyze the main aspects of the Rawl´s political proposal. I focus on the concepts of "impartiality" and "reasonability" as nuclear notions in their conception on politics in Political Liberalism (2011). I approach the notion of reasonable pluralism and three critics that were made to the rawlsean conception of pluralism. Finally, I contrast both Arendt´s and Rawls´s positions in a dialogue that shows the differences between the approaches of these two authors, and I give reasons for choosing Arendt´s ideas about politics. ; Maestría

The aim of this article is to analyze pluralism that runs transversally through John Gray's politicalthought, a British theorist whose work occupies a relevant position in the field of contemporarypolitical theory. To this end, the more intellectual and non-ideological side of his thought is here examined; in other words, his works focused on political theorizing. Firstly, it is analyzed how Gray defines value pluralism on the basis of three interrelated ideas: plurality, incommensurability and impossibility of rational resolution of value conflicts. Even if Gray adopts a radical notion of incommensurability, he also attributes certain limits to it; what is of great importance to understand his whole political theory. Secondly, it is examined the connection between value pluralism and Gray's political proposal. On the one hand, the article focuses on his «negative» criticism of liberalism and communitarianism, as well as his more or less explicit defense of multiculturalism. On the other hand, the article examines Gray's «positive» political theory, as it is reflected in his proposal of modus vivendi, which displays some sort of ambiguity as a consequence of his double understanding of value pluralism both as descriptive and normative. Finally, it is argued that this ambiguity is explained, too, by Gray's balanced view of politics, for whom considerations of legitimacy and normativity are not overridden altogether by the indeterminate, contextual and contingent political processes involved in establishing a modus vivendi. Ultimately, this contributes to shape Gray's sui generis political theory. ; Este artículo tiene por objetivo analizar el pluralismo que recorre, de forma trasversal, el pensamientopolítico de John Gray, teórico británico cuya obra ocupa una posición relevante en lateoría política contemporánea. Para ello, se examina la vertiente más intelectual y no ideológicade su pensamiento, es decir, sus obras más centradas en la teorización política. En primer lugarse analiza cómo define Gray el pluralismo de valores según tres postulados interrelacionados:pluralidad, inconmensurabilidad e imposibilidad de resolución racional de los conflictos valorativos.Si bien Gray adopta una noción radical de inconmensurabilidad, también le otorgaciertos límites, algo sumamente importante para entender el conjunto de su teoría política. Ensegundo lugar, se estudia la conexión entre el pluralismo de valores y la propuesta política deGray. Por un lado, el artículo se centra en su crítica «negativa» al liberalismo y al comunitarismo,así como su defensa más o menos explícita del multiculturalismo. Por otro, se examinasu teoría política «positiva», reflejada en su propuesta del modus vivendi, la cual denota ciertaambigüedad como consecuencia de un doble entendimiento, descriptivo y normativo, de lapropia noción de pluralismo de valores. Finalmente, se argumenta que dicha ambigüedadtambién se explica a la luz de la equilibrada noción de política sostenida por Gray, para quienlas consideraciones normativas y de legitimidad no deberían dejar de tener cierta cabida en laarticulación indeterminada, contextual y contingente de un modus vivendi. En última instancia,esto contribuye a que pueda afirmarse que la teoría política de Gray es muy sui generis.

El sometimiento de las mujeres es uno de los libros más importantes del filósofo y economista inglés John Stuart Mill, defensor del utilitarismo como doctrina moral y padre del feminismo liberal, que llegó a defender delante del Parlamento inglés la amplitud de derechos en el terreno político mediante el reconocimiento del sufragio universal para las mujeres.

This paper questions those interpretations of Locke as a follower of leveller radicalism and an unequivocal supporter of political equality and democracy. It argues that his work and political thought seek mainly a return to «our ancient government» and «its original constitution», that is, a model of "moderate or mixed monarchy" which not only represents a democratic regression compared to the «popular republicanism» of the Levellers but also a form of government in which the democratic and egalitarian elements are weakened. ; RESUMENEl presente trabajo discute aquellas interpretaciones de Locke como un continuador del radicalismo leveller y un partidario inequívoco de la igualdad política y la democracia. Sostiene que su obra y pensamiento político persigue más bien un retorno a «our ancient government» y «its original constitution», esto es, un modelo de «monarquía moderada» o «mixta» que no sólo representa un retroceso democrático respecto al «republicanismo popular» de los levellers sino también una forma de gobierno en la que los elementos democráticos e igualitarios quedan debilitados. PALABRAS CLAVELOCKE, LIBERALISMO–IGUALDAD–DEMOCRACIA–MONARQUÍAABSTRACTThis paper questions those interpretations of Locke as a follower of leveller radicalism and an unequivocal supporter of political equality and democracy. It argues that his work and political thought seek mainly a return to «our ancient government» and «its original constitution», that is, a model of "moderate or mixed monarchy" which not only represents a democratic regression compared to the «popular republicanism» of the Levellers but also a form of government in which the democratic and egalitarian elements are weakened. KEY WORDSLOCKE–LIBERALISM–EQUALITY–DEMOCRACY–MONARCHY

In each instance that John Gower uses the term "Saracen" in his Confessio Amantis to characterize the enemies of Christendom, Juan de Cuenca' s prose Castilian translation, the Confisyon del Amante, employs alternative language -language that predominantly downplays rather than exacerbates scenes of religious conflict. This essay analyzes these divergent representations of difference to argue that such comparative analysis of English and Spanish texts makes legible each writer's differing investments in narratives of Christianity's violence and pacifism, its anxieties about its religious neighbors and its belief in its own triumphant ascendancy. Understanding the interpretive nuances of these differences between Gower and Cuenca carries implications for our understanding of the political, historical, and literary transactions between England and Castile and Leon in the late middle ages.

This essay analyzes why John Gower set the "Tale of the Three Questions," the concluding story in Book I of the Confessio Amantis, in Spain. Written during a time of intense parliamentary concerns over money apparently wasted by Richard II's uncles on military campaigns against Castille-Leon, the tale argues tar the relevance of Spain to England and for the relevance of poetic counsel in domestic politics. The question of Spain in English politics in the 1380s offered Gower a way into debates among the magnates and parliaments of England by evoking past and present Anglo-Castilian relationships. He imagines a situation in which the strategy of good counsel works, suggesting a more acceptable set of choices: alliance and realignment instead of the absolutism of either conquest or avoidance.

In this interview with Hugo Radice, John Holloway and Sol Picciotto (early Conference of Socialist Economists (CSE) members) conducted by Edith González, Panagiotis Doulos and Milena Rodríguez Aza (postdoctoral and PhD students from the Benemérita Autonomous University of Puebla, Mexico), we find a reflection on the CSE early days and a recalling of significant debates among CSE members exploring their relevance today. Above all, Clarke's CSE fellows tell us what it meant to be a socialist economist working together with Simon Clarke.