Suchergebnisse

This book examines the British tradition of common good politics, both historically and in the contemporary world. We live in a time when many anti-Conservative parties and voters feel a profound sense of crisis and disorientation over political principles and policy directions. As a result, many people are turning to common good politics as an alternative to state-centred socialism and laissez-faire individualism. Colin Tyler explores the practical and intellectual history of the British idealist tradition, which flourished from the 1870s to the 1920s, before applying the principles of common good politics to contemporary issues. These issues include the positive roles that can be played by conflict within democratic societies, the radical demands of social justice in a diverse world, the continuing influence of Bush's 'war on terror', international society and free speech under Tony Blair and David Cameron, and the relationships between economic migration, social justice and the common good. The book will appeal particularly to students and scholars interested in British politics, internationalism and political theory.

Acknowledgements -- Contents -- Chapter 1: Introduction: British Idealism and Contemporary Common Good Politics -- 1 'The People of the Abyss' -- 2 Social Justice and Social Labour -- 3 Catholicism, Blue Labour and the Problematic Revival of Common Good Politics -- 4 The Radical Alternative: British Idealist Common Good Politics -- 5 The Structure of This Book -- 6 Conclusion -- Notes -- Part I: British Idealism and Common Good Politics -- Chapter 2: The Liberal Hegelianism of Edward Caird: Or, How to Transcend the Social Economics of Kant and the Romantics -- 1 Introduction

Cover ; Contents; Front matter ; Title page ; Publisher information ; Dedication ; Acknowledgements; Abbreviations; Editorial Introduction ; Body matter ; Part 1: Thomas Hill Green ; 1. Rudiments of 'The Philosophy of Aristotle' and Related Texts [ca. 1866-7] ; 2. 'Metaphysic of Ethics, Moral Psychology, Sociology or the Science of Sittlichkeit' [Late 1860s-1874] ; 3. 'Political Philosophy.' [ca. 1869-71] ; 4. The Nature of Historical Narrative in Thucydides and Herodotus [ca. 1869-71] ; 5. 'Pleasure as the Chief Good.' [Mid-1870s?].

Civil Society, Capitalism and the State presents a critical reconstruction of the social and political facets of Thomas Hill Green's liberal socialism. It explores the complex relationships Green sees between human nature, personal freedom, the common good, rights and the state. It explores Green's analysis of free exchange, his critique of capitalism and his defence of trade union activity and the cooperative movement. It establishes that Green gives only grudging support to welfarism, whic

8 -- Democracy and the Conscientious RebelI -- Introduction; II -- Democratic Participation; III -- Cultural Diversity and the Greenian State; IV -- Political Change, Rebellion and Dissent; V -- Spiritual Determinism; VI -- Conclusion; 9 -- The Principles of Green's Political Economy; I -- Introduction; II -- Property, Utility and Self-realisation; III -- Free Exchange, Free Trade and Capitalism; IV -- Some Other Possible Criticisms of the Principles of Green's Political Economy; V -- Conclusion; 10 -- Capitalism, Cooperatives, Trade Unions and the Welfare State; I -- Introduction

Hegel on state-formation and the tragedy of war -- 'A working theory of life': T.H. Green on franchise reform -- 'An unregenerate Hegelian': Edward Caird on history and sittlichkeit -- Bernard Bosanquet on individuality and the state -- Idealism and cultural diversity -- Conclusion

Benjamin Constant was a vociferous critic of the political Rousseauianism that he saw underpinning French politics in the early nineteenth-century. Yet, his hostile reaction at the political level co-existed with a far more sympathetic attitude towards Rousseau's critical analysis of modernity. This article reflects on that combination through the dual lens of the influence on Constant's position of his ambivalent attitude towards Rousseau on the one hand and the modernisation of Rousseau undertaken eighty years later by the British idealist Bernard Bosanquet (1848–1923) on the other. Reading Bosanquet with Constant's criticisms of Rousseau in mind uncovers underappreciated dimensions of both Constant and Bosanquet's thought, and suggests ways to overcome the distinction between ancient and modern liberty that is often simplistically attributed to Constant. Section one introduces the topic. Section two analyzes Constant's dual attitude to Rousseauianism. Section three analyzes Bosanquet's modern Rousseauianism. Section four deepens this analysis by contrasting the theories of modern decadence developed by Rousseau, Constant and Bosanquet. It establishes that Bosanquet articulated key relationships that escaped both Rousseau and Constant, something that led him to see progressive possibilities in decadent societies that Rousseau and Constant neglected. Consequently, Bosanquet modernised Rousseau, while both addressing Constant's criticisms and avoiding Rousseau's shortcomings.

The article analyses the progress of the Brexit debate in the UK from the time that David Cameron announced in 2013 his intention to hold a referendum on the UK's membership of the UK up until the calling of the 2019 UK General Election. It considers three dimensions of that that debate: the hatred, the lies, and the standing of UK democracy. It argues that while the first two dimensions have been particularly stark and disturbing, there are reasons to retain some faith in the UK's democratic structures and public culture.

This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election. ; This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election.

This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election. ; This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election.