Suchergebnisse

AN EXAMINATION OF PATTERNS OF REPRESENTATION AND INTEREST ARTICULATION IN THE SUPREME SOVIET OVER TIME, AND OF ITS CHANGING INFLUENCE IN SOVIET POLITICS, SHOWS THAT THE SUPREME SOVIET CONTINUES TO HAVE VERY LIMITED AUTHORITY. IN DEBATE & LEGISLATION, IT HAS BECOME CONCERNED WITH SOCIOECONOMIC ISSUES, A TREND WHICH THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS SHOWS IT HAS NOT BECOME MARGINAL TO THE POLITICAL PROCESS.

CONCERN OF SOVIET POLITICAL LEADERS OVER THE POTENTIAL "IDEOLOGICAL CONTAMINATION" OF ITS CITIZENS WHEN MOSCOW (AND LENINGRAD, KIEV, AND TALLIN) SERVES AS HOST TO MANY WESTERNERS DURING THE 1980 SUMMER OLYMPIC GAMES IS ASSESSED. THE AUTHOR NOTES A NUMBER OF REPORTS RECENTLY GENERATED IN THE USSR WHICH CONCERN THE LACK OF SUCCESS OF POLITICAL EDUCATION IN THE COUNTRY & ITS INEFFECTIVE PROPAGANDA EFFORTS.

Cover -- Contents -- Notes on the Contributors -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction: New Labour and Future of Progressive Politics -- Part I: The Ideology of New Labour -- 1 The Ambiguities of the Third Way -- 2 New Labour: Old Liberalism -- 3 New Labour and Public Opinion: the Third Way as Centrism? -- Part II: New Labour in Government -- 4 Education and Training: Tensions at the Heart of the British Third Way -- 5 New Labour: a Distinctive Vision of Welfare Policy? -- 6 Enabling Participation? New Labour's Welfare-to-Work Policies -- 7 A Third Way in Industrial Relations? -- 8 Decentralization under New Labour: a Civic Liberal Perspective -- 9 Feminism and the Third Way: a Call for Dialogue -- Part III: Comparative Perspectives -- 10 The Collapse of Bill Clinton's Third Way -- 11 Prolegomena to the Third Way Debate -- 12 European Social Democracy and the Third Way: Convergence, Divisions, and Shared Questions -- 13 The SPD and the Neue Mitte in Germany -- 14 Dutch Lessons in Social Pragmatism -- 15 Pluralism and the Future of the French Left -- 16 Conclusion: New Labour and the Uncertain Future of Progressive Politics -- Index -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- Y.

This chapter discusses three liberal philosophies of ownership: right libertarianism, which advocates an expansive conception of private property and which holds that legitimate and strict rights to such property can emerge through the voluntary production and exchange of self-owning individuals on the basis of initial privatizations of external resources that can be very unequal but nevertheless just; left libertarianism, which modifies the right libertarian position by insisting on a (more) egalitarian initial distribution of external resources; and democratic liberalism, which makes all property rights subject to democratic judgements guided by principles of social justice which express an understanding of citizens' common good. The chapter discusses the implications of each philosophy for cooperatives and mutuals and for the place of public policy in promoting these kinds of enterprises and related institutions.

There is growing interest in the UK in holding a constitutional convention (CC) to deliberate possible reforms to the political system. What form should a CC take? Having identified a range of possible models, we examine their merits according to stated normative criteria focusing specifically on: (a) how CC membership is determined; (b) whether a CC should have agenda-setting power; and (c) whether it should have power to send proposals to binding referendum. We find good reasons to support a 'citizen majority' membership (chosen in a near-random fashion from the general public); agenda-setting-power; and referendum power. However, none of these features is likely to be the most appropriate in all contexts. Further design issues concerning citizen-majority conventions, such as whether they ought to include politicians as a minority or exclude them, are also considered. While the immediate focus of discussion is the UK, the core argument has wider relevance.

Recent years have seen a growth of interest in republicanism in academic political theory (Sandel, 1996; Pettit, 1997, 2012; Skinner, 1998; Honohan, 2002). There has also been a more modest growth of interest in "Property-Owning Democracy" (POD) as a form of economic organization, as advocated by John Rawls (Rawls, 1999). A POD is a market economy, with a significant role for private ownership of the means of production, but in which public authority is used to sustain an egalitarian distribution of productive assets so that market outcomes are more equal than is typical of a capitalist society. The categorisation of Rawls's theory as "liberal", combined with the tendency to see "liberalism" and "republicanism" as rival, even opposing schools of thought, might lead one to think that republicanism and POD stand in some kind of rival or antagonistic relationship. There are, however, strong reasons for seeing them as mutually supportive. In this paper I shall explore how POD arguably supports republicanism as a political ideal, and how republicanism also arguably supports POD as an economic ideal. By extension, I shall suggest that liberalism — or, at least, a Rawlsian liberalism— and republicanism are more appropriately seen as mutually supportive than in opposition (see also Audard, 2007; Thomas, 2016).

Under a basic capital grant policy (BC), every citizen receives a large capital grant as a right, typically in their early adulthood. Is BC part of the institutional framework of a just economy? Starting from John Rawls's discussion of just economic systems, the paper clarifies Rawls's reasons for thinking we need to complement welfare state policies with property-owning democracy and/or liberal socialist policies. It then seeks to clarify the grounds specifically for BC as a particular policy of the property-owning democracy type, and considers in depth what it adds to a policy of basic income (a uniform, universal and unconditional income grant paid to all, possibly in some part as a share of the return on publicly-owned wealth).

Dissatisfaction with the UK's social democratic welfare state was not confined to critics from the right in the years when Thatcherism was in the ascendant. This paper examines how a range of thinkers on the left (Colin Ward, Sheila Rowbotham, Stuart Hall, Paul Hirst, and Hilary Wainwright) developed a distinctive left critique of the welfare state. It discusses how they envisaged transforming the welfare state, notably through the creation of state-society partnerships that would democratise the provision of public services.

This paper proposes an idea of'values imperialism'as a helpful way of conceptualising the relationship between the EU and the states that came within its sphere of influence after the end of the Cold War, particularly its 'neighbours' in Eastern Europe. Values imperialism places its emphasis on the 'superstructure', including norms, laws and social practices. EU larger objective was that the assumptions about government and ownership that were favoured by the dominant powers (EU and the West in the broad term) should be absorbed and recapitulated by those countries that were subordinate. The broad framework ofsubordination was established by the Partnership and Cooperation Agreements that began to be concluded from 1994 onwards. Patterns of'values imperialism'could also be discovered in the EU Common Strategies on Russia and Ukraine that were adopted in 1999. Article also points out several cases when the EU intervened directly in the domestic affairs of the Eastern Europe countries in a manner that was not always compatible with the provisions on state sovereignty: a 'European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights', launched in 2006, interventions ofEU representatives in the work of local courts and organisation of exit polls, which could be used to discredit the official election results and in this way to undermine the position of local governments. Finally, the author concludes that the EU used 'values imperialism'practices in order to extend its influence, particularly in the Eastern Europe.

The author recounts the process of acquiring a work of art, focusing on one object but encapsulating the thoughts and experience of many years. In so doing, she reflects on the value added to the appreciation of artistic works and her joy in sharing this with others through public display of her collection.