Suchergebnisse

Criminal tribunals, truth commissions, reparations, apologies and memorializations are the characteristic instruments in the transitional justice toolkit that can help societies transition from authoritarianism to democracy, from civil war to peace, and from state-sponsored extralegal violence to a rights-respecting rule of law. Over the last several decades, their growing use has established transitional justice as a body of both theory and practice whose guiding norms and structures encompasses the range of institutional mechanisms by which societies address the wrongs committed by past regimes in order to lay the foundation for more legitimate political and legal order. In Transitional Justice a group of leading scholars in philosophy, law, and political science settles some of the key theoretical debates over the meaning of transitional justice while opening up new ones. By engaging both theorists and empirical social scientists in debates over central categories of analysis in the study of transitional justice, it also illuminates the challenges of making strong empirical claims about the impact of transitional institutions.

Jane Mansbridge's intellectual career is marked by field-shifting contributions to
democratic theory, feminist scholarship, political science methodology, and the
empirical study of social movements and direct democracy. Her work has fundamentally
challenged existing paradigms in both normative political theory and empirical
political science and launched new lines of scholarly inquiry on the most basic
questions of democratic equality, deliberation, collective action, and political
representation. Her three best-known books—Beyond Adversary
Democracy (1980), Why We Lost the ERA (1986) and
Beyond Self-Interest (1990a)—have become part of the political
science canon and remain staples on graduate course syllabi decades after their
publication. The importance of Mansbridge's work has been recognized by her
colleagues through a trifecta of major APSA awards: the Gladys M. Kammerer Award
(1987), the Victoria Schuck Award (1988), and, most recently, the James Madison
Award and Lecture (2011).

Globalization generates new structures of human interdependence and vulnerability while also posing challenges for models of democracy rooted in territorially bounded states. The diverse phenomena of globalization have stimulated two relatively new branches of Political Theory: theoretical accounts of the possibilities of democracy beyond the state; and comparative Political Theory, which aims at bringing non-Western political thought into conversation with the Western traditions that remain dominant in the Political Theory academy. This article links these two theoretical responses to globalization by showing how comparative Political Theory can contribute to the emergence of new global 'publics' around the common fates that globalization forges across borders. Building on the pragmatist foundations of deliberative democratic theory, it makes a democratic case for comparative Political Theory as an architecture of translation that helps deliberative publics grow across boundaries of culture. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

Globalization generates new structures of human interdependence and vulnerability while also posing challenges for models of democracy rooted in territorially bounded states. The diverse phenomena of globalization have stimulated two relatively new branches of political theory: theoretical accounts of the possibilities of democracy beyond the state; and comparative political theory, which aims at bringing non-Western political thought into conversation with the Western traditions that remain dominant in the political theory academy. This article links these two theoretical responses to globalization by showing how comparative political theory can contribute to the emergence of new global "publics" around the common fates that globalization forges across borders. Building on the pragmatist foundations of deliberative democratic theory, it makes a democratic case for comparative political theory as an architecture of translation that helps deliberative publics grow across boundaries of culture.