Suchergebnisse

Argues that, in spite of many close affinities, there are significant tensions between arguments for group representation & defenses of deliberative democracy. It is contended that defenders of deliberate democracy have not sufficiently considered the challenges social differences present to a deliberative conception of legitimacy. Contestations related to gender, race, ethnicity, class, or sexuality have the potential of undermining "notions of reasonableness upon which deliberative theory depends for its conception of legitimacy." The place of impartiality in various theories of deliberative democracy is explored, along with the contributions of marginalized group perspectives to democratic deliberation. Recent feminist critiques of deliberative democracy are extended to consider challenges to deliberative theory posed by a standard of reasonableness & social/political circumstances under which marginalized group perspectives are likely to influence the opinions of others. The implications are discussed in relation to general notions of the virtues/responsibilities of citizenship. A debate in the US Senate about the Confederate flag is highlighted to illustrate the uncertainty of reason-giving in public discourse. 1 Appendix. J. Lindroth

AbstractThe theoretical literature on representation tends to read the work of Edmund Burke as a defence of a functional-corporatist conception of society, in which the groups relevant for political representation are stable and objective economic "interests" whose cooperation in and contribution to the life of nation and empire are essential for the status of Britain as a pre-eminent commercial power. This article presents an alternative, contractarian Burke that emerges out of his defence of the interests of non-economic "descriptions" of citizens such as Irish Catholics, a Burke who offers us an illuminating perspective from which to assess the claims of historically marginalized groups in contemporary liberal democratic societies.

Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo. All are examples where humanitarian intervention has been called into action. This timely and important new volume explores the legal and moral issues which emerge when a state uses military force in order to protect innocent people from violence perpetrated or permitted by the government of that state. Humanitarian intervention can be seen as a moral duty to protect but it is also subject to misuse as a front for imperialism without regard to international law. In Humanitarian Intervention , the contributors explore the many questions surrounding the issue