In defence of progressive political change: against conservative progress and other normative troubles
In: Critical review of international social and political philosophy: CRISPP, S. 1-24
ISSN: 1743-8772
7 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Critical review of international social and political philosophy: CRISPP, S. 1-24
ISSN: 1743-8772
In: European journal of political theory: EJPT, Band 21, Heft 2, S. 276-298
ISSN: 1741-2730
In 2016, the Five Stars Movement (5SM), one of the parties currently in power in Italy, launched the 'Rousseau platform'. This is a platform meant to enhance direct democracy, transparency and the real participation of the people in the making of laws, policies and political proposals. Although ennobled with the name of Rousseau, the 5SM's redemptive promise has been strongly criticised in the public sphere for being irresponsible and ideological. Political realism, I will argue, can perform both a diagnostic and a corrective task, by providing some tools to unveil populist distortions and by offering more solid grounds for political opponents' critique. Three aspects of realism, in particular, will be pointed out as remedies against populist drifts. First, anti-moralism, complemented by anti-utopianism and contextualism, criticises the populists' moralistic picture of politics, its anti-pluralistic attitude and its rejection of the role of experts in politics. Second, the Weberian ethic of responsibility offers standards to assess politicians' actions, instead of embracing the populist aversion towards any professional politician; besides, it contrasts the populist image of politics as a derogatory activity. Finally, realism as ideology critique unveils the distorting narratives underlying populist propaganda and fostering uncritical support.
In: Journal of social philosophy, Band 54, Heft 4, S. 510-525
ISSN: 1467-9833
In: Constellations: an international journal of critical and democratic theory, Band 29, Heft 1, S. 93-106
ISSN: 1467-8675
Some realists in political theory deny that the notion of feasibility has any place in realist theory, while others claim that feasibility constraints are essential elements of realist normative theorising. But none have so far clarified what exactly they are referring to when thinking of feasibility and political realism together. In this article, we develop a conception of the realist feasibility frontier based on an appraisal of how political realism should be distinguished from non-ideal theories. In this realist framework, political standards are feasible if they meet three requirements: they are (i) politically intelligible, (ii) contextually recognisable as authoritative, and (iii) contestable. We conclude by suggesting that our conception of realist feasibility might be compatible with utopian demands, thereby possibly finding favour with realists who otherwise refuse to resort to the notion of feasibility.
BASE
SSRN
Working paper
In: Social theory and practice: an international and interdisciplinary journal of social philosophy, Band 48, Heft 1, S. 61-88
ISSN: 2154-123X
Political realists argue that the concept of political legitimacy should be linked to subjects' beliefs, while still offering normative guidance. In this article, I suggest doing so by referring to the concepts of acceptance and acceptability. I argue that a regime is legitimate if its power is accepted by subjects, provided that such acceptance meets the requirements of acceptability: subjects' beliefs about the regime's legitimacy need to successfully satisfy three requirements—coherence, fact-sensitivity, and politics-sensitivity—via entering public debate. I rely on pragmatism to investigate the link between subjects' beliefs and their experience of facing political authority.