Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe 1992 Consensus is perhaps the most crucial political term for cross‐strait relations. Surveys show that the public consistently supports it in Taiwan. Despite the alleged broad support, there has not been an academic study examining if Taiwanese people understand the content of the 1992 Consensus. Such an inquiry is important as the administration in Taiwan has yet accepted the Consensus in its interactions with Beijing. A nearly representative online survey was conducted in July 2018, and 1001 Taiwanese respondents were recruited to choose among different "definitions" of the 1992 Consensus. Results show that only one‐third of the respondents chose the version that Kuomintang agreed on, while another one‐third misperceived the 1992 Consensus as a country‐to‐country agreement. Taiwanese people might have supported the Consensus for content that it is not. We then discuss the policy implications of our study for both China and Taiwan and provide future research orientations.

THE ARTICLE EXAMINES THE POST-WORLD WAR II FOREIGN POLICY CONSENSUS WHICH SUPPORTED AMERICAN DIPLOMACY UNTIL THE FALL OF VIETNAM. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS THAT THE FOUNDATION OF THIS CONSENSUS WAS THE BELIEF IN POLITICAL DEMOCRACY AND THE BELIEF IN AMERICA'S MISSION TO SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE SUCH POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE WORLD. AS SUCH, CARTER'S HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY IS A RETURN TO THE OLD BELIEF SYSTEM.

Activists have long justified their egalitarian organizational forms in prefigurative terms. Making decisions by consensus, decentralizing organization, and rotating leadership serves to model the radically democratic society that activists hope to bring into being. Our comparison of consensus-based decision-making in three historical periods, however, shows that activists have understood the purposes of prefiguration in very different ways. Whereas radical pacifists in the 1940s saw their cooperative organizations as sustaining movement stalwarts in a period of political repression, new left activists in the 1960s imagined that their radically democratic practices would be adopted by ever-widening circles. Along with the political conditions in which they have operated, activists' distinctive understandings of equality have also shaped the way they have made decisions. Our interviews with 30 leftist activists today reveal a view of decision-making as a place to work through inequalities that are informal, unacknowledged, and pervasive.

Abstract

We consider here how democracy cannot be reduced to consensus and majorityvoting without taking in count contextual systemic social properties. We intend Democracy as context-sensitive, emergent property of social systems. We consider possible empirical confirmatory approaches to be used in case of strategic decisions as in thecase of the Brexit. We present the example of medical practice where no physician would decide a medical treatment on the base of a diagnosis having little more than fifty percent of probabilities to be true (neither a judge would condemn a defendant in court). In the post-industrial, knowledge societies we must face the end of the identity between universal suffrage and democracy.

Presentado el 22 de mayo de 2013 en el Internal Workshop: Social Choice & Game Theory, de la Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica, UAB, Barcelona (España). Presentado el 3 de abril de 2014 en The 2014 Meeting of the European Public Choice Society, celebrado del 3 al 6 de abril de 2014 en Cambridge (Reino Unido) ; The paper analyses the problem of a committee chair using favours at her disposal to maximize the likelihood that her proposal gains committee support. The favours increase the probability of a given member approving the chair's proposal via a smooth voting function. The decision-making protocol is any quota voting rule. The paper characterizes the optimal allocation of any given level of favours and the optimal expenditure minimizing level of favours. The optimal allocation divides favours uniformly among a coalition of the committee members. At a low level of favours, the coalition comprises all committee members. At a high level, it is the minimum winning coalition. The optimal expenditure level guarantees the chair certain support of the minimum winning coalition if favours are abundant and uncertain support of all committee members if favours are scarce; elitist or egalitarian committees are compatible with a strategic chair. The results are robust to changing the chair's objectives and to alternative voting functions ; Peer Reviewed

Two Phenomena Have Converged in recent years to account for the current interest among international lawyers in the concept of the "consensus" of states. The first is the recognition in jurisprudence that all law, and particularly the international legal system with its lack of centrally organized sanctions, is founded on inductively verifiable psychology and not in deductive principles purportedly derived from God, nature, or reason. If international law is nothing more or less than what states (national decisionmakers and their counsel) think it is, then do not particular rules of international law owe their existence and transmutations to the flow of international consensus?