Suchergebnisse

Istnienie państwa dobrobytu może być uzasadniane za pomocą argumentacji zarówno ekonomicznej, politycznej, jak i filozoficznej. W artykule scharakteryzowano sprawiedliwość dystrybutywną z perspektywy liberalnego egalitaryzmu, co stanowi jednocześnie analizę filozoficznej argumentacji na rzecz państwa dobrobytu. Odwołano się przy tym do dwóch najbardziej wpływowych koncepcji: teorii sprawiedliwości jako bezstronności autorstwa Rawlsa oraz idei równości zasobów zaproponowanej przez Dworkina. Celem artykułu była ocena modeli państwa dobrobytu w świetle wymagań stawianych w obu koncepcjach sprawiedliwie urządzonemu społeczeństwu. Autor dowodzi, że mając na względzie realne możliwości jednostek do formułowania, rozumnego realizowania oraz korekty swych własnych planów życiowych, jedynie socjaldemokratyczny (nordycki) model państwa dobrobytu można uznać za akceptowalny z perspektywy egalitarystycznej. ; The existence of the welfare state can be justified by economic and political arguments as well as philosophical ones. The paper analyses the liberal-egalitarian view on distributive justice and hence on the philosophical justification of the welfare state, based on two most influential egalitarian concepts: Rawls's theory of justice as fairness and Dworkin's equality of resources theory. The aim of this article was to evaluate the welfare state regimes in the light of requirements of both theories that just society must satisfy. It is argued that with respect to the individual capacity to formulate, rationally pursue, and revise one's life plans, the social-democratic (Nordic model) may be deemed as the only regime capable of being accepted from the egalitarian perspective.

Djent - digital metal neomoderne?

Deep-rooted ideas of "art rock" do not expire and recently gave rise to the new, progressive metal trends like djent. It wants to be the elite, the modern, and the innovative. At the expense of greater commercial success, djent bands cut off from the mainstream and operate independently, incessantly exceeding stylistic and aesthetical boundaries. Poetics of their music often reveal a tension between elitism and egalitarianism, intellect and corporeality, individuality and convention. But can it be seen as some kind of musical trans-avant-garde or neomodernistic?

This article concerns the sources and mechanisms of the monopolisation of power in democracy. Where do the claims of people's representatives for exclusive rights to rule come from? The author pleads two arguments and try to prove them in both the history of theoretical frameworks of democracy and its political adaptations. The first argument is that these claims are provoked by the very idea of democracy – they are its structural component which decides on its pharmakonic action, because – that's the second argument – it (the idea) is based on the construction of oppositional concepts like egalitarianism vs. elitism, power of the people vs. power of capital and their derivatives. That's why democracy, as a cure for – in respect of gaining – equality, freedom and justice, can poison these values to death simultaneously. It creates inequalities and discriminates separated people. Every substantial content of its formal values is fatal to it. It tends to move to some kind of authoritarianism, fundamentalism or totalitarianism.

The tendency to equate economic growth with industrialization has in the recent past started a violent and bloody movement in the Indian state of West Bengal. The movement that started against forced acquisition of agricultural land for industrialization in Singur gradually spread to other parts of the state of West Bengal including Nandigram. This movement acquired explosive proportions with the intellectuals, civil society and anti-left political parties throwing in their weight behind the displaced peasants who lost their land. Ultimately it became an albatross around the neck of the Left leadership and sunk the political fortunes of the thirty-four year old Left Front government in 2011 state assembly elections. The Singur and Nandigram tragedy are only one among the many agitations that have exploded in various parts of India in recent past. These protest movements have kicked off the development versus displacement debate in India. The killing of protesting peasants in Singur and Nandigram by the trigger happy police not only exposes the political myopia and inhuman indifference of the so-called pro-poor Left Front Government of West Bengal. But it also goes on to show that the political process in India is increasingly getting hijacked by the logic of the market which sees displacement only as an appendix to development. What we need today is to reinvent the principles laid down by Gandhi to usher in a just and equitable economic order. The Gandhian model of economic development is based on the simple yet profound principles of altruism and egalitarianism. This article would focus on the reasons behind the inception of a violent movement in Singur and Nandigram, the fundamental flaws in the development model of the erstwhile Left Front Government of West Bengal, and end by providing a Gandhian solution to the development versus displacement dilemma in the state of West Bengal in India.

The tendency to equate economic growth with industrialization has in the recent past started a violent and bloody movement in the Indian state of West Bengal. The movement that started against forced acquisition of agricultural land for industrialization in Singur gradually spread to other parts of the state of West Bengal including Nandigram. This movement acquired explosive proportions with the intellectuals, civil society and anti-left political parties throwing in their weight behind the displaced peasants who lost their land. Ultimately it became an albatross around the neck of the Left leadership and sunk the political fortunes of the thirty-four year old Left Front government in 2011 state assembly elections. The Singur and Nandigram tragedy are only one among the many agitations that have exploded in various parts of India in recent past. These protest movements have kicked off the development versus displacement debate in India. The killing of protesting peasants in Singur and Nandigram by the trigger happy police not only exposes the political myopia and inhuman indifference of the so-called pro-poor Left Front Government of West Bengal. But it also goes on to show that the political process in India is increasingly getting hijacked by the logic of the market which sees displacement only as an appendix to development. What we need today is to reinvent the principles laid down by Gandhi to usher in a just and equitable economic order. The Gandhian model of economic development is based on the simple yet profound principles of altruism and egalitarianism. This article would focus on the reasons behind the inception of a violent movement in Singur and Nandigram, the fundamental flaws in the development model of the erstwhile Left Front Government of West Bengal, and end by providing a Gandhian solution to the development versus displacement dilemma in the state of West Bengal in India.