Suchergebnisse

Back in print for the first time in 30 years, this volume provides a brilliant and accessible summation of the ideas of left Marxist giant C.L.R. James. Originally delivered in 1960 as a series of lectures in his native Trinidad (Modern politics : being a series of lectures on the subject given at the Trinidad Public Library, in its adult education programme). James's wide-ranging erudition and enduring relevance are powerfully displayed. From his analysis of revolutionary history and the role of literature, art, and culture in society to an interrogation of the ideas and philosophy of such thinkers as Rousseau, Lenin, and Trotsky, this is a magnificent tour de force from a critically engaged thinker at the height of his powers. Still relevant to politics today and an essential introduction to an important body of work, the ideas of C.L.R. James remain as necessary and illuminating for this century as they have for the last

Scarcely two decades have passed since Lord Bryce stated that democracy is universally accepted "as the normal and natural form of government." What the author of the American Commonwealth regarded at the end of his long life as the result of the modern development had been announced by Alexis de Tocqueville even before Bryce was born. This French historian and political philosopher, who is today classed as one of the most important thinkers of all time, characterized the whole modern political and social trend as an irresistible advance towards democracy. He was afraid that democratic equality would destroy individual liberty. Like John Stuart Mill a generation later, he too was depressed by the fear that the despotism of a brutal majority rule might be a future threat to democracy. But this fear did not change the general trend of his prophecy.

THIS THOUGHT-PROVOKING SYMPOSIUM ORIGINATED IN A small conference organized at the London School of Economics by Government and Opposition and the papers printed here have been revised — in many cases extensively — by their authors in the light of the discussion there. With a single exception (Sir Arthur Knight) all the contributors are members of the Editorial Board or the Advisory Board of Government and Opposition, and the idea for the symposium was first put forward by one of the Editors, Professor Isabel de Madariaga.The central issue addressed in the symposium is the adequacy or otherwise of the sciences, natural and social, in providing the information required by people in various capacities — as citizens, business leaders, politicians, judges, and so on — if they are to act intelligently.

Cover -- Contents -- General Introduction -- Acknowledgments -- Prologue: Late Medieval and Early Modern Political Thinking: Some Metahistorical Challenges -- 1. Historical Orientation: From War, Plague, and Schism to Renaissance, Reformation, and Revolt -- 2. The Politics of Nostalgia: Empire, Papacy, and Their Twilight Struggle -- 3. The Politics of Virtue: Italy, the Republican Tradition, and the Humanist Political Legacy -- 4. The Politics of Sin: From Aegidius Romanus, Fitzralph, and Wycliffe to Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and the Radical Reformers -- 5. The Politics of Deference: Old Regal Sacrality and New Divine Right of Kingship -- 6. The Politics of Consent (i): politia saecularis -- 7. The Politics of Consent (ii): politia ecclesiastica -- 8. The Watershed of Modern Politics -- Epilogue -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- Y -- Z.

The relations between art and politics have rarely been discussed either in contemporary aesthetics or in political science. Since Hegel's Philosophy of Fine Arts, the analysis of art styles as the sensuous objectifications of cultural attitudes has been worked out in detail. But the same method has not been applied to the sensuous objectifications of political action. The removal of art from social life to the museum has also removed it from among the integral concerns of political science. Accepting the popular dichotomy between art and politics, modern political science has long lost its senseof art as techne, as a practical instrument of communication and coercion. An older political science did indeed consider "art" an instrument of coercion, curbing what Freud liked to call "the rebelliousness and destructive passions" of the masses and binding them to their rulers. Indeed, perhaps Freud alone among modern masters of social science comprehended art as one of the weapons of coercion in the arsenal of culture. "Works of art," Freud writes, "promote the feelings of identification" and identification is, in the Freudian theory, the modality of authority.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITY & ITS POLITICAL CAUSES IS EXAMINED. KNOWLEDGE, APPLICATION, & CHANGE ARE DEFINED AS 3 FUNCTIONS OF SCIENCE. 6 MODELS OF THE SCIENCE-POLICY RELATIONSHIP ARE EXAMINED. THEY BELONG TO IDEOLOGICAL TRENDS, IE LIBERAL, CHRISTIAN, MARXIST, & TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF DEVELOPMENT, & INCLUDE: (1) THE SELF-PROGRESSIVE MODEL, (2) JURGEN HABERMAS' MODEL OF THE IDEOLOGICAL MODEL, (3) THE POSITIVIST MODEL, (4) THE HARMONIC MODEL, (5) THE TECHNOCRATIC MODEL, & (6) THE DECISIONIST MODEL. SCIENCE IS THE ORGANIZATION OF A POLITICAL SOCIETY SINCE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ARE CONSIDERED TO BE 2 OF THE CAUSES OF CHANGE DETERMINANT IN NATION BUILDING. SCIENTIFIC CORPORATISM IS ONE OF THE BASES FOR THE INCORPORATION OF INDIVIDUALS & GROUPS INTO THE POLITICAL SYSTEM. POLITICAL MODERNIZATION IS CLOSELY ASSOCIATED WITH THE TYPE OF POLITICAL SYSTEM. THE CONSEQUENCE OF WEAK NATIONAL SCIENCE-POLICIES IS A RESULT OF SITUATIONS UNFAVORABLE TO THE SCOPE OF SCIENCE WHICH FURTHER RESULTS IN THE POORER GROUPS & SOCIETIES BEING DISPLACED TOWARD RICHER ONES. SCIENCE IS "AN INSTRUMENT OF POLITICAL & SOCIAL DOMINATION, A CAUSE OF CULTURAL INTEGRATION, & A VARIABLE OF POLITICAL & ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY." B. MILLER.

IS SCIENCE IN ITSELF A FACTOR OF INTEGRATION AND POLITICAL MODERNIZATION, AND THAT WHATEVER BE THE SYMBOLICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL AND POLITICAL VALUE THAT EACH OF US ATTRIBUTES TO SCIENCE ACCORDING TO HIS EDUCATION, HIS TRAINING, HIS BELIEFS AND HIS IDEOLOGICAL OPINIONS? AT THE MOMENT WHEN POLITICS SEEK SNEW INSTRUMENTS OF POWER FROM SCIENCE, MEN OF SCIENCE QUESTION THE INTENT OF THE RESEARCH.

A comprehensive guide to the complex ideology/terminology which surrounds the world of politics.* Well over 500 extensive definitions* Defines political theories, dogmas and phraseologies* Terms such as Pacifism, Proportional Representation, Jihad, Son of Star Wars, Third Way and Consensual are explained clearly and succinctly* Invaluable for anyone concerned with politics or current affairs.

FOR CONVENIENCE, I HAVE CHOSEN THE CONCEPT 'SCIENCE', ALTHOUGH the phrase 'science policy' would have expressed more clearly the relationship between scientific activity and its political causes and effects. The term 'science' is generally taken as free of any axiological or ontological value. The 'liberal' tradition assigns it an objective and neutral character, a point of view defended for instance by Karl Popper and Michael Polanyi whose search for truth and scientific work is situated above the political or ideological planes. Marxist ideology, however, places science on the level of beliefs, thus perpetuating 19th century 'scientism' and the vast positivist movement which, in a teleological way, bases the hope of a solution to all human problems on the development of science. 'Objective Science', 'Scientism', 'Scientific Socialism' are brand labels. But in all political systems, the combination of ideologies and of the resources created through scientific research confers a symbolic value upon science: that of the final means by which humanity will be saved or which will trigger off the ultimate catastrophe.