Suchergebnisse

La recherche est souvent affaire de cycles et de redécouvertes. Ce livre n'échappe pas à cette logique. À l'instar d'Alan Zuckerman qui s'intéresse aux logiques sociales du politique ou de Céline Braconnier1 qui insiste sur l'importance des groupes d'appartenance primaire des individus pour saisir leurs comportements électoraux, le travail de Meredith Rolfe vise à resocialiser l'individu, ici quand il s'agit d'aller voter. Pour l'auteure, il faut sortir d'une analyse atomistique, qu'elle soit centrée sur le calcul des coûts ou des bénéfices (Anthony Downs), ou bien des ressources civiques, afin de proposer une « théorie sociale » de la participation électorale [Premier paragraphe].

La recherche est souvent affaire de cycles et de redécouvertes. Ce livre n'échappe pas à cette logique. À l'instar d'Alan Zuckerman qui s'intéresse aux logiques sociales du politique ou de Céline Braconnier1 qui insiste sur l'importance des groupes d'appartenance primaire des individus pour saisir leurs comportements électoraux, le travail de Meredith Rolfe vise à resocialiser l'individu, ici quand il s'agit d'aller voter. Pour l'auteure, il faut sortir d'une analyse atomistique, qu'elle soit centrée sur le calcul des coûts ou des bénéfices (Anthony Downs), ou bien des ressources civiques, afin de proposer une « théorie sociale » de la participation électorale [Premier paragraphe].

Selon la Legal Origins Theory, les origines juridiques d'un État ont une influence significative sur sa croissance économique. Née dans l'orbite du droit des sociétés, elle a d'abord été défendue par un collectif d'auteurs à l'occasion de l'étude du niveau de protection accordé aux actionnaires minoritaires dans différents États à travers le monde. Ils en ont tiré la conclusion que les États appartenant à la culture juridique de Common Law accordaient le plus haut degré de protection, source d'un marché financier efficace et synonyme de croissance économique. La Legal Origins Theory s'est ensuite étendue à d'autres domaines juridiques et s'est attachée à démontrer plus globalement l'efficience générale du modèle de Common Law. Dans la foulée, elle fut au cœur des rapports Doing Business de la Banque mondiale. Cette théorie a suscité de nombreuses critiques que la présente contribution a pour ambition d'exposer. Après l'analyse de la théorie et des critiques émises à son encontre, l'étude tente de dégager les présupposés philosophiques sous-jacents à la Legal Origins Theory, à travers la pensée de deux auteurs : Friedrich von Hayek et Bruno Leoni. ; The Legal Origins Theory argues that the legal origins of a state have a significant influence on its economic growth. This theory originated mainly and prospered in the field of company law. A group of researchers has enquired about the degree of protection granted to minority shareholders in various states throughout the world. They concluded that states belonging to the legal family of common law granted the best protection, sourcing an efficient market and easing their economic growth. The Legal Origins Theory spread out widely and expanded to several other legal domains, while continuing to emphasize and highlight the efficiency of the common law. It was furthermore at the heart of the "Doing Business" reports of the World Bank. This theory has led to many critiques, which the present paper aims to show. Beyond this analysis and the review of criticisms, our study finally attempts to identify the philosophical assumptions that support the Theory of Legal Origins, through the review of the developments authored by Friedrich von Hayek and Bruno Leoni. ; Peer reviewed

This text is constructed as follows. It is organised as follows: classifications; a reminder of the foundations of the stakeholder theory; stakeholder theory, empirical or normative theory? ambiguities in stakeholder theory; the ethical and political foundations of stakeholder theory; stakeholders as a possible basis for deliberative democracy). ; Ce texte est construit de la manière suivante. Il est organisé de la manière suivante : les classifications ; le rappel des fondements de la théorie des parties prenantes ; la théorie des parties prenantes, une théorie empirique ou normative ?; les ambiguïtés de la théorie des parties prenantes ; les fondements éthiques et politiques de la théorie des parties prenantes ; les parties prenantes comme fondement possible d'une démocratie délibérative). ; This text is constructed as follows. It is organised as follows: classifications; a reminder of the foundations of the stakeholder theory; stakeholder theory, empirical or normative theory? ambiguities in stakeholder theory; the ethical and political foundations of stakeholder theory; stakeholders as a possible basis for deliberative democracy). ; Doctoral

How to theorize communication in social sciences? This text has two goals. First, to rely on the work of Louis Quéré, revealing the strengths and weaknesses of the two dominant models of two dominant models: an epistemological model enrolling the theory of information and cybernetics in an instrumental aim; a political model that aims at inter-understanding at the service of self-determination of the citizens in the elaboration of norms that govern them. Moreover, we wish to add to this review, two models which go beyond the limits of the first two approaches: a praxeological model that relies on praxis as an organizing activity of shared perspectives; a model of incommunication that reverses the situation and makes the impossibility of achieving intercomprehension the norm.

Studies of the Genevan philosopher's writings, and particularly his politic ones, leads us to question the possibility of seeing a critical theory about democracy in rousseauism. The major political principles set in Contrat social, refined in Lettres écrites de la montagne and applied to practical cases in Considérations pour le gouvernement de la Pologne and Projet de constitution pour la Corse, can provide the analysis standard sand judgment that allows to put into perspective our democratic modernity. Firstly, it is about showing that the principles of his political thinking, in Lettres écrites de la montagne, allow him to criticize the oligarchical drift of Geneva's Republic (from a democracy in the XVst century to an oligarchy in the XVIIIst century) and government's usurpation of sovereignty. Secondly, it is about highlighting his criticism of democracy's forms (representative, direct, deliberative). Thirdly, it is about identifying critical comments that Rousseauism makes possible towards contemporary democracy (representative and liberal). Fourthly, it is about emphasizing his political theory as a meaning to raise awareness of the fact that democracy is restricted in the contemporary policy. As a critical theory of democracy, political Rousseauism clarifies what is a true democracy or not and, in the same time, it unveils a specific definition of a common power, the people's effective sovereignty. This is a conception of democracy that his theory about government contributes to enlighten - preferring an aristocratic government leaning on an active political virtue and revealing that the form of this legal authority is not a criteria for democracy (republic). Different critical interventions of Rousseauism about democracy ("weak": legitimating representative democracy, "strong": considering a transformation of politic societies) highlight political principles and means that question the nature and operation of contemporary representative democracies (supremacy of the executive power, and hence ...

Studies of the Genevan philosopher's writings, and particularly his politic ones, leads us to question the possibility of seeing a critical theory about democracy in rousseauism. The major political principles set in Contrat social, refined in Lettres écrites de la montagne and applied to practical cases in Considérations pour le gouvernement de la Pologne and Projet de constitution pour la Corse, can provide the analysis standard sand judgment that allows to put into perspective our democratic modernity. Firstly, it is about showing that the principles of his political thinking, in Lettres écrites de la montagne, allow him to criticize the oligarchical drift of Geneva's Republic (from a democracy in the XVst century to an oligarchy in the XVIIIst century) and government's usurpation of sovereignty. Secondly, it is about highlighting his criticism of democracy's forms (representative, direct, deliberative). Thirdly, it is about identifying critical comments that Rousseauism makes possible towards contemporary democracy (representative and liberal). Fourthly, it is about emphasizing his political theory as a meaning to raise awareness of the fact that democracy is restricted in the contemporary policy. As a critical theory of democracy, political Rousseauism clarifies what is a true democracy or not and, in the same time, it unveils a specific definition of a common power, the people's effective sovereignty. This is a conception of democracy that his theory about government contributes to enlighten - preferring an aristocratic government leaning on an active political virtue and revealing that the form of this legal authority is not a criteria for democracy (republic). Different critical interventions of Rousseauism about democracy ("weak": legitimating representative democracy, "strong": considering a transformation of politic societies) highlight political principles and means that question the nature and operation of contemporary representative democracies (supremacy of the executive power, and hence ...

Studies of the Genevan philosopher's writings, and particularly his politic ones, leads us to question the possibility of seeing a critical theory about democracy in rousseauism. The major political principles set in Contrat social, refined in Lettres écrites de la montagne and applied to practical cases in Considérations pour le gouvernement de la Pologne and Projet de constitution pour la Corse, can provide the analysis standard sand judgment that allows to put into perspective our democratic modernity. Firstly, it is about showing that the principles of his political thinking, in Lettres écrites de la montagne, allow him to criticize the oligarchical drift of Geneva's Republic (from a democracy in the XVst century to an oligarchy in the XVIIIst century) and government's usurpation of sovereignty. Secondly, it is about highlighting his criticism of democracy's forms (representative, direct, deliberative). Thirdly, it is about identifying critical comments that Rousseauism makes possible towards contemporary democracy (representative and liberal). Fourthly, it is about emphasizing his political theory as a meaning to raise awareness of the fact that democracy is restricted in the contemporary policy. As a critical theory of democracy, political Rousseauism clarifies what is a true democracy or not and, in the same time, it unveils a specific definition of a common power, the people's effective sovereignty. This is a conception of democracy that his theory about government contributes to enlighten - preferring an aristocratic government leaning on an active political virtue and revealing that the form of this legal authority is not a criteria for democracy (republic). Different critical interventions of Rousseauism about democracy ("weak": legitimating representative democracy, "strong": considering a transformation of politic societies) highlight political principles and means that question the nature and operation of contemporary representative democracies (supremacy of the executive power, and hence ...

Politische Wissenschaft ist ein Abenteuer des Geistes. In diesem Sinne wurde sie im Nachkriegsdeutschland durch Eric Voegelin und seine Neue Wissenschaft der Politik wiederbelebt. Der Band ehrt einen Voegelin-Schüler, der als einer der unkonventionellsten Politikwissenschaftler Deutschlands gilt. Walter Rothholz hat sich in seiner wissenschaftlichen Laufbahn mit so verschiedenen Themen wie Wohlfahrtsstaat, Repräsentations- und Transformationstheorien, politischer Kultur, Mystik und Religion beschäftigt. In einem ebenso weiten Spektrum umfasst der Band aktuelle Beiträge ausgewiesener Experten als auch Nachwuchswissenschaftler zu den Dimensionen politischen Denkens und Handelns

Secouée par les populismes, le bouleversement des équilibres entre les grandes puissances, la révolution numérique, la crise planétaire et la défiance envers des institutions de gouvernance mondiale conçues dans une période moins désespérée, la diplomatie traverse une crise profonde. Loin d'apporter une solution idéaliste de plus, cette introduction esquisse une théorisation ancrée dans la comparaison de cas empiriques qui sortent de la définition classique de la diplomatie centrée sur les rapports entre États. En privilégiant une approche pragmatique et interactionniste, et en étant attentive aux inventions des vaincus, elle entend identifier quelques traits constitutifs de la situation diplomatique : un rapport particulier à la violence (qui n'est pas toujours d'exclusion), l'invention de rituels qui sont autant de modélisations du monde, l'imitation de l'autre au risque de la confusion.

Has the Romanian Revolution of 1989 produced a renewed vision of post-communist political authority? Can the fall of Romanian communism in December 1989 be seen as the end of a political venture that informed the political institutions and the exercise of political power for several decades? What was rejected and what remained from the Romanian communism as a political system after the Revolution of 1989? In order to answer those questions, the study explores the ways the newly emerging and established political actors right after the demise of the Romanian Communist Party thought of themselves as "revolutionaries", envisaged the political change, its imperatives and its emergences and acted as political authorities in charge of this political transformation.

The ethics of care is facing a problem that is paradoxical: although politicisation seems necessary, the ethics of care does not seem to be able to find sufficient resources in itself for the formulation of an understandable political theory. There does not seem to be a political theory of care in its own right. This article examines the fertility of a link between the ethics of care and neo-republican theory of non-domination. The not insignificant result would be to guarantee important forms of protection for care activities, but this would not necessarily prevent negative representations of such activities, which can be assumed to be one of the factors of marginalisation and unequal distribution affecting them. To block these degrading representations, care should be discussed and defined in the public space not only as a possible place of domination, but as a fundamental and positive aspect of individual and collective life. ; The ethics of care is facing a paradox: although politicization seems necessary, the ethics of care does not seem able to find in itself sufficient resources to formulate a comprehensive political theory. There is no political theory of care per se. This article examines the possible and fruitful rapprochement of ethics of care with neorepublican theories of non-domination. The important result would be to guarantee the protection of important forms of care activities, but this would not necessarily block negative portrayals of these activities, which can be assumed of having provoked, at least partly, the marginalization and the uneven distribution that affects these activities. In order to stop these degrading representations, care must be discussed and defined in the public space not only as a possible locus of domination, but as a fundamental and positive aspect of individual and collective lives. ; The ethics of care is facing a problem that is paradoxical: although politicisation seems necessary, the ethics of care does not seem to be able to find sufficient resources in itself ...

Charles J. Halperin, Tverian political thought in the fifteenth century.
The pokhval'noe slovo (word of praise) to Grand Prince Boris Aleksandrovich of Tver' attributed to the monk Foma has not been correctly interpreted as an expression of Tverian political thought in the fifteenth century. First, although it does discuss the Council of Florence, it never accuses the Greeks of apostasy, and therefore its use of Byzantine Imperial epithets and titulature do not constitute an attempted translatio imperio such as is found in the Muscovite tales of the Council, or later in the theory of Moscow-the Third Rome. Secondly, Foma's careful usage suggests that the Muscovite monopoly of the myth of the Russian Land had not been broken by Muscovy's civil war, and that the more provincial concept of the Tverian Land is used by Foma in its stead. Such "land" (zemli) terminology in Old Russian political thought has not been sufficiently studied.

The Anthropocene, which means the anthropogenic modification of the Earth's habitability conditions in a lasting way, highlights the extent to which modernity is marked by economic hegemony, to the detriment of politics. The conceptions of political action in Anthropocene are in tension between a desire to accomplish the Promethean project of modernity and a post-promethean approach. The Anthropocene confronts humanity with an anthropological krisis to cross. This work explores the idea of an anthropological mutation of political consolidation from a "post-promethean between us", at the foundation of the capacity to act together. The political thinking of the human condition developed by Hannah Arendt is invested here as a resource for thinking about humanity based on the notion of human adventure made up of three dimensions: the hybris, the world and coexistence referring respectively to the logic of profit of the homo oeconomicus, the logic of responsibility of the homo collectivus and the logic of the hospitality of the homo religatus.The intellectual and political gesture outlined in this work is an extension of the critical theory: in the same movement a critique of what poses a problem in our relationship to the world and a proposal for surpassing ourselves with the aim of social transformation are proposed. The proposed gesture is that of an uprising and an anthropological consolidation of politics based on the vitality made possible by the sharing of a conviviality between humans and with the non-human. The identification of conviviality as an educational paradigm to cross the Anthropocene is the materialization of a necessary reason for hope despite this inheritance of the Anthropocene. The critical theory proposed attempts to articulate the functions of resistance, criticism and utopia. It is important to remain in opposition (resistance) based on what is identified as problematic (critical) so that the hoped-for future can come (utopia). This critical theory for the Anthropocene mobilizes, in addition ...