During V. Giscard d'Estaing's presidency, France faced an economic crisis, a political reshuffling & the emergence of new ideological frames of reference, changes whose political significance was all but lost on political scientists at the time. Though various, particularly institutional, reasons may be adduced to explain this neglect, it seems to have been partly due to shortcomings in the theoretical tools applied as well as a lack of interest in political theory. Ultimately, the only scholars to discern & analyze what was changing in political discourse & practices were those working on the fringes of traditional political science who still appreciated the operational value of concepts bequeathed by Marxist theory. Adapted from the source document.
This article discusses the rhetoric deployed by two professional orders, the Ordre des ergothérapeutes du Québec and the Ordre des orthophonistes et des audiologistes du Québec, when they are called upon to contribute to public debates on various social issues. What rationalities do they promote and how are these rationalities are in tension with those articulated by the government? To answer this question, we analyzed 10 recent briefs tabled at the National Assembly of Quebec. Our analyses reveal four rationalities: political, economic, scientific and ethical. By revealing these rationalities, we highlight the tensions between bureaucratic and professional logic. This article thus helps to demystify a little-known political communication exercise. ; Cet article porte sur la rhétorique déployée par deux ordres professionnels, l'Ordre des ergothérapeutes du Québec et l'Ordre des orthophonistes et des audiologistes du Québec, lorsqu'ils sont interpellés à contribuer aux débats publics en lien avec divers enjeux sociaux. Quelles rationalités mettent-ils de l'avant et en quoi ces rationalités sont-elles en tension avec celles articulées par le gouvernement ? Pour répondre à cette question, nous avons analysé 10 mémoires récents déposés à l'Assemblée nationale du Québec. Nos analyses font ressortir quatre rationalités : politiques, économiques, scientifiques et éthiques. En levant le voile sur ces rationalités, nous révélons les tensions entre la logique bureaucratique et la logique professionnelle. Cet article contribue ainsi à démystifier un exercice de communication politique peu connu.
In this paper I compare and examine critically the political thought of Paul Ricoeur and Jacques Derrida. I analyze their specific ways of combining philosophy, ethics, and political theory. Despite the fact that they share specific concepts and criticize purely procedural and liberal definitions of the political, they profoundly disagree on the meaning of justice and sovereignty. Derrida's overflowing ethical and unconditional "event" has to be radically opposed to Ricoeur's attention for the "institution" and social cohesion. The concept of hospitality tackled lately by both authors illustrates this main opposition. Finally, I argue for a political theory approach to Derrida while calling for a cautious use of his first and foremost philosophical concepts. Adapted from the source document.
Gros user of polls, political marketing is a growing discipline at still poorly defined borders. There are two common trends in the profession. One based its analyses on socio-political models similar to those proposed by political science. The other proposes a model of social and even political analysis, which puts cultural determinants at the forefront. ; As a heavy user of polls, political marketing is a discipline in full expansion whose limits are still badly defined. Two trends divide the profession - One bases its analysis on models of a socio-political science. The other proposes a model of social and even political analysis which puts emphasis on cultural factors. ; Gros user of polls, political marketing is a growing discipline at still poorly defined borders. There are two common trends in the profession. One based its analyses on socio-political models similar to those proposed by political science. The other proposes a model of social and even political analysis, which puts cultural determinants at the forefront. ; Gros utilisateur de sondages, le marketing politique est une discipline en pleine expansion, aux frontières encore mal définies. Deux tendances se partagent la profession. L'une fonde ses analyses sur des modèles de type sociopolitique proches de ceux proposés par la science politique. L'autre propose un modèle d'analyse sociale, voire politique, qui place au premier plan les déterminants culturels.
Scholarly interest for the impact of technologies on democracy has raised in parallel to the decline of political participation. Technology has often been seen as either one of the causes of the crisis of representative democracy or as a powerful remedy to heal the negative externalities generated by party oligopolies. The study of the impact of new media in party politics or presidential elections dates back the forties (with the outgrowth of radio) and has evolved in cyclical waves until today, covering the emergence of television, the development of global telecommunications, the birth of internet and finally what's popularly called the Web 2.0. The notion of eDemocracy emerges from this dynamic, but is in a league of its own. There is no agreement on many of the terms that one needs to use to dissect its meaning. Scholars diverge on virtually every foundational concept: from the very definition of democracy and interactivity, to the core functions of political parties, to the definition of propaganda as opposed to political communication or to political marketing. As a consequence of this, there is little agreement on both what could be done in theory with eDemocracy and what is actually done in practice. A permanent tension exist between idealtypes and real types in this domain. The aim of this research is to prove this thesis with the largest and most global research unit of political parties web sites at the time of writing. The choice of an information architecture approach has allowed to cover some uncharted territory while providing a first set of data on the structures of the political web (in 2004-2005) for public scrutiny. The core of this research contribution consists in a basic taxonomy and a set of data (on the intentions and on the information architecture) resulting from a 10 years observational research on the early actors of the political web (stricto sensu i.e. 2073 political parties web sites), reviewed with a new degree of detail (through an ad hoc software procedure aiming at dissecting ...
We have first led a study of A Theory of Justice and other works by John Rawls (Political Liberalism, Justice et démocratie, Collected Papers, etc.)which offers us a picture of a representative contemporary ideal democracy built on an original version of social contract, a contract aiming at the Just (the Good being left to each individual's discretion). This study gives us the opportunity to release the defining caracteristics of the liberal individual ("liberal" taken in the american use of the word)such as he has to be represented in order to be a plausible contractor in search what is justice going to be once he will have determined the fundamental principles of society. The partner's liberal identity, as he is contracting and deliberating on the principles,establishes the foudation of the contemporary individual's personal identity , at least in the way he represents his identity. We confronted, within the framework of our prospect,the led personal identity by the choice of a contractual theses aimed at a critic of a democratic historical society as it stands, with theses by M. Sandel and C. Taylor, especially. They do not only criticise Rawls' contractual theses, but above all, for us, the image it allows us to built of personal identity as liberal. The liberal individual, because he represents himself first and fundamentally free, links himself to rights (and their conditions of exercise)which he gives himself, and is only secondarily interested by the Good.It is precisely this auto-representation of the self which is rejected, because, e.g., it is not anymore the agent's good aimed at that is worthy of respect but the agent himself becaus he chose it. So, society should not consider the effects of his choice. In our An Outline of a Theory of Liberal Identity, we ask ourselves if it can resist these critics and, in fine, of what liberty, as the liberal self thinks it establishes his life, consists. ; Nous avons d'abord mené une étude de Théorie de la justice et des autres œuvres de John Rawls (Libéralisme ...
We have first led a study of A Theory of Justice and other works by John Rawls (Political Liberalism, Justice et démocratie, Collected Papers, etc.)which offers us a picture of a representative contemporary ideal democracy built on an original version of social contract, a contract aiming at the Just (the Good being left to each individual's discretion). This study gives us the opportunity to release the defining caracteristics of the liberal individual ("liberal" taken in the american use of the word)such as he has to be represented in order to be a plausible contractor in search what is justice going to be once he will have determined the fundamental principles of society. The partner's liberal identity, as he is contracting and deliberating on the principles,establishes the foudation of the contemporary individual's personal identity , at least in the way he represents his identity. We confronted, within the framework of our prospect,the led personal identity by the choice of a contractual theses aimed at a critic of a democratic historical society as it stands, with theses by M. Sandel and C. Taylor, especially. They do not only criticise Rawls' contractual theses, but above all, for us, the image it allows us to built of personal identity as liberal. The liberal individual, because he represents himself first and fundamentally free, links himself to rights (and their conditions of exercise)which he gives himself, and is only secondarily interested by the Good.It is precisely this auto-representation of the self which is rejected, because, e.g., it is not anymore the agent's good aimed at that is worthy of respect but the agent himself becaus he chose it. So, society should not consider the effects of his choice. In our An Outline of a Theory of Liberal Identity, we ask ourselves if it can resist these critics and, in fine, of what liberty, as the liberal self thinks it establishes his life, consists. ; Nous avons d'abord mené une étude de Théorie de la justice et des autres œuvres de John Rawls (Libéralisme ...
We have first led a study of A Theory of Justice and other works by John Rawls (Political Liberalism, Justice et démocratie, Collected Papers, etc.)which offers us a picture of a representative contemporary ideal democracy built on an original version of social contract, a contract aiming at the Just (the Good being left to each individual's discretion). This study gives us the opportunity to release the defining caracteristics of the liberal individual ("liberal" taken in the american use of the word)such as he has to be represented in order to be a plausible contractor in search what is justice going to be once he will have determined the fundamental principles of society. The partner's liberal identity, as he is contracting and deliberating on the principles,establishes the foudation of the contemporary individual's personal identity , at least in the way he represents his identity. We confronted, within the framework of our prospect,the led personal identity by the choice of a contractual theses aimed at a critic of a democratic historical society as it stands, with theses by M. Sandel and C. Taylor, especially. They do not only criticise Rawls' contractual theses, but above all, for us, the image it allows us to built of personal identity as liberal. The liberal individual, because he represents himself first and fundamentally free, links himself to rights (and their conditions of exercise)which he gives himself, and is only secondarily interested by the Good.It is precisely this auto-representation of the self which is rejected, because, e.g., it is not anymore the agent's good aimed at that is worthy of respect but the agent himself becaus he chose it. So, society should not consider the effects of his choice. In our An Outline of a Theory of Liberal Identity, we ask ourselves if it can resist these critics and, in fine, of what liberty, as the liberal self thinks it establishes his life, consists. ; Nous avons d'abord mené une étude de Théorie de la justice et des autres œuvres de John Rawls (Libéralisme ...
MOST RECENT ATTEMPTS AT REDEFINING POLITICAL PARTIES SITUATE THEMSELVES OUTSIDE THE MAINSTREAM OF POLITICAL THEORY & DO NOT DEAL SUFFICIENTLY WITH THE PROBLEMATICAL ASPECTS OF POWER & OF GOVERNMENT. TO DEVELOP A TRUE POLITICAL SCIENCE OF PARTIES ONE HAS TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO 3 QUESTIONS: WHO GOVERNS IN THE PARTIES? DO THE PARTIES REALLY GOVERN? HOW DO THE GOVERNMENTAL OR NONGOVERNMENTAL ACTIONS OF PARTIES AFFECT THE SOCIETY & THE SUPPORT THAT THEY OBTAIN THERE? FROM THESE 3 QUESTIONS EMERGE THE NOTIONS OF THE LEADERSHIP POWER (OR INTERNAL POWER), GOVERNMENTAL POWER, & SOCIETAL POWER (ELECTORAL OR NONELECTORAL) OF POLITICAL PARTIES. GOVERNMENT IS DEFINED ACCORDING TO A CYBERNETIC MODEL, & POWER IS LOGICALLY DEFINED. THE NOTIONS OF LEADERSHIP POWER, GOVERNMENTAL POWER, & SOCIETAL POWER ARE SUCCESSIVELY ANALYZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THEM OPERATIONAL. A NUMBER OF PROPOSITIONS, HITHERTO SEEMINGLY UNRELATED, ARE DRAWN TOGETHER TO OUTLINE A POLITICAL THEORY OF PARTIES. 2 FIGURES, 1 TABLE. HA.
International audience ; The academic debates around the rise of so-called populist movements rarely refer to the origins of the tensions structuring representative democracies today. The "democratic deficit" or the "democratic crisis" are expressions that imply the unstructured nature of this moment. We argue here that it points out a structural shift, resulting from the progressive disarticulation between the representative principle and the democratic principle. As both principles defined representative democracy since the 19th century, their disarticulation raises interrogations and produces reactions within the political field: the return of the nation, the possible Constituent Assemblies, as well as the defence of a representative regime deprived of its democratic features are the many political possibilities born out of this disarticulation. The present article develops this thesis and aims at contributing to the theoretical discussions around the current situation of representative democracies, as well as around the so-called populist moment. ; Les débats académiques autour de la montée des mouvements définis comme populistes s'interrogent rarement sur ce à quoi renvoient les tensions qui traversent les démocraties représentatives aujourd'hui. Le « déficit démocratique » ou la « crise de la démocratie » sont autant d'expressions qui supposent le caractère non structurel de ce moment. Nous y voyons plutôt une rupture structurelle, issue de la désarticulation progressive du principe représentatif d'avec le principe démocratique. Alors que ces deux principes ont défini la démocratie représentative à partir du XIXe siècle, leur désarticulation suscite des interrogations et produit des réponses au sein du champ politique : le retour de la nation, l'évocation de possibles assemblées constituantes ainsi que la défense d'un régime représentatif dépourvu de ses traits démocratiques sont autant de possibilités politiques qui naissent de cette désarticulation. Le présent article développe cette thèse et la propose ...
International audience ; The academic debates around the rise of so-called populist movements rarely refer to the origins of the tensions structuring representative democracies today. The "democratic deficit" or the "democratic crisis" are expressions that imply the unstructured nature of this moment. We argue here that it points out a structural shift, resulting from the progressive disarticulation between the representative principle and the democratic principle. As both principles defined representative democracy since the 19th century, their disarticulation raises interrogations and produces reactions within the political field: the return of the nation, the possible Constituent Assemblies, as well as the defence of a representative regime deprived of its democratic features are the many political possibilities born out of this disarticulation. The present article develops this thesis and aims at contributing to the theoretical discussions around the current situation of representative democracies, as well as around the so-called populist moment. ; Les débats académiques autour de la montée des mouvements définis comme populistes s'interrogent rarement sur ce à quoi renvoient les tensions qui traversent les démocraties représentatives aujourd'hui. Le « déficit démocratique » ou la « crise de la démocratie » sont autant d'expressions qui supposent le caractère non structurel de ce moment. Nous y voyons plutôt une rupture structurelle, issue de la désarticulation progressive du principe représentatif d'avec le principe démocratique. Alors que ces deux principes ont défini la démocratie représentative à partir du XIXe siècle, leur désarticulation suscite des interrogations et produit des réponses au sein du champ politique : le retour de la nation, l'évocation de possibles assemblées constituantes ainsi que la défense d'un régime représentatif dépourvu de ses traits démocratiques sont autant de possibilités politiques qui naissent de cette désarticulation. Le présent article développe cette thèse et la propose ...
International audience ; The academic debates around the rise of so-called populist movements rarely refer to the origins of the tensions structuring representative democracies today. The "democratic deficit" or the "democratic crisis" are expressions that imply the unstructured nature of this moment. We argue here that it points out a structural shift, resulting from the progressive disarticulation between the representative principle and the democratic principle. As both principles defined representative democracy since the 19th century, their disarticulation raises interrogations and produces reactions within the political field: the return of the nation, the possible Constituent Assemblies, as well as the defence of a representative regime deprived of its democratic features are the many political possibilities born out of this disarticulation. The present article develops this thesis and aims at contributing to the theoretical discussions around the current situation of representative democracies, as well as around the so-called populist moment. ; Les débats académiques autour de la montée des mouvements définis comme populistes s'interrogent rarement sur ce à quoi renvoient les tensions qui traversent les démocraties représentatives aujourd'hui. Le « déficit démocratique » ou la « crise de la démocratie » sont autant d'expressions qui supposent le caractère non structurel de ce moment. Nous y voyons plutôt une rupture structurelle, issue de la désarticulation progressive du principe représentatif d'avec le principe démocratique. Alors que ces deux principes ont défini la démocratie représentative à partir du XIXe siècle, leur désarticulation suscite des interrogations et produit des réponses au sein du champ politique : le retour de la nation, l'évocation de possibles assemblées constituantes ainsi que la défense d'un régime représentatif dépourvu de ses traits démocratiques sont autant de possibilités politiques qui naissent de cette désarticulation. Le présent article développe cette thèse et la propose à la discussion théorique autour de la situation actuelle des démocraties représentatives, et du moment dit populiste.
International audience ; The academic debates around the rise of so-called populist movements rarely refer to the origins of the tensions structuring representative democracies today. The "democratic deficit" or the "democratic crisis" are expressions that imply the unstructured nature of this moment. We argue here that it points out a structural shift, resulting from the progressive disarticulation between the representative principle and the democratic principle. As both principles defined representative democracy since the 19th century, their disarticulation raises interrogations and produces reactions within the political field: the return of the nation, the possible Constituent Assemblies, as well as the defence of a representative regime deprived of its democratic features are the many political possibilities born out of this disarticulation. The present article develops this thesis and aims at contributing to the theoretical discussions around the current situation of representative democracies, as well as around the so-called populist moment. ; Les débats académiques autour de la montée des mouvements définis comme populistes s'interrogent rarement sur ce à quoi renvoient les tensions qui traversent les démocraties représentatives aujourd'hui. Le « déficit démocratique » ou la « crise de la démocratie » sont autant d'expressions qui supposent le caractère non structurel de ce moment. Nous y voyons plutôt une rupture structurelle, issue de la désarticulation progressive du principe représentatif d'avec le principe démocratique. Alors que ces deux principes ont défini la démocratie représentative à partir du XIXe siècle, leur désarticulation suscite des interrogations et produit des réponses au sein du champ politique : le retour de la nation, l'évocation de possibles assemblées constituantes ainsi que la défense d'un régime représentatif dépourvu de ses traits démocratiques sont autant de possibilités politiques qui naissent de cette désarticulation. Le présent article développe cette thèse et la propose à la discussion théorique autour de la situation actuelle des démocraties représentatives, et du moment dit populiste.
(.) At the time when the flare subset theory gave its first applications in economic science, this result is quite intuitive. However, in the following lines, I propose that the cause should be examined in terms of the lack of precision which characterises consumer preferences, the rationality of which therefore becomes less inhuman than that of homo-economicus. Indeed, we know that the axioma of the existence of a preferential order presupposes a consumer with supra-rationality. For example, since an indifference curve is the expression of an infinite set of sets considered to be equivalent, the homo-economicus is supposed to be able to compare one thousand units of a good X and ten units of a good Y with an infinite number of other sets of those two goods. That reason exists only for economic theory. In fact, comparisons and choices are made on quantities which do not have the precision of the numbers they represent. After recalling the traditional framework of demand theory (0), we will assume that a consumer is capable of making comparisons between blurred sets, that is to say, to consider as equivalent 'approximately x units of good X with just less y units of good Y' and 'approximately x' units of X with just over y units of Y'. A vague demand, the graphic representation of which reflects Jean MARCHAL's 'spindle', will ultimately be derived by introducing budgetary constraints (in the sense of the traditional theory of consumer choices). This "weakened" rationality does not lead to an appetite for demand theory. On the contrary, it leads to a more general case where the traditional demand curve appears to be a particular case of the graphical expression of blurred demand. The analysis of consumption choices presented in this introduction is based on a very simple example which does not reveal all the concepts formed by economic theory. This simplification was necessary in so far as it was a question of establishing the general framework of the vague demand theory. ; (.) A l'heure où la théorie des ...
