Suchergebnisse

Albert O. Hirschman has observed a specific pattern of reactions against any attempt to change society. According to Hirschman, the rhetoric of reaction is limited to three alternatives -- perversity, futility, or jeopardy -- that will be the unintended & unavoidable effects of attempts to make changes in society. Therefore, say the so-called reactionaries, changes should not be realized. The objective of this study is to test the validity of the theory of Albert O. Hirschman. This is made by a case study of the media reaction of the call of the Attac movement for a currency transaction tax, the so-called Tobin tax. The study comprises an argument analysis of the editorial pages of five Swedish newspapers during the first three months of 2001, selected to represent main political & geographical dimensions: Aftonbladet, Dala-Demokraten, Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet, & Vasterbottens-Kuriren. The result of the study is that all of the arguments are against the Tobin tax & that most of them follow the pattern of perversity, futility, or jeopardy. Arguments that do not follow either of these patterns are irrelevant or marginal. The study gives no support to questioning the reaction theory of Albert O. Hirschman. 3 Tables, 3 Figures, 2 Appendixes, 105 References. Adapted from the source document.

The liberal state, it has been argued, must be neutral between different conceptions of the good. Honoring individual autonomy & embodying ideals such as fairness & impartiality, the doctrine of state neutrality is intuitively appealing. Working as a restraint for state actions it is however problematic. In this paper, a possible solution to this predicament is outlined. Drawing on the distinction between liberty & what gives worth to liberty, it is argued that we must never accept non-neutral restrictions of liberty itself, but may pursue non-neutral policies affecting the distribution of what gives worth to liberty & may impose taxes funding non-neutral state actions, although such taxation inevitable limits the worth of our liberty. It is suggested that we, by adopting such a policy of limited state perfectionism, can recognize the right to individual autonomy without having to restrain the state from doing the good it can. References. Adapted from the source document.

The purpose of this article is to review the main hypotheses on Questione meridionale, the Southern Question, a term which means the differences between the North & South of Italy, their causes, & possible solutions. All the hypotheses on the problem refer to three sectors: structural, economic, & cultural. Structural explanations include inefficiency, corruption of state administration, poor infrastructure & clientelism. Economic explanations revolve around the economic relation that was established between the North & South after the political union (1861). On one hand the Southern capitals go to the North in the form of taxes or State investments or Treasury bonds; on the other hand the North uses the South as a market for its manufactured goods. Cultural approaches explain Southern backwardness as is the result of a mentality characterized by lack of collaboration, lack of interest in public welfare, & victimization. All three types of explanations are inspired by North American or North European models, & "blame" the South for not being more like the North. In the last part of this article two scenarios are discussed. The first is that the cleavage between North & South will remain in the coming years. The second is that the cleavage will disappear as a result of European cultural & economic integration process & new cleavages formed by non-European immigration. 9 Tables, 1 Chart, 174 References. Adapted from the source document.