Search

The article reports on a research by the author in which she intends to study the issues related to the stability of democratic government. The research is based upon a detailed listing of all the qualities that make up a working democracy and examines the theories of democratic transition and consolidation. Finally she addresses the democratic deficit that has begun to emerge in the U.S.

This paper claims that the ?quality? of post-authoritarian democracies is largely shaped by the choices countries make, during the early stages of democratization, about the restoration of justice (including social justice) for their beleaguered societies. More specifically, the paper argues that different national paths to restore justice after dictatorship and conflict create distinct institutions and collective memories that, over time, critically affect partisan competition, political discourse, and state/society relations in each new democracy. In so doing, they also pave the way for variance among countries? post-authoritarian democratic quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

General William Tecumseh Sherman is famous for his statement that "War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it." This sounds barbaric, and Sherman’s actions during the Civil War are often taken to be a consequence of his nasty character. But we cannot take this as Sherman’s last word on the subject. He was not an entirely Sherman also had the ear of President Lincoln, who was a very moderate man, and Sherman himself describes his March as an "act of statesmanship." This paper tries to understand Sherman’s approach to the war by means of an examination of his own writings, and especially his letters. I argue that Sherman engaged in a kind of "military statesmanship." His strategy was not barbaric, but took account of serious political concerns, which in turn were informed by a deep understanding of the conditions of political life. Specifically, Sherman’s thought about political life, and the conditions for maintaining it, played a large role in determining his choice of military strategy. The paper has two parts: it first examines Sherman?s notion of the best regime and the requirements for maintaining it, and then, shows how this approach was applied in fighting the war. Sherman ultimately supported a constitutional republic, because he considered the consent of the governed a condition of legitimacy. But there was also a significant anti-democratic strain in his thought, connected to his deep, almost religious, devotion to the rule of law. On the other hand, he understood that a regime could not live by consent alone, but there was a need for it to show that it has the strength to keep its own citizens from violent rebellion and protect itself from foreign invaders. It was with a view to these considerations that Sherman developed his strategy for the March to the Sea, and his whole approach to the battle in the South. Ultimately, the two strands in Sherman’s thought coalesced into a single strategy. He envisioned victory in the War and the re-election of Lincoln in 1865 as a two-part proof for the legitimacy of the Union: it would thus be shown to have both the strength to control violent rebellion, and an ultimate foundation in the consent of the governed. In this way, Sherman weds an almost idealistic reverence for the rule of law with a very realistic understanding of the conditions for maintaining it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a conference paper titled "Politeia in Aristotle's Politics V: A Catalogue of Uses" that discusses the changes in the constitution. It mentions that changes could be of two types on the basis of complete abandonment of existing politeia or change. It presents instances of previous politeia which include oligarchy to democracy, polity to democracy and oligarchy to aristocracy.

Using a computer simulation of a common collective action problem, this paper investigates whether the structure of decision-making affects the propensity to cooperate. Democratic and authoritarian decision-making units are placed in a prisoner?s dilemma to determine whether a significant difference exists in their level of cooperation. Part of the purpose of the study is to discern whether regime type affects cooperation levels. Based on the outcome of the study, several conclusions are applied to the possible behavior of states including evidence that suggests significant differences exist between democracies and authoritarian regimes in their patterns of cooperation vis-à-vis their opponent and the context of cooperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The welfare states of Norway and Sweden have been a picture of divergence since the early 1990s. Norwegian welfare programs have been sustained or even significantly increased throughout the 1990s; in contrast, the Swedish welfare system has been subjected to significant retrenchment in a number of areas. What explains the divergent pattern of welfare retrenchment in Norwegian and Swedish old-age pensions and universal health care programs during the 1990s? Although the deeper economic crisis in Sweden and abundant petroleum revenues in Norway provide some clues to the puzzle, the author argues that the institutional structure of welfare policymaking in both countries largely explains the different outcomes in welfare retrenchment. This finding suggests that three traditionally important actors in the politics of the Social Democratic welfare states?labor unions, business, and bureaucrats?continue to play key roles in today?s retrenchment politics. This paper traces the origins of the crisis of the social democratic welfare state. National political institutions continue to influence the development and reform of welfare states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the past decade, scholars have plunged back into the issue of authoritarian politics, proposing new concepts such as hybrid regimes, electoral authoritarianism, competitive authoritarianism, and dominant party authoritarian regimes, to demonstrate how authoritarianism can function via ostensibly democratic institutions. This article will review four academic works in order to solve the following questions: Why has the focus of literature shifted from democratization to authoritarian studies? What new concepts have scholars established? What are the similarities and differences across each new concept? What is the boundary between new concepts and the more traditional concepts of democracy and authoritarianism? Why do some electoral authoritarian regimes persist while others collapse? What crucial factors have scholars presented in this regard? This paper yields three findings. Firstly, the trend towards studies of authoritarianism is a reflection upon existing literature on the third wave of democratization. Many regimes have adopted democratic institutions but incumbents continue to employ authoritarian methods to tilt elections in their favor. These regimes should be classified as neither democratic nor conventionally authoritarian, but can instead be considered electoral authoritarianism. Secondly, electoral authoritarianism and hybrid regimes are two interchangeable concepts which overarch competitive authoritarianism. The dominant party authoritarian regime type is relatively narrower in scope. Finally, three factors which may account for regime trajectories have been receiving great attention in academia: (1) international factors (Western leverage and linkage); (2) the authoritarian state/party's characteristics (organizational cohesion, economic control, repression capacity); and (3) the opposition's coalition and strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on partisan change in the American electorate has devoted considerable attention to the explaining Republican gains in the South. Less time has been devoted to examining changes outside of the South, where a Democratic majority has persisted-and indeed grown-over the past two decades. The goal of this paper is to examine whether the realignment toward the Republican Party in the South has resulted in move toward the Democratic Party outside the South. Specifically, it is posited that the growing influence of the South within the Republican Party has resulted in a backlash against the GOP. Using data from the American National Election Studies, we examine affect toward southerners as a determinant of the political behavior of non-southerners. Findings indicate that even after controlling for other explanatory variables, affect toward southerners is a significant predictor of how non-southerners evaluate the political parties, as well as vote choice in the 2008 presidential election. While partisanship and ideology remain the best predictors of vote choice among non-southerners, we suggest that anti-southern backlash should not be discounted for the GOP's "Northern problem" in recent elections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines politics of counterterrorism in representative democracies. The analysis focuses on two types of tradeoff faced by counterterrorism authorities. Contemporaneous tradeoff arises when protecting civilian lives requires additional military resources. Inter-temporal tradeoff occurs when indiscriminate use of force suppresses current attacks but mobilizes terrorists? base and leads to increased future terror activities. It is shown that elected government officials behave myopically in equilibrium and pursue too aggressive measures compared to the social optimum. The bias becomes more pronounced when elected leaders are subject to term limits. Policy implications are discussed in light of recent U.S. experiences. It is shown that neither checks-and-balance system nor the law of war provides an effective constraint on executive power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Democratic support is the most important political capital all democratic regimes-new and old-need to survive and maintain. Prior studies have focused on the dynamic aspect of democratic support accompanying with support for democracy and rejection to authoritarianism. However, this analytical convention is not able to capture how democratic support has evolved over the last few decades of democratic advancements. Thus, this study first re-conceptualizes democratic support as a dynamic as well as developmental process. Second, scholars in comparative politics have documented political, economic, and cultural sources of democratic support. However, another important source, cognitive origin, has received less theoretical and empirical attention. This study argues that people who know more about democracy form more authentic support for democracy versus its alternatives than those who know less. Using the theories of attitude and institutional support, it posits that democratic support evolves as people learn democracy to understand that democracy is different from authoritarianism. Using the fifth World Value Surveys and multi-level statistical techniques, the present paper empirically shows that democratic support develops as people become cognitively knowledgeable about democracy. The findings imply that to know democracy is to love it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"But what Commandements are those that God hath given us? …The Laws of God… are none but the Laws of Nature, whereof the principall is, that we should not violate our Faith, that is, a commandement to obey our Civill Soveraigns, which wee constituted over us, by mutuall pact one with another. And this Law of God, that commandeth Obedience to the Law Civill, commandeth by consequence Obedience to all the Precepts of the Bible; which is there onely Law, where the Civill Soveraign hath made it so… which a man at his own peril, may without injustice refuse to obey" (Hobbes, Leviathan). Socrates in the waning moments of his life related to Simmias in the Phaedo that the truth of religion is of lesser consequence than faith in a meritocratic God. It is rational for man to "risk the belief" for without a God who judges there is no reason "man should be of good cheer about his soul, who in his life has rejected the pleasures and ornaments of the body" (Plato, Phaedo). Socrates, like Hobbes, considers religion and faith as critical to civic responsibility. While antiquity considers sovereign authority and religion inseparable, modernity seems intent on severing the two in the name of individual freedom and democracy. My paper will demonstrate the manner in which the dogmatic individuality championed by modern thinkers is only possible through mutual allegiance to a unified doxology, whether tacit or expressed, by all members of a given body politic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to defend the thesis according to which in its final form, as appeared in the work 'Toward Perpetual Peace' (1795), Kantian political theory interprets a 'democratic' republicanism. In such a context the concept of republic that Kant introduced since the latest 60s in his political mind fully accords modern concept of democracy, opposing the 'ancient' concept that the philosopher as well as many other political theorist of Enlightenment harshly criticized. Thus, the exegetical prove of Kantian republicanism's coincidence with the very idea of a modern representative and constitutional democracy will be produced. In order to defend the argument, the work will proceed through a very detailed analysis of the whole range of Kant's political writings, among which the ones involving the latest stage of his own critical philosophy will be emphasized. Accordingly, some basic issues of Kant dealings with republicanism will be particularly discussed, namely: The structure of Kantian idea of Republic, focusing on its own theoretical principles and institutional framework as well; Kant's dealings with the concept of law as well as its political role in the writings of the 90s years; The evolution of the theory of republicanism from 1793 to 1795; The normative foundation of republicanism in 'Towards Perpetual Peace' and its defense of liberal democracy; The philosophical foundation of Kantian political theory, especially regarding its coherence with democratic principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Globalization has and will continue to influence both democratic nation-states and the democratic process. Whereas some scholars argue that globalization has negatively affected democratization around the globe, others have a more nuanced view of globalization, positing that globalization can actually help to create more stable and legitimate democratic regimes. The purpose of this research paper is to propose a new way of identifying democracy at the theoretical level. Once democracy is defined as a non-Western concept, it is possible to cultivate hybrid democratic institutions through new avenues opened up by the globalization process. These new hybrid regimes are tied to established democracies not through a permanent set of legal codes and procedures, but through universal codes of rights and behaviors. When globalization is treated as a value neutral force, and democracy is defined as a universal set of norms and beliefs, Cosmopolitan Democracy can be fully realized at the structural and institutional level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a mixed-methods approach to exploring the relationship between compulsory voting laws and political information. The overall results suggest that CV laws increase incentives and abilities for individuals to acquire political information, and also increase the number of informed voters. However, contrary to popular concern, CV laws - as practiced - do not increase the occurrence of uninformed random voting. I explore the research question in three ways: theoretical, experimental, and empirical. First, I discuss the various mechanisms by which compulsory voting laws might directly and indirectly affect political information. I formalize the effect of the law on rational voting behavior in a decision-theoretic model which improves upon previous characterizations of how compulsory voting laws actually work in democratic elections. Second, a laboratory experiment simulating elections under compulsory and voluntary voting rules demonstrates support for the substantive predictions of the model. Third, previous empirical studies are reviewed, and a new comparative case study is introduced which exploits intra-national variation in compulsory voting laws across the Austrian provinces. This design allows for improved causal inference regarding the effects of CV laws in a real political setting, controlling for institutional rules and other national-level variables. The theoretical and experimental evidence is most compelling. The empirical evidence finds some significant positive effects, but several null results as well, suggesting the need for additional empirical testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will examine the similarities and differences between Thomas Aquinas' concept of the common good with a similar concept in Islamic law, namely: public welfare. The concept of public welfare was always part of Islamic jurisprudential thought however it was developed and thoroughly researched by al-Shatibi. The fact that Thomas Aquinas was influenced by Maimonides ideas and also that Maimonides might have influenced al-Shatibi, could explain the resemblance between Thomas Aquinas' "common good" and al-Shatibi's "public welfare". The ideological and theoretical connection thus has many implications because it sheds light on historically shared democratic values in the Western and the Muslim world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research seeks to explore the tole of justice in the democratic context and, to this end, it will examine the impact of democratic politics on the judicial handling of capital punishment across the US and how this affects the decisions of states on who should live and who should die. I will explore if and how public sentiment influences the judicial outcome of death penalty appeals at the state supreme court level. For this purpose, I utilize data on both direct and state post-conviction appeals of the death penalty across 34 US states for the years 1973 to 1995. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study will focus on the issues related to democratization in Croatia while attempting to assess the outlook of the country’s potential 2007 membership in the EU. More specifically, the emphasis will be on the challenges to the state in the establishment of democratic governance that are a direct result of the ethnic conflict. Croatia’s problems with minority rights, refugee returns and reconstruction, and war crimes are typical of a society in a post-ethnic conflict transition to democracy. Moreover, it is argued that in a country transitioning to democracy following a conflict, democracy building starts with political elites, while organizations and citizens increase their involvement gradually with each positive step that the government makes toward restoring legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the hope of understanding how exclusion from democratic practices is made synonymous to being apolitical, apparent in the oft-muttered phrase, "If you don't vote, you can't complain", this paper analyzes Jean-Jacques Rousseau's ideal republic and Hannah Arendt's depiction of the Greek polis. In doing so, it seeks to demonstrate the extent to which both theories privilege the description of a form of democratic equality over a capacity to describe and understand political actions that may occur in a state of unequal material and power conditions. Furthermore, the conviction expressed by each of these authors that a radical and elusive equality is the pre-requisite leads both to produce a narrow definition of the political, such that those who are unequal are excluded not only from the practices of the democracy, but also from political action in its totality. As such, Arendt and Rousseau are left without the possibility of analyzing events that are profoundly political in both cause and effect, such as French food riots of the 18th century. These food riots are used, in this paper, as a wedge that is useful in making the full implications of the theorists' shortcoming obvious: in sacrificing a robust notion of the political to an idea of democracy, these authors produce a notion of political action and, indeed democratic action, that is characterized more so by exclusivity than participation and more often by stagnation than by beginnings, and render any form of politics initiated by the poor an impossibility. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the major turning points for Turkish politics is the opening of its accession negotiations for European Union membership in 2005. The EU has significant leverage on countries aspiring for membership due to its political conditionality and through the applicant country's adaptation of its rules and laws to those of the EU. Thus, the process of membership negotiations impacts the applicant country's political process in a significant fashion. This paper argues that the Turkey's increasing assimilation of rules and norms of liberal democracy since 1999 has partly resulted from the EU's political conditionality. This paper arges that the political conditionality of the EU acted as a catalyst inducing change in Turkey. In this fashion, the EU's role in Turkish politics will be analyzed through the reforms adopted since 2002. One should note that the adaptation to EU rules is a costly process which the governments' that engage in significant political reform have to incur. The paper will analyze the costs of adaptation to EU rules in Turkish politics. An important point of analysis is the nationalist backlash created by the Turkish political adaptation process to the European Union's political criteria, so the paper will analyze the different social groups in Turkey in terms of their positions on the EU. Through the issue of EU membership, different political parties and social groups in Turkey are engaged in political bargaining and this in turn impacts the assimilation of European norms by the Turkish society at large. The paper's findings are important to assess the degree to which EU conditionality works and could form the basis for further research on other countries in the EU's periphery. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My paper deals with the shortcomings of democratic political theory in Latin America. I criticize the minimialist conception of democracy defined along procedural lines i.e. elections. I contend that this conception of democracy is far too narrow and formalistic, and abstracts too much from the substantive essence of democracy which I define as liberty, equality, and happiness. My paper then is divided into two parts. In the first part, I explore liberal theory to see the concept of liberal-democracy developed from Hobbes to Mill; from there I try to demonstrate how inherent contradictions within liberal theory led to a regression in liberal-democracy, from a regime designed to secure human rights and provide happiness to the populace, to what we have today which does not provide for that. To demonstrate this empirically leads to the second part. I look to Argentina and Brazil, ostensibly democratic and wealthy yet besieged by violence and inequality. Violence is the key variable I explore, I believe it to be a manifestation of inequality, but more importantly I think it constitutes the grossest violation of the promises of liberal-democracy. Ultimately I conclude that a true democratic order must look both to its subjective essence and its objective form, I propose a dialetical relationship as the means to establish that, to raise subjectivist concerns to a matter of necessity in constituting a regime as democratic. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper employs Levinas's critique of Western philosophical tradition's prioritization of the virile, sovereign subject as a springboard for a re-evaluation of the political as immersed within the realms of temporality, alterity and substitution. In that sense, a central question this paper probes is whether or not Levinas's castigation of that foundational liberal premise, the self-conscious Individual whose being precedes all and hence is, can be read as the starting point for a criticism of liberal democracy. After examining Levinas's explication of these realms, I argue that the core of the feminist literature that criticizes (and in doing so, privileges) Levinas's (in)articulation of the feminine as the mysterious, unrepresentable other taking on an antecedent role towards an ethical (and political) order in the future cannot evade the risk of re-asserting the assumption of sexual difference as ontological difference. Thus, I maintain that Levinas's evaluation of the feminine can be re-appropriated as the enabling milieu for a feminist politics in the present moment. Finally, I conclude that an instance of disidentification, as propounded by Jose Munoz, would enable us to re-consider Levinas's text as enabling an interaction with an ever-shifting alterity (that no longer assumes the pre-conceived origination of a unified Individual) through the performative repetition of the phrase Here I am, whereby substitution would challenge the dominant mode of interpellation, and pave the way for the visibility and representation of subjects who are otherwise bound to remain at the margins of the markedly virile nature of the present, political realm. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Treatments of the concept of sacrifice within political theory literature have tended to emphasize what can be considered extraordinary events. Goldhammer's discussion of sacrifice and political founding and Walzer's analysis of citizens' obligations to sacrifice (or die) for their state, are both examples of such a tendency. What has been neglected in the literature is an application of this concept to politics which focuses instead on the sort of non-violent and ideational self-sacrifices which citizens inherently engage in on behalf of their state and one another. Although recent work by Danielle Allen and Romand Coles hint at the role that individual self-sacrificing may play in contemporary politics, their specification of the concept itself has remained underdeveloped. This paper examines these instances of self-sacrifice within a democratic context, and argues for understanding them as a specific kind of response to decisions with which one does not agree. This conceptualization sees self-sacrifice as an ordinary civic activity in which all citizens must take part if a stable democratic order is to be maintained. Through a theorization of the virtues of such self-sacrifice, as well as the limits and legitimacy of such activity, this paper seeks to highlight the importance of self-sacrifice as an ordinary civic virtue within contemporary pluralist democracy. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a study of legislator areal orientations (geographic foci) when engaging in representation. In particular, the paper challenges the district centric nature of representation by measuring and explaining legislators' areal orientations when engaging in representation. Data collected from two mail surveys and semi-structured elite interviews with state legislators and staffers in three states shows that legislators and staffers actively engage in a significant amount of extra-district representation (defined as representation outside of a legislator's home district). The predictive power of several variables including electoral ambition, obligation, personal attributes and district characteristics are measured to explain why legislators adopt extra-district areal orientations. The results show that legislators expand their areal orientations beyond the district in order to achieve their electoral goals. This finding contradicts previous research that suggests electoral ambition strengthens district areal foci and that district electoral structure (multi-member districts) explains extra-district areal orientations. The implications of these findings are important to our understanding of representation because they show that legislators are much more active outside the district than previously thought. By incorporating extra-district representation into legislators' areal foci, two different types of representation are revealed: anticipatory and reactionary representation. Anticipatory representation is primarily a district representation style that emphasizes anticipating and preempting district concerns through effective constituency service while reactionary representation is primarily an extra-district representation style that emphasizes responsiveness to extra-district concerns. While district representation is an important part of any representation style, more work needs to be done to understand the role of extra-district representation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper offers a new interpretation of the well-known Athenian trial of the Arginousai generals in 406. The trial, in which Socrates plays a momentary but critical role, is described in detail by Xenophon's Hellenika. Its fame or infamy derives from later references to it, and - especially - from centuries of scholarship that has taken the trial for granted as the principal example of Athenian democracy as an impassioned mob -- reckless, lawless, and self-destructive. This impression has given rise to the nearly universal condemnation of the democracy at Athens as a regime without restraint or respect for the rule of law. This paper examines the trial and concludes that the harsh action taken by the Athenian democracy on this particular occasion, when seen in its proper context (namely, recent political affairs in Athens), was both deliberate and warranted, as a defense of demokratia at Athens -- notwithstanding the disruptive consequences of this action in prosecuting the war against Sparta and preserving the Athenian empire. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper will explore the normative work done by the idea of "the people" in theories of democratic self-government, arguing that the conception of democratic self-government as rule by the people threatens to conceal the key problem of self-government-what I call "the problem of incorporation." The historical importance of the idea of the people to theories of self-government stems from the capitalization of modern democratic theorists on existing theories of sovereignty, such that "the people" was understood as a subject that could displace the monarch as the sovereign. The problem with locating constitutive authority in the people is that this relegates the reconciliation of individual differences to the process of identification, suggesting the false transitive principle that if individuals are members of the people, and the people makes a decision, then this decision can be attributed to each individual. This conceals the mechanisms through which individuals' opinions and wills are or are not actually reconciled and incorporated in collective decisions. The paper argues that theories of democratic authority should do without the concept of the people and instead formulate the moral intuition behind popular sovereignty in terms of the equal moral right to authority (that is, to the positive right to rule) of all individuals under the law. The reformulation of democratic self-government in terms of the equal individual right to authority reveals that the primary problem of self-government is to determine which mechanisms can successfully reconcile and incorporate simultaneously individuals' divergent opinions and wills in common decisions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do parliamentary and presidential government structures, as well as different degrees of federalization, influence counter-terrorism decision-making in Germany and the United States? After 9/11, Western democracies have focused their counterterrorism efforts on improving their intelligence capacities and facilitating information-sharing between security services. Viewing the cataclysmic events of 9/11 as a unique opportunity for a quasi-experimental research design, this paper uses the attacks as a benchmark for a comparative analysis of how political structures affect domestic decision-making processes and policy outcomes. The examination of political structures places this paper at the center of an ongoing debate about the domestic sources of foreign/national security policy. Specifically, scholars of world politics have continued to shift their focus from state-level analyses to a focus on organizations and individual decision-makers. The latter approach stresses the importance of conceptualizing perceptions and motivations of bureaucracies and individual decision-makers. Proponents of the first school, by contrast, focus on how the question of how executive and legislative branches stand in relation to each other, and to lower levels of government, produces variations in decision-making processes, government capabilities, and, ultimately, the policy output.The paper argues that while nature and scope of U.S. and German counterterrorism responses show many similarities, the vertical, intergovernmental attributes of German decision-making structures - as manifested in the states' veto powers - prevented a centralization of homeland security and intelligence authorities symptomatic of reform efforts in the United States. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The promulgation of norms and practices is a key concern of many actors, such as those who espouse ideologies of capitalism or democracy. This paper seeks to shed light on the processes by which these norms and practices diffuse from one country to the next. In particular, the paper focuses on those key actors, often referred to as entrepreneurs, who are most central to the diffusion process. The available literature too ambiguously describes the mechanisms by which entrepreneurs integrate foreign norms into the local context, and too often centers the mechanisms at the state level. These mechanisms are generally presented as "localization" or "translation", or the innovative act of framing and grafting foreign norms to the local context. This paper sharpens these notions and separates them into two distinct ideas: translation as the reconstruction of foreign norms and practices at the state and policy level, and localization as the adaptation of imported norms to the local discourse at the substate level. This paper approaches the issue from the context of Bolivian democracy. In particular, it focuses on how two actors, (then-president) Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada and (current president) Evo Morales, launched initiatives to integrate notions of liberal democracy into Bolivia, and acted respectively as a translator and a localizer for Western notions of liberalism and organization. Analyzing this case solidifies the notion that the international diffusion of norms must be studied as a multi-level, multi-faceted process, with interactions and innovations occurring between the international, state, and local levels. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past half century, observers of democratic societies have repeatedly expressed anxiety about the fate of civil liberties in the face of measures to safeguard national security. The rapid expansion of intrusive national security measures since 9/11 has dramatically expanded the scope and significance of this concern. In light of recent events, one question in particular has attracted the attention of leading scholars in democratic societies - why do civil liberties succumb to national security concerns with almost predictable regularity? In contrast to the accounts offered by prominent democratic theorists, who offer complex cultural, psychological and institutional explanations for why concerns of security tend to win out over those of civil liberties, this paper argues that the preeminence of security concerns derives from the executive's under-examined monopoly over state secrecy. This informational advantage allows the executive to dominate - and even manipulate - the public deliberation that legitimizes the infringement of civil liberties. Consequently, the paper argues, efforts to secure a more reasonable balance between the pursuit of security and maintenance of liberties requires attention to the theoretical and practical resources that democratic theory offers to combat the abuse of state secrecy. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An essay is presented on religious zealotry and the prophetic ways of democratic dissent in the U.S. It focuses on the marked tension between liberal and deliberative theories of democracy and the practice of religious fanaticism in the U.S. politics. The author attempts to enhance the space for rethinking religious fanaticism and argues that the dominant comprehensions of religious zealotry are incomplete both in their conception of fanaticism and its place in a democratic society.

The article discusses the critical theory by Plato which employs creation of linguistic and conceptual images in his critique of Athenian democracy designed to provide critical purchase on the Kallipolis. It mentions that this critique is devoted to drawing out and altering conceptions of ownership. It analyzes the fantasies around the structurization of political organizations and the construction of Kallipolis.

Although there is wide agreement on the empirical fact of democratic peace today, there is fierce disagreement on its causes. Is it due to economic interdependence? Institutional restraint? Normative restraint? Perception of country similarities? American hegemony? What causes the contemporary democratic peace? All these factors undoubtedly have some explanatory power, but we argue that focusing exclusively on them misses a deeper cause of contemporary democratic peace, which is the heretofore undertheorized notion of "democratic solidarity" and mutual amity/support among democratic countries. Because democratic peace theory treats contemporary democratic peace as the mere absence of war (a "thin peace") and because of its rationalist character, it tends to neglect the "democratic solidarity" which underlies its ontological referent (democratic peace). Therefore it fails to recognize that today's "thick" democratic peace, built on democratic solidarity, is qualitatively different from the thin democratic/republican peace of past international systems. This failure has several consequences: a) it neglects the processes through which democratic solidarity and thick democratic peace reinforce each other, and; b) perpetuates an unawareness of the system-transforming potential of democratic solidarity. We support our arguments with a comparative case study, in which we show how different the thin peace among Italian city-states in the 1380-1454 period was from the contemporary, thick transatlantic peace. For example, the Italian thin peace was typically the result of historical accidents or factors exogenous to the arguments of democratic peace theory. Such a peace was based on coercion and/or cost-benefit calculations, was not stable or durable, and was unable to transform the Italian sub-system into a more peaceful one. On the other hand, the contemporary, thick democratic peace is based on a strong belief (war between democracies is unthinkable), is stable, enduring, and is showing the potential to push the "Lockean culture" of the international system towards a Kantian one. The structure of the paper is as follows. First, we analyze the different ways democratic peace literature and constructivist approaches conceptualize democratic peace, showing that while the first treats peace as a mere absence of war and ignores its reliance on democratic solidarity, the second can account for a thick peace built on common identity, interests, and values. Second, we produce a comparative historical analysis of the thick democratic peace of the contemporary international system and the thin democratic peace of the Renaissance Italian city-states. This analysis makes it clear that democratic peace theory must take into account democratic/republican solidarity issues and effects to fully understand the (re)production of democratic peace and its implications for the international system. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political theory addressing environmental problems typically takes a single type of issue, such as climate change, as exemplary and relies upon this type as the basis for theorizing. This paper begins with a simple but often neglected question: What makes an environmental problem a political problem? I begin with a set of temporal and spatial distinctions in order to illuminate the variety of environmental problems before turning to the role of complexity and uncertainty in understanding environmental problems. The purpose is to determine whether there is a unifying idea behind this variety of problems that is amenable to deliberative or participatory democracy and whether an attachment to a participatory idea of democracy is sustainable in light of these problems. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Liberal democracies are defended partly on the ground that they foster the happiness of their citizenry. The freedom and autonomy that liberal societies grant their citizens is said to be the principle means through which they promote this happiness. Individuals are presumed to be the best judges of their needs and interests; therefore granting them freedom to pursue those needs and interests should make them happy. However, while it is true that liberal societies are generally happier than other societies, findings from the field of positive psychology suggests that happiness in these societies has been declining in recent decades. Perhaps more troubling, they are experiencing rising suicide rates and an epidemic of depression. Some evidence suggests that, in certain contexts, an abundance of freedom is the culprit behind the loss of happiness. The paper closes with some suggestions for how liberal democracies might combat declining happiness without compromising liberalism's fundamental and necessary commitment to freedom and autonomy. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The French Monarchomachs and the English Levellers were among the first to develop the idea of popular sovereignty, and in both instances popular control over government ultimately manifested itself in a right to resist. The theories of popular sovereignty developed during the next century, notably those of Rousseau, Herder, Sieyès, and Kant, were significantly more skeptical to a right of resistance, or denied it outright. What explains this transformation of the concept of popular sovereignty? In this paper I argue that the change can be attributed to the rise of the idea of a nation's political autonomy, which entails, on the one hand, that the institutions that had previously possessed the right to resist (such as estates, ephors, and parlements) were denied an independent authority; on the other that sovereign public authority is held accountable to the people as a whole in democratic procedures. The difficulty that the 18th century authors struggle with is how to make room for resistance to authority under democratic conditions. Their debates is the genesis of arguments about civil disobedience in democracies current today, and we can understand them better by considering their origin in the transitions of the idea of popular sovereignty. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Plato's Republic, there is the clear message that democracy is prone to civil war; democracy is precarious. There is a multiplicity of desires and interests-the seeds of stasis-without any clear way of negotiating between them. Words and force become the means of persuasion, but individuals want different things and the crowd is always changeable, always unruly. Athens and Syracuse, both democracies in the last few decades of the 5th century had much in common: both struggled with conflicts between The People, ambitious oligarchs, and the threat of tyranny; both were, or were potentially, naval empires; both struggled for unity and stability. And yet while there are these parallels, the differences between what was persuasive to the citizens of each is telling. This paper will explore the speeches 'recorded' by Thucydides and Diodorus that were used by Athenian and Syracusan generals and private citizens as evidence both of the contrasting methods used to maintain unity within a democracy, and as revealing the differing character and circumstances of these cities. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The bulk of the literature analyzing Latin American politics identifies incomplete or unsatisfactory democratization. Literature on East and Southeast Asia has been much more concerned whether hybrid regimes are and can be legitimate and whether democracy was inevitable or even desirable. The two subsets of literature have much to offer the other particularly since analysis of the two regions tends to evaluate different regimes with different terms. Latin America's democracies require adjectives whereas Asia's governments seek legitimacy and law often without democracy. Traditional typologies in the field breakdown in both areas leading to the question as to whether the typologies are effective ways of understanding politics in the contemporary world. This paper will assess a few of the dominant typologies within the field in relation to Latin American and South and Southeast Asian governments before proposing a separate set of criteria by which to identify regimes. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although there is some room for discussion, the "Democratic Peace" theory has become widely accepted by many scholars as a foundation for their research. When some culturalist scholars such as Samuel Huntington make a claim that certain states are dangerous, they base their argument on their belief that some culture/civilization are inimical to democratization, thus posing a threat to the global community in general and the West in particular. More recently, some scholars are closely examining the validity of the democratic peace theory, posing a question whether it is the degree of economic development rather than democracy that makes states less confrontational with each other. What has not been extensively researched is the relative importance between a)cultural/civilizational differences between states and b)their degree of economic development as the explanatory variable for democracy. This paper attempts to answer this question. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the constitutional development of civil liberty within state governments. At first glance, we realize a rather obvious point about the articulation of liberty within state constitutions: 50 different sovereignties inevitably produce variance. Yet, what are the parameters of this variance and is the variance significantly wide enough to matter? This project seeks to capture and catalogue the empirics of constitutional change and difference amongst state governmental articulations of civil liberty. It will build provision by provision and state by state, a historical and incremental index for the years 1789-2006. The purpose of this is to give traction to both the substantive content of constitutional regimes as well as their temporal development. Once complete, this catalogue can map answers to the following patters. For which liberties is there convergence amongst the states? Where did convergence occur and when? Is there temporal "lumping" of development? For which issues, are states most dissimilar? This analysis fights for purchase over the causes of observed trends in the data. The ultimate purpose of the project is to identify observable trends, which then generate theories about constitutional development. Under close examination, this study of adaptive change enriches our understanding on how states chose to institutionalize visions of libertas and how this institutionalization might matter within the state today. The NPSA presentation will focus on the following three components: 1) the method developed to track constitutional provisions, 2) summary of observable inference, 3) a summary of the hypotheses driving future research. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on a review of comparative case studies of top-down initiated grassroots democracy (Fox, 1992 and Abers, 2000) and upcoming Caracas-based field research in July and August of 2007, this paper studies the political effects of Chávez's social redistribution policies in terms of (re)producing clientelism, (re)generating citizenship or some combination thereof. Examining dynamics within the Chávista camp, that is, the multifaceted relationship between the popular sectors, "grassroots" civil society, and the state, I consider the role of recently organized and older Venezuelan civil society organizations' (CSO) attempts to mediate the state and society relationship and question whether their interventions provides actors with a useful channel for contestation in this post-partyarchy (Coppedge, 1994) context of (supposed) decentralized "participatory democracy." Thus, can civil society organizations utilize recently created Community Councils to construct pathways for moving beyond articulatory politics to consolidating results in terms of political citizenship? My working hypothesis is that the likelihood for CSOs to combat clientelism and create widened access to citizenship increases as groups attain a greater degree of organizational autonomy and structure their internal spheres of participation more representatively. But if the objective is to actually attain democratic citizenship, then such a dynamically organized civil society needs to carve out institutional spaces within the state in order to enforce its claims. The entrenched practice of petro-state clientelism (Karl, 1997) and the tutelary statism of the Chávez government represent major obstacles to a) a civil society apertura and b) the stimulation of "enforceability" mechanisms for attaining citizenship, respectively. Treating Venezuela as a "least likely case," then, I offer an initial report on these important research questions and hypothesis based on my two-month field work. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Friedrich Nietzsche, long considered an opponent of the mainstream Anglo-American liberal-democratic tradition, has recently been the subject of renewed attention among English-speaking political theorists for his potential contribution to an agonistic democratic theory. Less attention has been paid to his relation to liberalism, in either its classical or contemporary articulations. However, while Nietzsche considered himself a trenchant critic of the English liberal tradition, his own moral and political commitments bear a number of striking similarities to the positions of "English" liberals such as his near-contemporary John Stuart Mill and the later Isaiah Berlin, while sharing with their thought a certain incompatibility with a renewed Kantian liberalism exemplified by the work of John Rawls. In this paper, I offer an overview of the reasons for reconsidering Nietzsche's relation to liberalism, and for considering in particular his contribution to the question of personhood. While criticism of the conceptions of person advocated by Rawls in his theory of political liberalism has usually proceeded on communitarian grounds, certain theorists, including Michael Walzer and Martha Nussbaum, have also argued for a more nuanced account of the relation between reason and the passions as a crucial dimension of any adequate liberal conception of the person. Here Nietzsche's non-metaphysical conception of the person, which emphasizes embodiment and vulnerability in accounting for the relation between sentiments and reason, provides a distinctive contribution to liberal thought, one particularly relevant to the contemporary theoretical challenge posed by political claims grounded in the bodily and emotional experience of persons. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The principal aim of this paper is to provide a critical overview of the recent 'legitimacy crisis' surrounding the Korean Constitutional Court in the aftermath of democratization in 1987. While commentators have expressed mixed reactions towards the Court's new activism, the intractable question remains as to how the democratic legitimacy of the Constitutional Court's newly found powers could be warranted. An inquiry into the European/neo-Kelsenian model for "centralized review" reveals that constitutional courts generally occupy a distinct space that do not fit the traditional separation of powers doctrine. In light of the global proliferation of rights, these special courts enjoy an elevated status over all three branches of government by assuming the role of the final, positive interpreter of higher law. The recent 'legitimacy crisis' in Korea involving the Court was precisely the result of widespread ignorance towards its unique institutional character. If the Court is indeed a "fourth state function," then legitimacy cannot be maintained through conventional means of checks and balances. Controversial decisions rendered recently suggest that the Court has now reached a critical point by failing to maintain its own legitimacy as the guardian of the constitution. Lacking institutional ways to limit the Court's behavior, Koreans are compelled to turn to a higher level of civic responsibility that can induce the legitimate action of constitutional justices. However, prospects are not bright because the provision for constitutional petitions intended to empower the individual has effectively thwarted the foundation for democratic citizenship vital for holding the Court accountable. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Philip Pettit has recently argued that collective institutions face a discursive dilemma: when making a decision on the basis of reasons, there are circumstances when the judgment obtained by applying inferential rules to the group's assessment of each of the supporting reasons is different from the decision the group would reach if it merely voted on the judgment. Pettit argues that in most cases we should resolve the dilemma in the former manner, taking what he calls the "premise-centered" approach. This method is superior, he argues, because these institutions will then count as rational unities. Only when groups are rational unities can they execute their purposes. In my paper, I argue that the Pettit's approach results in an unwarranted encroachment on the liberty of democratic institutions. First, I argue that expressions of aggregate preference are curtailed on his model. Because the premises themselves can be construed as the outcome of prior judgments, a consistently-applied premise-centered approach will regressively eliminate opportunities to consider the aggregate views of representatives. Second, I challenge the priority that Pettit assigns to "premises" in the decision procedure. In my view, there are times when an institution should reject a premise rather than accept a conclusion. This is because the aims of democratic institutions are contested: doctrines and past activity are not fixed milestones but are rather respected though rejectable elements in the process. In the end, I argue that the central problem with Pettit's model is his restrictive account of rational unity; I outline another approach. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper attempts to problematize the discourse and politics of civil society, the former as produced by liberal democratic theory and mainstream democratization literature and the latter as carried out by various agencies of international democratic aid industry. The operation of a liberal discourse on democracy and the vanguard role it assigns to a particular model of civil society is construed here as an exercise in regulatory and disciplinary power implicated in governmentality in the Third World. Taking its cue from the Foucauldian genealogical approach questioning the conditions of possibility, modalities and constitution of the objects and domains of power (Foucault in 'Power' 2000; 118), this analysis is about how a certain regime of truth around the universal value of liberal democracy progressively re-constitutes the not-yet-so-civil subjects of the Third World through a multiplicity of mechanisms and shapes the contours of the political - without indelibly fixing them- in those transitional settings via novel forms of intervening into and managing the political energies and potentialities of those populationsBearing in mind the accompaniment of major mechanisms of power by ideological productions, I shall argue that the discursive production of the democratization paradigm in Western political theory entails the specific production of the Third World subjects through the practice of democratic aid interventions in the political processes of the Third World, thus constitutes an exercise in power. A regime of government is erected over the Third World, discursively and practically marking out uncivil societies in need of Western democratic aid; its control, surveillance, discipline and administration. Such an intervention in the government of the socio-political in the Third World is made possible by the production and circulation of a politics of truth, of an expert knowledge construing certain forms of knowledge as ontologically true, thereby setting the limits of what can be said, by whom, and with what legitimacy. Using the Western liberal model of civil society as the hegemonic benchmark against which to evaluate political change and development in the Third World, the democratization paradigm, in discourse and practice, governmentalizes 'civil society' for the ultimate purpose of shaping it to fit a preexisting model of democratic development; through the conditional funding of Southern non-governmental organizations by the democratic aid agencies. The instrument and effect of such intervention appears to be the normalization of liberal democratic ethics, the inculcation of universally appraised modes of political conduct, thereby constituting a momentary suture of the political, yet never complete. In the process, a whole set of local knowledges have been disqualified as inadequate, "located low down on the hierarchy", and subjugated, the insurrection of which requires "opposing the effects of centralizing powers linked to the institutions and functioning of an organized scientific discourse" (Foucault in 'Power and Knowledge'; 84). Nonetheless, the subjugating and constitutive functions of power-knowledge are inseparable from its contradictory effectivities in generating novel sites of counter-hegemonic resistance intent on resuscitating such subjugated knowledges. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Where it is not rejected altogether, global democracy is often thought to entail either world government, or to be limited to loose regional or international federations of nation-states (or perhaps simply involve some strengthening of existing international institutions, e.g., a global people's assembly at the UN). However, these characterizations omit a distinctive feature of contemporary globalization -- the emergence of cross-border communities and transnational associations, which requires a new normative framework giving a major role to human rights fulfillment, including social and economic rights, and harmonizing the claims of political communities or associations (including cross-border ones) with increased democratic input by distant others into decisions that crucially affect them. In the first part of this paper, I develop two criteria that I have previously advanced in Globalizing Democracy and Human Rights (Cambridge, 2004) for addressing the range and character of desirable democratization in transnational contexts-common activities and impact on basic human rights--and argue that they are compatible. In the second part, I go on to consider some practical implications of these criteria for institutional transformation and design, with special reference to new directions for transnational representation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the degree to which electoral endorsement of ethno-nationalist terrorist affiliated political parties arises out of perceived relative deprivation or economic grievances in established democracies. While there is debate and inconclusive evidence in the literature concerning the relationship between economic hardship and terrorist group membership, I argue that widespread support for an ethno-nationalist terrorist affiliated party at the ballot box is not driven by economic conditions. Since the focus is individual rather than cross-national variation in voting behavior, I investigate this claim within Northern Ireland for the period 1969-2005. I draw on archival research, individual level survey data, and a newly compiled dataset combining sub-national socio-demographic information, data on the intensity and type of violence as a result of the conflict, and electoral results at the district level. The empirical evidence reveals that although individuals who vote for an ethno-nationalist terrorist affiliated party are more likely to face economic adversity, they are less likely to cite economic concerns as a primary election issue or reason for vote choice. Furthermore, districts exist where prospective voters face high levels of deprivation and do not vote for the terrorist affiliated political party. Instead I find that the majority of citizens who vote for terrorist affiliated political parties report higher levels of insecurity, exposure to violence, and a lower levels of trust in the state and/or security forces. These findings are part of a larger project which demonstrates how local demographics shape levels of inter-communal insecurity and incentives for terrorist group infiltration of society. This is turn influence levels of state and security force legitimacy among the local population which reduce the costs of endorsing ethno-nationalist terrorism at the ballot box. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I critically analyze how tribal sovereignty is considered problematic from the perspectives of feminists and democrats. I look at the views of James Tully, Judith Resnik, and Jurgen Habermas on the question of whether the relationship between indigenous peoples and European settlers and their descendents has been one of simply violence and force or whether their have been moments of consent, and the question of what normative implications this history might have for the theory and practice of (democratic?) politics today.Feminists have problems with the doctrine of tribal sovereignty because it allows unequal treatment of women by tribal governments. In Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, the United States Supreme Court held that tribal sovereignty prevented an equal protection challenge to tribal membership rules that discriminated based on sex. In her discussion of Martinez, feminist scholar Judith Resnik contends that we need to take seriously how conquest and force is a (or the) source of federal power over Native Americans. Democratic theorists object to Martinez because of the how the right to membership was denied unfairly; these theorists hold that all claims (including indigenous sovereignty) must ultimately be subject to challenge. Interestingly, Habermasians like Seyla Benhabib have also emphasized that all states began in violence. James Tully has argued that the prior sovereignty of indigenous peoples has normative implications for today. However, in defending indigenous sovereignty, Tully has changed from emphasizing a past history of treaty making and consent to emphasizing how the settler-states cannot be legitimate until they obtain the consent of indigenous peoples. Can a history of violence be used to vindicate feminist claims? Democratic claims? Or claims for the return of indigenous self-governance? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Western Balkan states stand as Europe's last bastion of serious instability, and they remain a final frontier for democracy and capitalism. However, despite a long history of oppression and foreign domination, the Western Balkans have made impressive strides toward liberalization and reform-these strides can largely be attributed to the attractiveness of membership to the European Union (EU). Among these states, it is Serbia who faces the severest obstacles and sharpest opposition to their prospective accession to the EU. How Serbia manages its relationship with Kosovo will play a significant role in Serbian accession.This paper examines Vachudova's concept of "leverage" as the EU's strongest foreign policy, exploring the impact of leverage over aspiring member states as the catalyst for economic and political reforms. It identifies challenges to EU membership that are unique to Serbia, most especially the Kosovo conflict, and credits the EU for playing a meaningful role in fostering an end to one of the most ardent nationalist conflicts in Europe. It finds that the EU itself is an anomaly amongst international organizations, in that it is able to exert itself upon the Western Balkans through what Vachudova terms "asymmetrical interdependence"-that is, because the Western Balkans have more to gain from a relationship with the EU, states like Serbia will ultimately yield to European conditions designed to promote Western democracy. Finally, the EU is exerting leverage and enacting change without the use of force-this is key to establishing lasting reforms and defining the EU's growing role as a leading force in international affairs. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In his Discourses Machiavelli provides his famous study of Rome, offering it as a model from which to learn and, in important ways, to emulate. Yet there is another noteworthy analysis of Rome that has not received the careful attention it deserves. Montesquieu, in his Considerations of the Causes of the Greatness of the Romans and Their Decline offers his own, more systematic account of the rise and fall of Rome. This paper will discuss how Machiavelli and Montesquieu differ in their explanations of why Rome fell. Both understand Rome to be the best model of free government up to their time, yet understand that Rome went awry in crucial ways. While Machiavelli seems to nevertheless look to the Roman Republic as a model, Montesquieu eventually turns his attention elsewhere: to Britain. Understanding his Considerations will thus offer insight into this decision and hence into his Spirit of the Laws. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aeschylus' Persians is fascinating for various reasons, not least because it dates from the period which saw the birth of Athenian democracy and empire. In this paper, I argue that Aeschylus is trying to shape the emerging Athenian identity, accepting the movement toward democracy and empire, yet resisting the loss of piety, a loss characterized by hubris. He fashions the Athenian identity both positively and negatively by contrasting Greek and barbarian. This polarization permits Aeschylus to effect a limited sense of identification between his audience and the Persians. Aeschylus uses this identification in turn to generate the tragic emotion of fear, thereby lending further force to his message against hubris. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Classic democratic theorists and empirical political scholars have long disagreed on the nature of democracy. While there are several dimensions to this disagreement, the two groups diverge most fundamentally on the competence of citizens. While theorists have long believed that citizens have the potential to become politically knowledgeable and sophisticated, empiricists have decried these claims as "utopian." Styling themselves as "realists," the empiricists have cited a variety of practical barriers in arguing that most citizens cannot achieve more than moderate levels of competence.In my paper, I argue that the realist position itself is flawed. I collect and review several dozen empirical studies which suggest that the problems with citizen competence run deeper than empirical scholars have supposed. These studies show that the building blocks of citizen competence-substantial political knowledge, and careful, systematic reasoning-can actually detract from the realization of citizen competence. Given this, problems in this area spring not merely from the citizens' failure to successfully fulfill their role, but from the basic nature of that role itself.Accordingly, I argue that the empiricists have encountered the same problem as the theorists; an inability to elaborate a productive role for the citizen. Rather than staking out a more realistic stance, then, empiricists have arrived at the same end. I conclude by suggesting that empiricists should join theorists in working to identify a meaningful and productive conception of citizen competence, and by advocating more studies which usefully combine democratic theories and empirical work. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]