Search

This is a republication of Judith N. Shklar's paper "Rights in the Liberal Tradition" first published in an issue of Colorado College Studies in 1992. This is the first time the piece has been made digitally available. Edward Hall and Matt Sleat provide a brief foreword to the essay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the journal on topics including political ideas, the roles of power and persuasion in politics, and inequality in relation to post-war British conservatism.

Will Kymlicka has argued that ‘democratic politics is politics in the vernacular’. Does this statement mean that democratic politics is impossible in a multilingual community, whether at the local, national, regional or global level? This paper discusses this assumption and maintains that democratic politics should imply the willingness of all players to make an effort to understand each other. Democratic politics depends on a willingness to overcome the barriers to mutual understanding, including the linguistic ones. Anytime that there is a community of fate, a democrat should search the available methods to allow deliberation according to the two key conditions of political equality and participation. If linguistic diversity is an obstacle to equality and participation, some methods should be found to overcome it, as it is exemplified by the Esperanto metaphor. The paper illustrates the argument with four cases of multilinguistic political communities: (1) a school in California with English-speaking and Spanish-speaking students; (2) the city of Byelostok in the second half of the nineteenth century, where four different linguistic communities (Polish, Russian, German and Yiddish) coexisted. This led Markus Zamenhof to invent Esperanto; (3) the linguistic problems of the Indian state and the role played by English – a language unspoken by the majority of the Indian population in 1947 – in developing Indian democracy; and (4) the case of the European Parliament, with 20 languages and a wealth of interpreters and translators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the outcome of the 2001 and 2005 general elections, when the numbers of abstainers outweighed the numbers of Labour voters on both occasions, much attention has focused upon the state of British democracy and how to enthuse the electorate, especially young people. Whilst the government is exploring ways to make the whole process of voting easier, it may be failing to tackle the real problem – that youth appear to find the business of politics uninviting and irrelevant. This paper examines data derived from a nationwide survey of more than 700 young people in order to shed light on what lies at the heart of young people's apparent disengagement from formal politics in Britain – political apathy or a sense of political alienation. The findings reveal that they support the democratic process, but are sceptical of the way the British political system is organised and led and are turned off by politicians and the political parties. However, there is no uniform youth orientation to politics, and the data indicate that views differ according to social class, educational history and also gender. However both ethnicity and region of the country in which young people live seem to have little influence in structuring political attitudes and behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a preliminary attempt to evaluate changing patterns of democratic governance, at least in Westminster-style parliamentary settings, and possibly more generally. It has two specific purposes: first, to propose a paradigm for evaluating the empirical evolution of democratic governance; and second, to illustrate the explanatory potential of this paradigm through a mini-case study of changing patterns of governance in one particular polity. The conceptual framework is drawn from March and Olsen's eponymous study (1995) from which polar (‘thick’ and‘thin’) forms of democratic governance are derived. Four conjectures about its evolution are then explored. First, in its mass party phase, the pattern of democratic governance approximated the‘thick’ pole. Second, the subsequent evolution of democratic politics has been in the direction of the‘thin’ (minimalist or populist) pole. Third, the cause of this shift was a failure to adapt political institutions to changing citizen identities, which was masked by the ascendancy amongst political elites of the neo-liberal account of governance. Fourth, the paper considers the means by which democratic governance might be renewed. The approach is applied to explain changes in Australian politics over recent decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Law of Freedom in a Platform was Gerrard Winstanley's final published work. It appeared in February 1652, nearly two years after the dissolution of the ‘Digger’ commune in Surrey of which he had been the principal spokesperson. The book is said to differ markedly from his previous writings. In particular, his depiction of a disciplinary state apparatus is contrasted to his earlier rejection of state authority, and his appeal to a utopian legislator (Cromwell) is contrasted to his earlier emphasis on the self-emancipation of the poor. In accounting for this shift of position, commentators often refer to the ‘bitter’ experience of the Diggers’ defeat. Confronted everywhere by ignorance and persecution, Winstanley came to realize that institutionalized discipline was required to counter human imperfection and that emancipation could only come from the top down. This paper questions such an argument. It suggests that in almost every respect The Law of Freedom remained consistent with Winstanley's other writings and that no transformation in his thought took place. What apparent differences there were stemmed from the challenges presented by the utopian genre, and the paper concludes by arguing that Winstanley's achievement lies in his having risen to these challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although some conventional liberal democratic regimes are likely to become consolidated in Latin America, the dominant pattern is better understood as ‘democracy by default’, and in a few cases little more than ‘facade democracy’ is to be expected. This paper reviews the major factors accounting for the fragility, instability and policy ineffectiveness of many of these new regimes. Although current fiscal crises lend some plausibility to the ‘neo-liberal’ analyses of democratization, the paper argues that in the longer run consolidated democracies will tend to develop a range of ‘social democratic’, participatory and interventionist features that are at variance with the neo-liberal model. Latin American nation-states are relatively well integrated and contain a stock of human and social resources that should favour constitutional outcomes, so that although many of these new democracies will remain provisional and incomplete for the time being, they possess the potential for subsequent extension and entrenchment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Liberal democracy is liberalized democracy; that is. democracy defined and structured within the limits set by liberalism. The paper outlines the constitutive features of liberalism and shows how they determined the form and content of democracy and gave rise to liberal democracy as we know it today. It then goes on to argue that liberal democracy is specific to a particular cultural context and cannot claim universal validity. This, however, does not lead to cultural relativism as it is possible to formulate universal principles that every good government should respect. The paper offers one way of reconciling universalism and cultural diversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines Hobbes's doctrine of representation and argues that implicit in this doctrine is the modern notion of the people as the constituent power of the state. Attention is focused on the progressive evolution of Hobbes's ideas about the multitude, the people, and the constitution of political unity, and on the connection between his doctrine of political representation and his concept of personality. The paper ends by assessing the compatibility of Hobbes's concept of the people as constituent power and his concept of the commonwealth by acquisition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has become commonplace to argue that Benjamin Constant and Alexis de Tocqueville form a distinct French liberal tradition going back to Montesquieu. Yet Tocqueville showed little interest in Constant, and early nineteenth-century French liberals did not recognize Montesquieu as the father of French liberalism. Based on these observations, this essay demonstrates that the French liberal tradition is a belated construction and explains how, when, and why it was invented. Exhuming the origins of the French liberal tradition, I argue, is important for our understanding of the history of liberalism and the mechanisms behind ideology formation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the account of political obligation given by cosmopolitans and concludes that this account, which depends on a weak or thin connection between members of common humanity, leaves a motivational vacuum at the heart of cosmopolitanism. An alternative view, according to which material ties that bind prompt obligations of justice in a globalising world, is offered. This is ‘thick cosmopolitanism’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper employs and scrutinizes Asef Bayat's theory of [the] ‘quiet encroachment’ of the ‘informal people’ in the Middle East to reflect on civility and governance in Jamaica. The central argument is that while the practices of the economically dispossessed represent rational ways to survive hardships and improve their lives, the alliance of members of Jamaica's informal sphere with ‘community dons’ flies in the face of civility and civic engagement, engendering destructive, criminal behaviour, which undermines the state's capacity to regulate the space and uphold the rule of law. The essay recognises the validity of the episodic mobilization of ‘people on the margins’ in Jamaica as a useful, autonomous aspect of civil society, without romanticising it or abstracting it from its counterpoint to the state. It however maintains that such a collectivity, operating vicariously, exerts a burden on social stability and cohesion with dire consequences for democratic governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to do two things: first, to map out in a broad way Laclau and Mouffe's intellectual development, since the publication of Hegemony and Socialist Strategy in 1985, and how they have created a following within academia; and second, to evaluate their ‘hegemonic’ endeavors so far. I argue that there is a place for a post-structuralist approach to the study of political ideologies and the ‘political’, but that the project as a whole is unlikely to achieve its intellectual and political ambitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on populism used to depict the phenomenon as an alternative to the standard path from traditional to modern society; as a way to enfranchise the underclass; or as an anomaly vis-à-vis class politics and liberal institutions. More recently, the debate has shifted into something of a terra incognita as a result of the growing interest in the connection between populism and democratic politics. One of the more intriguing contributions to this debate is an article by Margaret Canovan, if only because it makes this unknown territory less confusing. Her argument draws from Michael Oakeshott's claim that political modernity is characterised by the interplay of two distinct styles – the politics of faith and the politics of scepticism. She renames them the redemptive and pragmatic faces of democracy and suggests that populism arises in the gap between them. This establishes a relation of interiority between populism and democracy. The former will follow democracy like a shadow. At times, however, the theoretical status of the gap is somewhat uncertain, as it seems more appropriate for thinking politics (particularly radical politics) in general. The political valence of the shadow could also be specified further to show the undecidability between the democratic aspect of the phenomenon and its possible ominous tones. This paper looks into this in some detail to engage in a friendly interrogation of Canovan's claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Charles Taylor's engagement with Marx and the Marxist tradition has been relatively neglected in the literature on his work. This is a strange omission, because he was not only a pivotal figure in the development of the New Left, but also wrote many pieces which critically engaged with the main principles of Marx and Marxism. This paper re-examines Taylor's engagement with Marxism and thereby exposes a neglected element in his political philosophy. The following themes emerge: the self; Taylor's conception of the affirmation of ordinary life; democracy; ecology; and religion. In one area at least, the affirmation of ordinary life, a crucial element of Marxism is retained and positively endorsed by Taylor. In relation to the other themes, while he raises important issues for Marxist theory, he is, at times, far too quick to dismiss Marx's arguments and also misses similarities between those arguments and his own work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inspired by Habermasian critiques of liberalism, supporters of deliberative democracy seek an extension of social democratic institutions to further a reinvigorated communicative rationality against the ‘atomism’ of market processes. This paper offers a critique of deliberative democratic theory from a Hayekian perspective. For Hayek, the case against the social democratic state rests with the superior capacity of markets to extend communicative rationality beyond the realm of verbal discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The most influential contemporary defences of liberal neutrality are premised on a contractual view of political legitimacy. For contractualists, perfectionist principles of justice are illegitimate because they cannot be the object of reasonable agreement among free and equal citizens. Several critics have challenged this connection between contractualism and neutrality by suggesting that the epistemic arguments commonly offered in its favour are self-defeating. This paper examines three recent expressions of this claim – those of Simon Caney, Simon Clarke and Joseph Chan – and finds that none of them succeeds. They fail because they mistake an ethical claim about how states should respond to disagreement for an epistemic one that explains why such a response is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews the neo-liberal case for economic limits to democracy, assesses the counterposed argument of socialists and social democrats and considers why the latters' practical experience in ‘democratizing economic life’ has been so unsatisfactory. The second half of the paper considers the claim that some form of market socialism can overcome these limitations. While the market socialists have some success in undermining the claims of the neo-liberals, there are acute difficulties in transforming their agenda for economic democracy into a practicable politics. At the same time, it is suggested that while there may indeed be some economic limits to democracy, we are still very far from reaching them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper contrasts the liberal conception of democracy as the aggregation of individual preferences with the deliberative conception of democracy as a process of open discussion leading to an agreed judgement on policy. Social choice theory has identified problems – the arbitrariness of decision rules, vulnerability to strategic voting – which are often held to undermine democratic ideals. Contrary to common opinion, I argue that deliberative democracy is less vulnerable to these difficulties than liberal democracy. The process of discussion tends to produce sets of policy preferences that are ‘single peaked’; and within a deliberative setting it may be possible to vary the decision rule according to the nature of the issue to be decided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-ownership is the moral principle that one ought to be left free to do whatever one chooses so long as non-consenting other persons are not thereby harmed, in specified ways. The principle is foundational for one tradition of political liberalism running from Locke to Nozick. This paper aims first to clarify this principle, in part by contrasting it with a kindred principle of ‘self-benefit’, and secondly to develop its implications for justified private property ownership. These implications are more meagre than is usually supposed. The principle is indeterminate in ways that undermine its claim to adequacy. Finally, further reasons for rejecting the self-ownership principle are suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the few efforts to link systemic and organizational determinants of party strategies is provided by what John May dubbed the ‘law of curvilinear disparity’. According to this law, voters, party activists and leaders have necessarily divergent political ideologies. These systematic differences are attributable to the activists' motivations and the constraints of party competition. This paper argues that the law is empirically valid only under distinctive behavioural, organizational and institutional conditions which are not specified in its general formulation. Thus, the law is only a special case in a broader theory reconstructing the interaction between constituencies, intra-party politics and party competition. This alternative theory is partially tested with survey data from party activists in the Belgian ecology parties Agalev and Ecolo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper attempts two tasks. The first is to provide a characterization of the social democratic approach which sets it in contrast to liberal democratic theories. This is pursued by contrasting the different interpretations of the ideal of equal respect which are associated with the two approaches. The second task is to establish that the social democratic approach is, if not clearly superior, at least worth considering further. This task is pursued by the attempt to vindicate three assumptions which the social democratic approach must make about the state [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rôle of consumption cleavages in influencing political behaviour has received a great deal of attention in recent years. This paper argues that some critics have misunderstood the approach as a theory about the direct influence of social circumstances on behaviour, rather than as a theory about the way in which people's perceptions of one another's positions in relation to the means of consumption are articulated by political parties to become bases for political action. Dunleavy has argued that ideas about self-interest in state and private consumption in relation to other people are of the greatest importance in this, while Saunders suggests that the security associated with private property rights has stronger influence. Both these claims are tested with data from a recent national survey. ‘Consumption sector’ is shown to play a minor but significant rôle in influencing ideas. Part of this influence appears to lie in the social meaning of private property, as Saunders claims. Comparisons of relative advantage across sectoral cleavages, however, contribute little to the explanation of political ideas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the problematic nature and implications of fellowship in and for communitarian theory, as illustrated by the writings of William Morris and Peter Kropotkin. The first part examines the descriptive and prescriptive components of fellowship and its role in Morris's and Kropotkin's theories. A discussion section then addresses problems arising from this dual nature of fellowship. In particular, an analysis of its social-psychological dimension on the one hand and its moral dimension on the other suggests a tension between them, inadequately recognized by communitarians, concerning the size of the appropriate communal unit. The paper concludes by suggesting a way in which this tension might be accommodated, if not resolved, drawing on the insights of conservative localism as well as the socialist universalism advocated by Morris and Kropotkin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question addressed in this paper is whether it is permissible to use violence for political ends within the confines of a liberal democracy. After a brief defence of the liberal conception of violence, the standard liberal position on violence (which answers the above question unequivocally in the negative) is rejected as theoretically unsound. However the alternative radical view, which endorses the selective use of violence on democratic and/or humanitarian grounds, fails to come to terms with some important empirical facts about violence in democracies. The concluding section urges a more discriminating response to such violence than either the liberal or the radical view fosters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A number of writers have recently argued that nationalism is essentially a response to the uneven geographical development of capitalism or industrialism. In this part of the paper the most important problems confronting a theory of nationalism are outlined and the origins of this particular theory in twentieth-century Marxian thought are examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Individualism is the foundation of democratic theory and practise in the United States. A multi-ethnic, but not really a multi-communal society in the same sense as Northern Ireland or India, the United States has not generally had to confront the nature and justification of its historical opposition to group rights and communal social and political organization. Only the American Indian tribes, with their treaty-mandated communalism, have presented exceptions to this pattern. This paper explores the assumptions underlying liberal democratic attitudes towards communalism, the ways in which group claims pose challenges to conventional notions of justice and equality, and the utility of introducing alternative assumptions about the nature and role of groups in democratic society. Discussion centers on the most recent attempt to reduce the group rights of American Indian tribes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's response to the criticism made on his article on economic democracy. According to the author, the concerns made on his paper appears to a history of economic democracy, while the paper is about theory. The author's reflection on democracy were focused at an urgent theoretical issue for capitalist democracies.

Comments on the paper "How Capitalism Infringes Property Rights," by Peter Morris. Attempts to demonstrate taht a Nozickian version of the rights theory is incompatible with the account of capitalism which emphasizes the importance of entrepreneurial risk-taking and entrepreneurial failure; Rights-based argument for capitalism; Summary of the Nozickian version of the rights theory.

This article employs the October 1974 British Election Study to examine the level and nature of political ideology among British political activists, the effects of socioeconomic characteristics on these attitudes, and the impact of the attitudes on political behaviour. On balance, the activist group closely resembles the non activist population. Activists are somewhat more ideological in their thinking than non- activists, but the differences are quite small. Demographic attributes affect the policy attitudes of the elite slightly more than the non activists, but again differences are small. The influence of issue attitudes on voting is about the same for activists and non activists. These results stand in contrast to studies showing large élite-mass policy differences in the United States and other work documenting ideological orientations in higher levels of the Labour Party. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Politics is a feature of any associational activity but political scientists seldom systematically examine politics within their own profession. An account of the movement, essentially in the US in the 1970s, for the development of comparative legislative studies, affords a convenient case-study. An outcome of Title IX of the Foreign Assistance Act, its examination entails uncovering different strands of interest and of doctrine in relations between government (specifically the US Agency for International Development) and the academic community and also within that community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arguments about the optimum size for units of local government often overlook the fact that small units have some considerable drawbacks while large ones have some advantages. By and large the discussion breaks down into two parts; those about size and functional effectiveness, and those about size and democracy. On the first count, it seems that large units are no less efficient and can be a good deal more effective than small ones. On the question of size and democracy, the evidence suggests that large units of government are no less democratic than small ones, and that in some respects they may be more so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study evidences the existence of partisan and electoral cycles in privatisation, by using a sample composed of 22 European countries during the period 1995–2013. Our findings suggest that privatisation reforms tend to be implemented by governments with different ideologies when elections are not immediate; however, results support a greater orientation of right-wing governments towards privatisation reforms in election periods. After the elections, right-wing governments continue adopting privatisation reforms, but governments from ideological traditions tend to oppose such reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Provides an overview of the book "Approaches to Democracy: Philosophy of Government at the Close of the Twentieth Century," by W. J. Stankiewicz.

A preface for the 1992 special issue of the "Political Studies" journal is presented.

The article presents an account of the book "Law, Socialism and Democracy," by Paul Q. Hirst. This collection of powerful papers appears to be principally addressed to convincing socialists of the lasting political significance of the rule of law and the need to express socialism in democratic terms.

Research focusing on several post-communist countries has found evidence of social cleavage effects on political behaviour similar to those found in Western Europe. In some post-communist countries, however, social cleavage effects appear far weaker (if at all). To understand why this is the case, I perform a case study of Romania, focusing on the religious-secular cleavage. Drawing upon research that emphasises the role of parties in forming cleavages, I argue that the reason for the absence of social cleavage effects is due to party competition for the same group of voters by parties from opposing ends of the ideological spectrum. By shifting their positions, some parties have prevented the appearance of cleavages by shaping individuals' perceptions of the parties and, in doing so, have even altered individuals' own left-right self-placements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article challenges the use of diminished subtypes as a strategy for avoiding conceptual stretching in the conceptual construction of hybrid regimes. The popular adoption of this strategy is based on its perceived ability to increase analytical differentiation and, more relevantly, avoid conceptual stretching by making a more modest claim about the extent of authoritarianism and democracy. Using this strategy, regimes are classified according to any additional or missing properties they contain vis-à-vis these two root concepts. This is demonstrated by an influential body of scholarship using elections as the defining property (e.g., 'competitive authoritarianism' and 'pseudodemocracy'). The problem, however, is that the creation of these subtypes is premised on a 'true' democratic definition of elections: a method for selecting and empowering political representatives through a competition for people's votes (albeit without freedom and fairness). This article argues that in attempting to avoid stretching the meaning of authoritarianism and democracy, scholars have inadvertently displaced concept stretching by assuming that the meaning of democratic elections is applicable to hybrid regimes. Instead, it is proposed that elections in hybrid regimes can have at least three alternatives roles: legitimation, patronage and elite management. This article concludes by discussing the implications of this finding for the field of comparative studies and proposes three solutions to help guard against conceptual stretching in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although trust is clearly central to human relations of all kinds, it is less clear whether there is a role for trust in democratic politics. In this article, I argue that trust is central to democratic institutions as well as to democratic political participation, and that arguments which make distrust the central element of democracy fail. First, I argue for the centrality of trust to the democratic process. The voluntary compliance that is central to democracies relies on trust, along two dimensions: citizens must trust their legislators to have the national interest in mind and citizens must trust each other to abide by democratically established laws. Second, I refute arguments that place distrust at the centre of democratic institutions. I argue, instead, that citizens must be vigilant with respect to their legislators and fellow citizens; that is, they must be willing to ensure that the institutions are working fairly and that people continue to abide by shared regulations. This vigilance – which is reflected both in a set of institutions as well as an active citizenry – is motivated by an attitude termed ‘mistrust’. Mistrust is a cautious attitude that propels citizens to maintain a watchful eye on the political and social happenings within their communities. Moreover, mistrust depends on trust: we trust fellow citizens to monitor for abuses of our own rights and privileges just as we monitor for abuses of their rights and privileges. Finally, I argue that distrust is inimical to democracy. We are, consequently, right to worry about widespread reports of trust's decline. Just as distrust is harmful to human relations of all kinds, and just as trust is central to positive human relations of all kinds, so is distrust inimical to democracy and trust central to its flourishing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a recent two-part article in this journal, John Horton offers reasons to reject ‘philosophical anarchism’, and claims that rejecting that view should lead us to an ‘associative’ account of political obligations. This article argues for a different conclusion. The claim that local obligations are irreducible or independent is vulnerable to critique, and does not provide a compelling account of moral conflict. Rejecting philosophical anarchism should lead us to a version of moral universalism that can find a place for local attachment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has shown that those who won an election are more satisfied with the way democracy works than those who lost. What is not clear, however, is whether it is the fact of winning (losing), per se, that generates (dis)satisfaction with democracy. The current study explores this winner/loser gap with the use of the 1997 Canadian federal election panel study. It makes a theoretical and methodological contribution to our understanding of the factors that foster satisfaction with democracy. At the theoretical level, we argue that voters gain different utility from winning at the constituency and national levels in a parliamentary system, and that their expectations about whether they will win or lose affect their degree of satisfaction with democracy. On the methodological front, our analysis includes a control group (non-voters) and incorporates a control for the level of satisfaction prior to the election. The results indicate that the effect of winning and losing on voters' satisfaction with democracy is significant even when controlling for ex ante satisfaction before the election takes place, and that the outcome of the election in the local constituency matters as much as the outcome of the national election. They fail to show, however, that expectations about the outcome of the election play a significant role in shaping satisfaction with democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union's attempts to improve its democratic character increasingly often lead to debates about how to include civil society organizations in its decision-making processes. However, this interpretation of participatory democracy seems at odds with democratic traditions in a number of member states. Among those, France is said to be at the diametrically opposite end of the EU democratization debate spectrum. French democratic thought is based on government through electoral representation. The aim of this article is to analyze both theoretically and empirically the discourse and participatory processes in both the EU and France. While normative approaches to democratic patterns in the EU and French political debate show important differences, empirical evidence suggests that the misfit between the European and French conception of democracy is less developed than one might believe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do institutions possess explanatory and prescriptive powers imputed to them by institutionalism? If they do, why do outcomes in developing countries (DGC) defy those powers? I argue that, although institutions play a role, they are neither the explanation for outcomes nor the prescription for development problems. The primacy of institutions is defied in DGC because ‘new institutionalism’ shares the premises of modernization theory-inspired ‘old institutionalism’. Both fail to subordinate institutions to society-rooted politics, the pre-eminent explanatory variable. I support this argument by: (1) demonstrating the pre-eminence of politics vis-à-vis institutions; and (2) relating various policy failures in DGC to the failure of the unbroken thread between old and new institutionalisms to recognize this pre-eminence. Because politics explains both institutional and socio-political outcomes, I propose that the crucial difference between politics in Western democracies and developing countries – and not institutions – be the focus of inquiry to account for outcomes and to prescribe solutions for DGC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a reply to Panizza's recent article, ‘Unarmed Utopia Revisited: The Resurgence of Left-of-Centre Politics in Latin America’. It contests the claims that there are no alternatives to market economies and liberal democracy in contemporary Latin America. It does this by disentangling the conceptual assumptions that underlie the analysis presented, which, it argues, construct a loaded dice that makes the conclusions of the arguments seemingly inevitable and objective. It also explores the internal contradictions within the alternative presented. This analysis is developed through the use of critical social theory and with reference to the ‘movements from below’ engaged in the struggle to re-imagine and reconstruct utopias. This involves bringing to the heart of analysis a theoretical orientation in which structures become a series of concrete social relations, not objects, and power is mediated at a variety of spatial levels. It necessitates a conceptualisation of politics, structure and the agents and nature of structural change that expand the boundaries of traditional political science categories. Such conceptual expansion and theoretical repositioning make visible, and politically central, the movements from below normally categorised as marginal in political analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Different concepts of local democracy imply different tasks, functions and reform strategies for local political leadership. This article draws a map of local democracy that entails four non-exclusive components: representative democracy, user democracy, network democracy and participatory democracy. After reflecting on the nature of local democracy in governance and the functions of political leadership generally, the article considers in turn the bases of constructing the common good within each form of democracy. Special attention is given to the role of political leadership within these forms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study is to ascertain how certain important changes in Finnish society in the 1990s altered the national elite structures and affected democracy. We examine how the patterns of recruitment, interaction and cohesiveness among the elites changed in the period 1991–2001. The data for the study were drawn mainly from postal surveys conducted among the elites and a sample of the population in 1991 and 2001. The first research task was to establish how recruitment to various elites has altered in terms of social stratification and education. The second was to analyse changes in patterns of interaction between various elites as far as physical contacts and attitudes were concerned. The third was to study the relationship between the elites and the general population on the basis of attitudinal affinity. The conclusions were based on theoretical models characterising various elite structures and their interconnections with democracy. The concept of a responsive elite is developed on the grounds of the theory of democratic elitism. The changes in the Finnish elite structure have meant a passage towards an inclusive structure compatible with democracy rather than towards an exclusive elite configuration. Finnish elites have become more open and more diverse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyzes the concept of hegemony and examines its relationship to power and autonomy. Refuting the conventional belief that it is ideology that distinguishes hegemony, the article argues that it is autonomy that constitutes the distinguishing characteristic. Although hegemons tend to evolve into imperialists, hegemony involves leadership of an alliance, not domination by coercion. It is impossible to conceptualize hegemony without also including autonomy. In this conceptualization, the primary source of autonomy lies in a specific hegemonic system of domination that itself embodies the notion of autonomy for both the polity and its citizenry, a limiting construction that hinders the tendency toward imperialism. Such a system includes one type of autonomy that can be designated as autonomy within hegemony. In addition, the article discusses two other types of autonomy: counterhegemony and a largely power-based opposed hegemony. Thus, the article concludes, hegemony is a complex concept, with several types of manifestation, that can more usefully be understood in connection with autonomy and power than as a stand-alone concept. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is commonly supposed that deliberative democracy and the politics of recognition are natural allies, as both demand a more inclusive politics. It is argued here that this impression is misleading and that the politics of recognition harbours significant anti-deliberative tendencies. Deliberative politics requires a public sphere which is maximally inclusive of diverse beliefs and perspectives, including those which dissent from orthodox understandings of group indentities. By contrast, the politics of recognition typically seeks to insulate such identities from challenge, both from within and without. Devices such as special group representation, while apparently inclusive, risk incentivising an anti-deliberative culture of deference to identity claims. An alternative model of inclusive politics, which involves a more contestatory political culture and a multiplication of deliberative opportunities, is sketched. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Isaiah Berlin is often regarded as one of the sources of contemporary liberal nationalism. Yet his own attitude to nationalism, and its relation to his liberalism, remains unexplored. He gave conflicting definitions of nationalism in different places, and although he frequently contrasts more benign with more malign forms of nationalism, the terms in which he draws the contrast also vary. In Berlin's most explicit account, nationalist doctrine is presented as political, unitary, morally unrestricted and particularist, but these four dimensions are separate, and on each of them alternative nationalist positions are available. Berlin's account of the sources of nationalism is also ambiguous: his analysis of the Jewish condition in European societies and his support for Zionism contrasts with his diagnosis of the origins of German nationalism. Comparing Berlin with later liberal nationalists, we see that his liberalism prevented him from presenting a normative political theory in which liberal and nationalist commitments were successfully combined. Such a theory can indeed be developed, but the challenge that emerges from Berlin's writing is to explain how real-world nationalism can be kept within liberal limits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most studies of local autonomy and local democracy fail to distinguish adequately between the two terms. As a consequence, there is an assumed bilateral relationship between them in which changes in one are always deemed to affect the other – particularly in policy formulations. This article develops a stronger analytical distinction between them by considering local autonomy in three separate ways: as freedom from central interference; as freedom to effect particular outcomes; and as the reflection of local identity. Each of these conceptualizations raises different challenges for local democracy and its relationship to broader forms of democratic practice. When used to analyze the recent emergence of the ‘new localism’ as a policy approach within Great Britain, this separation also shows significant limitations in current policies towards democratic renewal and central policies that are supposedly focused on outcomes rather than processes. Although localities are being afforded some autonomy, most initiatives are not supporting the enhancement of local democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]