Search

This paper presents some graph-theoretic conditions for a democratic system controlled by a social network to converge to a regressive or progressive system over time. The democratic system is modeled as a finite state automaton, and a social network of agents is modeled as a directed graph. Agents are controllers making decisions to enable or disable events such that their objectives are to be met. Based on the individual decisions of agents, the final decision is made by the majority rule. Specifically, the conditions obtained imply two strategies for the groups of regressive or progressive agents to achieve their objectives: one is to prevent informed agents in other groups from influencing uninformed agents, and the other is to make at least one uninformed agent in every cycle follow the decisions of the group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we make some comments as well as some constructive criticisms on the paper “Proposals for a democracy of the future” by Bruno S. Frey (2017). We focus our attention and criticism mainly on the idea of variable weights of the votes, on the treatment of the outcomes of the referendums and on the use of randomization tools as a guarantee of fairness. The paper contains also some proposals of refinement for the validation of referendum outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to establish connections between the theoretical debates on migration and multiculturalism. In the former, there are two dominant positions: the open borders approach and another approach that argues for the legitimacy of border control based on several considerations (we will call it controlled borders approach). In the second, based on the autonomy granted to groups, a distinction is made between strong and weak multiculturalism. It is generally believed that an open borders approach is connected to strong multiculturalism and that a controlled borders approach should be conjoined with weak multiculturalism. This paper prompts us to consider the possibility of developing further theoretical options and, as a result, enriches the debate by showing possibilities that have been largely overlooked so far. In particular, the paper sketches two unprecedented positions, one coming from the combination of open borders approach and weak multiculturalism, and another coming from controlled borders approach and strong multiculturalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the responsibility of AI experts for guiding the development of AI in a desirable direction. More specifically, the aim is to answer the following research question: To what extent are AI experts responsible in a forward-looking way for effects of AI technology that go beyond the immediate concerns of the programmer or designer? AI experts, in this paper conceptualised as experts regarding the technological aspects of AI, have knowledge and control of AI technology that non-experts do not have. Drawing on responsibility theory, theories of the policy process, and critical algorithm studies, we discuss to what extent this capacity, and the positions that these experts have to influence the AI development, make AI experts responsible in a forward-looking sense for consequences of the use of AI technology. We conclude that, as a professional collective, AI experts, to some extent, are responsible in a forward-looking sense for consequences of use of AI technology that they could foresee, but with the risk of increased influence of AI experts at the expense of other actors. It is crucial that a diversity of actors is included in democratic processes on the future development of AI, but for this to be meaningful, AI experts need to take responsibility for how the AI technology they develop affects public deliberation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Big digital companies have become key elements in economy, communication, education, and politics in 21st century societies. The neutral ideology in their digital platforms, applications, and services, as well as the exponential growth in their activities can be used by world superpowers —especially the United States and China— to implement geostrategical operations, massive social manipulation or influence democratic processes with the objective of increasing their power and dominance over other nations. The aim of this paper is to state the different strategies of digital expansionism performed by the United States and China, and, additionally, to showcase the negative consequences of these strategies on the population and democracies of the European Union. The first section of this paper will define the concepts of digital sovereignty and digital expansionism as well as their importance in 21st century geopolitics. Next, the important role that big digital companies have on digital expansionism will be analysed, and the usage of digital authoritarianism and digital instrumentarianism performed by the United States and China will be further examined. Finally, the negative consequences of the implementation of these methods in the democratic systems of the European Union will be analysed, as well as what possible solutions there might be for said consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Well-functioning modern democracies depend largely on expert knowledge and expert arrangements, but this expertise reliance also causes severe problems for their legitimacy. Somewhat surprisingly, moral and political philosophers have come to play an increasing role as experts in contemporary policymaking. The paper discusses different epistemic and democratic worries raised by the presence of philosopher experts in contemporary governance, relying on a broad review of existing studies, and suggests measures to alleviate them. It is argued that biases philosophers are vulnerable to may contribute to reducing the quality of their advice, and that the characteristics of philosophers' expertise, and controversies around what their competences amount to, make it hard to distinguish proper from less proper philosopher experts. Reliance on philosopher experts may also intensify democratic worries not least due to the depoliticization pressures that the introduction of ethics expertise tends to give rise to. Still, philosophers have competences and orientations that policy discussions and democratic deliberations are likely to profit from. Worries about philosopher experts may moreover be mitigated by means of a proper design of expert arrangements. Confronted with the genuine epistemic risks and democratic challenges of contemporary governance any quick fix is obviously unavailable, but when institutionalized in the right way philosophers' involvement in present-day policymaking bears significant promise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper advocates for a shift from insular paternalism to developmental paternalism in education, contending that students' engagement with erroneous ideas is crucial for building the ability to resist harmful notions and support democracy. The proposed inoculative approach exposes students to problematic ideas, guiding them through the process of overcoming these beliefs using the pedagogy of relation. The author employs behavioral economics to explore the shortcomings of insular paternalism and the early Christian notion of metanoia to explain the importance of changing one's mind. This developmentally-informed approach fosters rational thinking and curbs extremist ideologies. The paper asserts that prioritizing an inoculative approach over an insulatory one equips students to navigate the complexities of the modern world and uphold democratic values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite widespread acknowledgement of the value of sustainability, the transition towards more sustainable economies and societies remains a challenge around the world. Civil societies play an important role not only in supporting government efforts on sustainability by 'filling gaps' and raising social awareness, but also in pioneering new practices and disrupting particular governmental or corporate strategies, as well as engaging and empowering previously marginalised individuals and groups. Yet civil society is not always a champion of sustainability nor of democracy; these actors may of course also destabilise innovations, depoliticise sustainability issues by reifying certain concepts or approaches and reinforce social hierarchies and patterns of exclusion that can undermine any transformative potential and bolster the unsustainable status quo. This Special Issue is therefore dedicated to interrogating what we see as the ambiguous, yet critical, role played by civil societies in sustainability politics. This introductory paper intends not only to draw attention to some of the arguments, theories and challenges found in each of the individual papers collected here, but also to pull on the common threads that run through them, as well as to unpick some of the different uses of the key terminology that they employ. We aim, moreover, to highlight the inevitable tension between the 'democratic side' and the 'dark side' of civil society and its politics of sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues against the call to democratize artificial intelligence (AI). Several authors demand to reap purported benefits that rest in direct and broad participation: In the governance of AI, more people should be more involved in more decisions about AI—from development and design to deployment. This paper opposes this call. The paper presents five objections against broadening and deepening public participation in the governance of AI. The paper begins by reviewing the literature and carving out a set of claims that are associated with the call to "democratize AI". It then argues that such a democratization of AI (1) rests on weak grounds, because it does not answer to a demand of legitimization, (2) is redundant in that it overlaps with existing governance structures, (3) is resource intensive, which leads to injustices, (4) is morally myopic and thereby creates popular oversights and moral problems of its own, and finally, (5) is neither theoretically nor practically the right kind of response to the injustices that animate the call. The paper concludes by suggesting that AI should be democratized not by broadening and deepening participation but by increasing the democratic quality of the administrative and executive elements of collective decision making. In a slogan: The question is not so much whether AI should be democratized but how. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The political philosophy of radical democracy has made innumerable invaluable contributions to theories of democracy. However, while radical democrats tend to focus on the political, a cogent and comprehensive framework of law appropriate to radical democracy has only recently been begun to be developed. Interpreting the vast tradition of radical democracy to be based at least on the fundamental tenets of radical equality, anti-foundationalism, and to a lesser extent conflict, this paper argues that the oft-forgotten work of the American legal philosopher Robert Cover may provide critical resources for a radical democratic theory of law. According to Cover, every agent living under law is embedded, or embeds themselves, within a nomos or normative universe. From this nomos legal texts become imbued with widely different meanings, many of which will be mutually incompatible. Cover's legal anarchism, moreover, gives way to the argument that no agent or institution has a particularly privileged view of the 'correct' law. Accordingly, every legal texts gives rise to a proliferation of normative universes which due to their mutual incompatibility will eventually come into conflict with one another. This paper shows that Cover's normative commitments are highly congruent with those professed by many radical democrats, and that therefore Cover's legal philosophy furnishes a fruitful basis on which to further theorise a framework of radical democratic or agonistic law that incorporates struggle while remaining committed to equality and disavowing of any determinate foundations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politische Vierteljahresschrift is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In response to extreme conditions, government endowed with extraordinary powers in the form of a state of exception, released from the norms of a rule of law legal order, has been accepted as a modern political institution with an essential role in safeguarding democracy. It is only then, that a democratic government may achieve effective measures necessary to best address the extremities unfolding. The lack of public law theory legitimizing such an institution, alongside the heavy reliance on the medieval principle necessitas legem non habet as the institution's theoretic premise, prompt contemporary theorist Giorgio Agamben to question the role of the state of exception within modern democracy. This paper will first present how Agamben grounds the state of exception to the concept of necessity, tracing the theory of necessity to its apparent European origin, in the writings of Gratian and Thomas Aquinas. Then, this paper will focus on divergent interpretations of necessity drawn from the halls of the Swiss Federal Palace, whilst discussing the fate of recent state of exceptions. These divergent interpretations of necessity, namely by Ernest Paul Graber and Robert Grimm, both historic members of the Swiss Federal Assembly, indicate how necessity may be interpreted in different ways. Finally, this paper will question the extent to which this parallel relationship, between the state of exception and the concept of necessity, may undermine a democratic rule of law legal order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper offers the first philosophical analysis of a form of artificial intelligence (AI) which the author calls facial profiling technology (FPT). FPT is a type of facial analysis technology designed to predict criminal behavior based solely on facial structure. Marketed for use by law enforcement, face classifiers generated by the program can supposedly identify murderers, thieves, pedophiles, and terrorists prior to the commission of crimes. At the time of this writing, an FPT company has a contract with the United States federal government. After recounting how FPT resurrects the same moral problems associated with the pseudoscience of physiognomy, the author of this manuscript develops and defends the 'Liberal Argument Against Facial Discrimination' (LAAFD), which concludes that government use of FPT poses a significant risk of violating the classical liberal value of equality before the law by committing unjust discrimination against groups of people whose faces happen to match FPT classifiers. A key move in the argument suggests how a future scenario that results in widespread discrimination based solely on facial structure could be as unjustified and harmful, mutatis mutandis, as similar discrimination based solely on racial background. In the final section, the author of this paper develops prima facie policy proposals designed to protect classical liberal values if FPT is to be utilized by governments in liberal democratic societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary public discourse is saturated with speech that vilifies and incites hatred or violence against vulnerable groups. The term "hate speech" has emerged in legal circles and in ordinary language to refer to these communicative acts. But legal theorists and philosophers disagree over how to define this term. This paper makes the case for, and subsequently develops, the first corpus-based analysis of the ordinary meaning of "hate speech." We begin by demonstrating that key interpretive and moral disputes surrounding hate speech laws—in particular, surrounding their compatibility with the rule of law, democracy, and free speech—depend crucially on the ordinary meaning of "hate speech." Next, we argue, drawing on recent developments in legal philosophy, that corpus linguistics constitutes a distinctively promising tool for ascertaining the ordinary meaning of "hate speech." Finally, we offer a proof of concept, by outlining, and analyzing the interpretive and moral implications of, the first such study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An electronic democratic framework can also fulfill all the rules and regulations of any governing body. The election is one of the important events for a robust democratic system in a country, but still, many people are not thinking of it as major concern for democracy. There are several issues of vote fraud, hacking of EVM (Electronic Voting Machine), election manipulation, and booth capturing within the current electoral system. In this paper, we proposed a framework for E-voting (Electronic Voting) which might resolve these issues. This framework uses Blockchain technology as a service along with an E-Voting system that addresses all restrictions. Blockchain advancements proposed a wide scope of different applications to reduce the sharing of monetary economies. The proposed framework uses proof of voter's identity (PoVI) consensus algorithm that makes the proposed system more secure and differentiates this model from other models of E-voting systems. The objective of this paper is to clarify the utilization of Blockchain innovation as assistance for an authentic electronic democratic framework. The proposed framework evaluates the capability of distributed record advances with the assistance of illustrative contextual analysis, specifically the cycle of a political decision that improves security and minimizes the expense of facilitating a cross-country casting a ballot framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on democracy and corruption is inconclusive on the effect of democracy on corruption. We intend to supplement this void by arguing that interaction between democracy and unemployment may exist in shaping the de facto corruption levels. This paper examines whether such conjuncture exists. We estimate a linear dynamic panel-data model using data from 80 developing countries over the period 1990–2018. We find that democracy reduces corruption. However, the potential beneficial effect of democracy on corruption is eroded by a higher unemployment rate. The results are robust and quantitatively similar across different empirical specifications. These results imply that developing countries should focus on decreasing the unemployment level so as to take advantage of democratization in their fight against corruption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How should political power and influence be allocated in democratic systems? That is, roughly, the core of the boundary problem in democratic theory. As of late, some authors have begun paying increased attention to the methodological aspects of this dispute. This paper attempts to make a twofold contribution to this 'methodological turn'. On the one hand, it identifies and analyzes five desiderata of a successful principle of democratic inclusion. Any such principle, I argue, must be grounded in a clearly identifiable set of values, must provide a clear standard of inclusion, must specify the relevant modalities of inclusion, must provide sound bridging principles, and must be extensionally adequate. In the first half of the paper, these desiderata are developed and critically scrutinized. On the other hand, I also extract three lessons from the previous discussion. First, that a unique answer to the boundary problem (i.e. one grounded in one single principle) is unlikely. Second, that a satisfactory answer to the boundary problem need not necessarily appeal, as some have argued, to distinctively democratic values. And third, that intuitions about political exclusion (i.e. those requiring or permitting the exclusion of some individuals) should be treated with special caution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is becoming increasingly common for authoritarian regimes to leverage digital technologies to surveil, repress and manipulate their citizens. Experts typically refer to this practice as digital authoritarianism (DA). Existing definitions of DA consistently presuppose a politically repressive agent intentionally exploiting digital technologies to pursue authoritarian ends. I refer to this as the intention-based definition. This paper argues that this definition is untenable as a general description of DA. I begin by illustrating the current predominance of the intention-based definition (Section 2). Section 3 then presents four counterexamples to this definition: benign surveillance; digital sovereignty; attention-harvesting algorithms; and tech-induced loneliness. In each case, we witness authoritarianism being promoted by digital technologies without any evidence of this being intentionally caused by politically repressive agents. Based on these observations, I contend that the intention-based definition is underinclusive and is therefore unsustainable. Section 4 outlines an improved definition of DA – what I call the promotion-based definition. Since this more expansive definition does not posit intentional, politically repressive agency as a precondition of DA, it can accommodate the counterexamples discussed in Section 3. Moreover, it enables us to catch a broader spectrum of cases of DA, such as tech-induced loneliness, which those adhering to the intention-based definition are prone to overlook. After outlining further practical benefits of the promotion-based definition, I argue that we still need to distinguish between intentional and unintentional forms of DA since they call for distinct types of remedial action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

South Africa is undergoing a rapid decline in social and political cohesion at various scales. This paper explores Cape Town's experience of socio-territorial messages and identities deployed by the City administration and the leading party, the Democratic Alliance. I focus on relational constructions of the subjectivity of the 'ratepayer' and the deserving Capetownian as constructed in the City and the DA's discourse and policy measures in juxtaposition to 'street people' and other supposedly deviant urban subjects and how, as such, the wilful ignorance of the first remains both unchallenged and in service of an exclusionary and unjust spatial order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the notion of tolerance in education. In general, tolerance is perceived as a means to resist hostility, raise awareness of cultural differences, mitigate violence, and maintain liberal and democratic values. In education, there are various initiatives, such as the International Day for Tolerance (UNESCO in Declaration of principles on tolerance, 1995), that aim to build resilience against different forms of hate and cultivate openness and acceptance of the other. Yet the idea of tolerance includes different understandings and interpretations. This paper argues that cultivating an embodied sense of tolerance among students, in particular in divisive communities, requires us to move beyond deliberative interpretations of tolerance and to advance a pragmatic understanding of tolerance through an agonistic lens. This paper starts with a review of several dominant interpretations of tolerance. The heart of the paper focuses on interpreting Dewey's pragmatism as a theoretical basis for advancing tolerance. The final part of the paper explores how pragmatism through an agonistic lens can support a more flexible and humane approach to dealing with political conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we argue that because of the advent of Artificial Intelligence, the secret ballot is now much less effective at protecting voters from voting related instances of social ostracism and social punishment. If one has access to vast amounts of data about specific electors, then it is possible, at least with respect to a significant subset of electors, to infer with high levels of accuracy how they voted in a past election. Since the accuracy levels of Artificial Intelligence are so high, the practical consequences of someone inferring one's vote are identical to the practical consequences of having one's vote revealed directly under an open voting regime. Therefore, if one thinks that the secret ballot is at least partly justified because it protects electors against voting related social ostracism and social punishment, one should be morally troubled by how Artificial Intelligence today can be used to infer individual electors' past voting behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-immigrant backlash has emerged in recent years as a considerable threat to democracy. In many countries illiberal and anti-democratic political forces driven in part by anti-immigrant sentiment have damaged or threaten to damage the proper functioning of democratic institutions. Should policymakers try to avert this threat by implementing more restrictive immigration policy? If they do so, they may expose immigrants to unjust exclusion. If they do not, they may risk democratic dysfunction, even democratic failure. I will call this the Democratic Dilemma for immigration policy. In this paper I argue that this is a hard ethical dilemma that does not lend itself to a straightforward resolution. I propose an analytic and evaluative framework for assessing possible policy responses to the Dilemma to aid policymakers' as well as the public's ethical judgement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article contains a critique of Dirk Meyer's paper on "Deprivation of Politics". It is shown that Meyer's analysis of the structural conflicts between a globalized capitalist economy and democratic politics is unintendedly convergent with Marx' theory of revolution. Seen from this background it is unlikely that the withdrawal of the "mobile factors of production" from the framework of national political democracy will open a way to restore "collective rationality", as the author suggests. Contrarily, what Meyer points to is the scenario of a deepening economic and social crisis. Meyers neoclassical analysis of the crisis is faulty and ignores the historical circumstances which led to the rise of the modern interventionist state in the 20th century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholarly curiosity about political friendship (the relationship of mutual care among political fellows) is increasing as liberal democracies around the world face radical polarization. Yet one worry persists: can political friendship really exist in contemporary democracies? The objective of this paper is to answer this question in the affirmative. To this end, I investigate whether members of modern polities have reasons to form friendly bonds with one another. The paper has four parts. The first establishes a fundamental desideratum that any consideration must satisfy to count as a reason for political fellows to partake in political friendship. The second evaluates and rejects a line of argument that presents bonds of mutual identification and belonging among political fellows as reasons for political friendship. The third evaluates and rejects a line of argument due to Paul Ludwig that presents the shared utility of political community as a reason for political fellows to engage in friendly practices with one another. Finally, I introduce my own novel argument—the "argument from membership"—for why political fellows have a reason to care for one another. I argue that membership in a functioning political community is indispensably valuable for any individual in virtue of playing a constitutive role in the individual's attainment of their final ends. I hold that, as constituent parts of the same political community, political fellows have a reason to value one another and, accordingly, to care for one another's well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this introductory essay, we outline the relationship between political dissensus and radical democracy, focusing especially on how such a politics might inform the study of business ethics. This politics is located historically in the failure of liberal democracy to live up to its promise, as well as the deleterious response to that from reactionary populism, strong-man authoritarianism, and exploitative capitalism. In the context of these political vicissitudes, we turn to radical democracy as a form of contestation that offers hope in an affirmative, inclusive and sustainable alternative. On this basis we introduce the papers in the special issue as a collective exploration of the ethics and politics of radical democracy as manifesting in dissensus and the subversion of corporate and elite power by alternative democratic practices and realities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the original founders, texts, and location of Critical Legal Studies (CLS), its association with the 1960s counterculture is uncontroversial. However, this paper interrogates the assumption that CLS is itself a counterculture by proxy. Drawing from seminal work on subcultures, moral panics, and the emerging field of minor jurisprudence, this paper recategorises Critical Legal Studies as a legal subculture. An argument of clarification underpins this recategorisation, addressing the relationship between CLS and the dominant legal framework, its relationship with the counterculture, and why the reactions CLS received from the legal community were to be expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper takes as its point of departure Merleau-Ponty's assertion: "everything will have to begin again, in politics as well as in philosophy". In pursuing his later work, Merleau-Ponty signalled the need for a reconfiguration of his philosophical vision, so it was no longer caught in Cartesianism and the philosophy of consciousness. This required a turn towards ontology through which he consolidated two key ideas: firstly, a pervasive interdependence articulated in his reversibility thesis and the ontology of 'flesh'; secondly, a radical contingency at the heart of existence. This paper interrogates the political implications of these ideas, and specifically regarding humanism and human progress. Relatedly, I address the question – how might recognitions of ontological interdependence and radical contingency support a flourishing democracy? Merleau-Ponty's early political work concerned the issues of his day – Nazism, Marxism and the status of humanism – and did not engage extensively with these emerging onto-political concerns. Nonetheless, there are indicative reflections in the writings and interviews; the political implications of his ontological interrogations become more thematic in the later works. There is no rupture between the earlier and later works regarding his philosophical vision, although he later distanced himself from Marxism with revelations of the gulags under Stalin and the Korean War. The overarching claim of this paper – we need to rethink politics from the ground up beginning with ontology; ontology is political and the political is intrinsically ontologically informed. Getting the ontology 'right' is a matter of discovery and not theory choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Should education serve external goals, or should it be non-instrumental? In this paper, I recognize a tension between these two views with respect to the question of the end and the means in education, and I suggest conceptual and practical ways to handle this tension. The paper comprises two parts: the first part discusses the problem, and the second part offers solutions. To expose the problem, I present a brief overview of the opposing views of purposiveness versus anti-instrumentalism in education, based on old inspirations and new manifestations of each, and I present two examples of current theories that carry this tension as an inner contradiction. Additionally, I argue these theoretical tensions lead to professional confusions and practical dilemmas among teachers. In search of solutions, I lean on current theoretical arguments to reconcile the contradictions and offer ways to integrate the two views into one pedagogical approach. Finally, I draw a conceptual model that turns the tensions and confusions into a more reasonable complexity that educators can handle in their theoretical thinking and accommodate in their practical choices in school. My conclusions lead to a re-justified commitment to education for democracy, and to teachers' autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a post-Trump, post-Covid-19 world, it is clear that truth is contested by fake news outlets and misinformation. Less clear is how to navigate the vicissitudes of intersectional discourse without devolving into a Richard Rortyan relativism that denies truth altogether. This paper considers the epistemic commitments of foundationalism and coherentism before turning to pragmatist Susan Haack to explore whether there are convergences between the two. The goal of this paper is three-fold: (1) to clarify how truth and fact feature in foundationalist and coherentist epistemic thinking; (2) to offer a pragmatist "foundherentist" intersection between foundationalism and coherentism; and (3) to use (1) and (2) to highlight the untenable position Rortyan relativism represents, specifically in relation to education formally understood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On one account, courts ought to enforce legislative intent only when the public meaning of the text of the statute is unclear, and on another account, they should enforce the intent even when the public meaning is clear. In this paper, I argue against both approaches. My argument rests on considerations related to the moral authority of the democratically made law. More specifically, I argue that those considerations which make democratic law morally authoritative entail that judges ought to enforce the public meaning, when this is clear, and that interpretation of the public meaning which is closest to the balance of moral reasons, when the public meaning is unclear. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper empirically examines whether Africa's low corruption agenda can be achieved amid election cycles. We employ country-level data from 36 African countries covering the period 1998–2020. Using fixed effects, random effects and dynamic panel data regressions, our results suggest that in election years, increment in government expenditure is associated with higher corruption perception while increment in real GDP growth lowers corruption perception than in non-election years. On regional differences, the effect of election cycles on corruption perception was found to be greater in southern part of Africa than the rest of the sub-regions. These findings may have important implications for policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates the relationship between institutionalized democracy and the shadow economy in both the long- and short-run. Using time series data from Uganda that cover the period from 1991 to 2015, this paper applies autoregressive distributed lag method to investigate this relationship. How democracy affects the shadow economy in less developed countries like Uganda is not well understood. This paper aims to fill the above knowledge gap. The findings show that the shadow economy and institutionalized democracy are negatively correlated in both the short- and long-run. This implies that improvement in institutionalized democracy significantly hinders the rise of shadow activities. This indicates that institutions regulate the conduct of economic agents and determine how entrepreneurs engage in economic activities. Moreover, institutions are crucial in resource allocation which in turn leads to welfare improvement. Improvement in welfare of citizens reduces their incentive to engage in informal sector activities since the formal sector provides the necessary support needed to operate legally. These findings are robust to alternative econometric methods. Two practical implications of these findings stand out. First, these findings indicate that reforming the governance system to facilitate efficient resource allocation could be one way of addressing widespread informality in developing economies. Second, these results also indicate that minimizing informality in the economy should gradually move away from emphasis on tackling proximate causes of informality to democratic reforms that change the authority patterns. In this case institutionalized democracy is another important channel of mitigating the rise of the shadow economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this study is to provide a synthesis of prior research of estimates of the willingness to pay (WTP) for chronic disease treatment and examines the impact of economic and political institutions, cultures, and other important factors on WTP. Subject and method: The paper applies meta-regression analysis to 1053 estimates of WTP from 188 medical treatment studies from 40 countries. Results: The results suggest that patients assign higher values for medical treatment in more capitalistic and more democratic countries. Cultural traits also appear to matter, with higher WTP in societies characterized by individualism and indulgence. Further, disease types matter. Compared to cancer, WTP is lower for diabetes, obesity, asthma, and heart disease treatment, but higher for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis therapy. GDP per capita is positively associated with WTP. The higher public health expenditure is in a country, the higher citizens value health benefits. If individuals expect to live longer, then they will spend less on their health. The published studies estimate a lower value than unpublished studies. Conclusion: This paper presents a comprehensive synthesis of estimates of chronically ill patients' WTP for medical treatment and identifies the key factors determining WTP through a meta-regression analysis. The main finding is that economic and political institutions, cultural traits, the types of disease, socio-economic characteristics, and valuation methods all influence WTP estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Redistribution is one of the most central functions of modern government. Against the backdrop of rising income inequality in many countries, policymakers and economists call for redistributive policies to address the rising inequality directly. Yet, there has been little systematic analysis of whether and how inequality influences redistribution and of the role of economic, political and institutional factors of redistribution. Our paper fills this important gap in the literature. To our knowledge, this is the first paper that systematically analyzes and presents evidence from a large panel of countries over 1967–2014 that high-income inequality is consistently associated with greater redistribution. Making it richer, evidence shows the role of economic factors such as trade openness, old age dependency, and financial development, and suggests that political institutions are important factors in understanding a cross-country variation in the size of redistribution. Extensive robustness checks confirm the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 1984, the AHV journal has provided a key forum for a community of interdisciplinary, international researchers, educators, and policy makers to analyze and debate core issues, values and hopes facing the nation and the world, and to recommend strategies and actions for addressing them. This agenda includes the more specific challenges and opportunities confronting agriculture, food systems, science, and communities, as well as broader contextual issues and grand challenges. This paper draws extensively on 40 years of AHV journal articles and reviews and begins with a focus on a limited number of key grand challenges (climate change and global warming; threats to democracy and the growing neo-nationalism, populism, and authoritarianism; and increasing national and international inequality). With these challenges as the underlining context, the remainder of the paper addresses core journal themes of sustainable agriculture and local food systems, citizen and public science, and empowered communities. Highlighted are numerous important journal contributions to the analyses and recommendations to address these hopes and themes. I conclude that these themes and hopes not only deserve to live but are essential for changing and redirecting an unsustainable and destructive environmental, economic, political and social agenda to a viable, livable and just democratic society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nobel Prize winning economist James M. Buchanan has repeatedly argued that the "political economist should not act as if he or she were providing advice to a benevolent despot" (Boettke Constitutional Political Economy, 25, 110-124, 2014: 112), but an increasingly influential body of scholarship argues that Buchanan provided a wealth of early 1980s policy advice to Augusto Pinochet's military dictatorship in Chile (e.g., Fischer 2009; Maclean 2017). In particular, Buchanan reportedly provided an analytical defense of military rule to a predominantly Chilean audience when he visited the country in late 1981. This paper draws upon largely ignored archival evidence from the Buchanan House Archives and Chilean primary source material to assess whether Buchanan provided a defense of Pinochet's "capitalist fascism" (Samuelson 1983) or whether he defended democracy when he visited Chile in 1981. Aside from the importance of this for assessing Buchanan's own legacy, his constitutional political economy arguments presented in Chile also provide an interesting and distinct perspective on the connection between democracy and growth, which remains highly relevant to current debates. Despite a general agreement about the desirability of democracy, the view that authoritarian regimes can spur "growth miracles", or might even be a necessary stage in political-economic development, still has prominent supporters (e.g. Sachs 2012). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, work on the natural resource curse thesis has extended to testing the effects of natural resources on public health. Focusing on the case of malaria, this paper examines the effects of the interaction between resource dependence and political institutions on malaria management. To be more specific, this work argues that in a resource-abundant state, democracy plays an active role in providing health goods to the general public and allocating government funds to public health. Democracies also combat corruption behaviors and diversify economies in a more effective way than their autocratic counterparts. By testing a series of interaction effects between natural resources and democracy, this paper finds a positive and robust effect of democracy on the reduction of malaria death rates in resource-rich states, based on data on malaria deaths during the period of 1990–2016. Resource-rich dictatorships demonstrated the worst performance in malaria control compared with resource-rich democracies and resource-poor democracies and dictatorships. This empirical evidence has policy implications for resource management, public health, and infectious disease control and prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The main research question addressed in this paper is the following: What are the consequences of the purge of the communists and their sympathizers for the development of postwar Japanese society during the Allied Occupation (known as the Red Purge)? According to conventional wisdom, the Red Purge was an illegal and unfair suppression regarding the freedom of speech and a threat to the very survival of democracy in Japan. Surveying previous works on the Red Purge demonstrates that not a single work discusses any constructive aspect of the Red Purge. Criticizing this trend in the historiography, Thomas French correctly pointed out that these previous works tended to neglect or undervalue violent and aggressive behaviors of the Japanese Communist Party and its militant policy after mid-1949. This paper goes a little further, trying to find, if any, constructive aspects of the Red Purge. My hypothesis is that the Red Purge had many destructive and biased measures, but it was paradoxically a necessary evil to help establish a law-abiding Japanese society. The architects of the Red Purge, General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, the Japanese government, and corporate executives, were careful not to violate the constitution or labor laws when they executed the Red Purge. They established an important precedent that they had to act in accordance with the constitution and laws. In a paradoxical way, going through the Red Purge actually made Japan a law-abiding country in the long run. This paper tests the validity of this hypothesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following Anthony Downs’s classic economic analysis of democracy, it has been widely noted that most voters lack the incentive to be well-informed. Recent empirical work, however, suggests further that political partisans can display selectively lazy or biased reasoning. Unfortunately, political knowledge seems to exacerbate, rather than mitigate, these tendencies. In this paper, I build on these observations to construct a more general skeptical challenge which affects what I call creedal beliefs. Such beliefs share three features: (i) the costs to the individual of being wrong are negligible, (ii) the beliefs are subject to social scrutiny, and (iii) the evidential landscape relevant to the beliefs is sufficiently complex so as to make easy verification difficult. Some philosophers and social scientists have recently argued that under such conditions, beliefs are likely to play a signaling, as opposed to a navigational role, and that our ability to hold beliefs in this way is adaptive. However, if this is right, I argue there is at least a partial debunker for such beliefs. Moreover, this offers, I suggest, one way to develop the skeptical challenge based on etiological explanation that John Stuart Mill presents in On Liberty when he claims that the same causes which lead someone to be a devout Christian in London would have made them a Confucian in Peking. Finally, I contend that this skeptical challenge is appropriately circumscribed so that it does not over-extend in an implausible way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the twenty-first century, democracies are most often weakened, and even die, not by coups but by manipulation from within by democratically-elected officials. Yet, while democratic breakdown has become increasingly common, significant variation exists in the strategies deployed by would-be autocrats. Although some engage in unconstitutional power grabs, an increasing number of incumbents instead deploy constitutional methods to consolidate their power. How do incumbents decide how far to ride the democracy train, and whether to attack democracy unlawfully, or subvert it legally from within? This paper explores this question by presenting a simple formal model to adjudicate between these two incumbent-led paths to autocracy. The model implies that leaders who retain military support can successfully conduct an executive coup yet prefer lawful means to grab power when they enjoy high popularity. Choosing the constitutional route to dismantle democracy provides aspiring autocrats with a guise of legality as well as expands their power beyond even the self-coup option. Using the insights of the model, the paper examines how Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who boarded the democracy train as a democratically elected leader but continued his journey toward a fully authoritarian destination, orchestrated his autocratic takeover of Turkish democracy. The article contributes to existing literature by examining the strategic decision-making process that underlies incumbent-led subversions of democracy, while casting light on the increasing trend of legal subversions of democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since democracy is the only political system that considers the views of the general populace, most states have switched over to democratic political systems over time. The right to vote allows citizens to directly or indirectly elect the representatives of their choice in democracies; Good governance is a term that is only applied to this one system, a transparent, participatory, and accountable government. The phrase "good governance" refers to a system of government that upholds the rights of its citizens, gives them equal access to opportunities, considers the views of the general public, and makes its policies clear to the general populace and refrains from engaging in dishonest practices. It is referred to as a government that values participation, accountability, and transparency and ensures that all citizens are treated equally under the law. As time goes on, laws are made to increase government accountability and transparency; for this reason, the right to information is included in the constitutions of the vast majority of states. Through the exercise of this right, the public will have access to information about public matters, enabling them to monitor the government. As a result, corruption will be reduced and a more accountable system of government will be established; in addition, it will make corruption and the abuse of power more difficult. The constitution of 1973 was amended in April of 2010 to include 19-A Article regarding the RTI in order to design a more explicit, participatory, and accountable structure. Pakistan is a democratic country with a separate chapter on fundamental rights and this research paper aims to examine how Pakistan's RTI can put up good governance. This study looks at the regulatory structures of Pakistan's right-to-information laws and asks if the intended goals of openness and good governance have been met? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reconsiders the claim made by mainstream internet platforms that they inherently foster a democratic public sphere, offering reasons why the opposite may be true. It surveys past studies that have supported both views, showing how the position taken by scholars tends to depend on their disciplinary perspectives. Historically, scholarly approaches to the public or political impacts of the internet and social media have been characterised by four main interpretative lenses: technodeterminism, behaviourism, and the prioritising of either ideology, or the economics of media ownership. This article pays particular attention to the last two, and to Facebook, which among mainstream internet platforms has notably associated itself with democratic ideals. The article describes how many of the democratic ideals associated with Facebook's impacts on society are in fact reversed by the platform's practices, with effects that directly contradict the platform's stated principles. The article ends by suggesting that Facebook consciously pretends to favour the public sphere, and that such Orwellian doublethink is a deliberate attempt to divert attention away from its augmentation of private and personal issues at the expense of collective engagement and empowerment. designed differently, Facebook could have had favourable impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Is democracy related to lower poverty rates and better living conditions for children in developing countries? Multiple sources have confirmed that living conditions in low- and middle-income countries have improved significantly during the past decade. This development coincides with a period of economic growth and, until recently, a trend towards increasing democratization of many of the world's political systems. In the present paper, we use data from 51 low- and lower-middle-income countries covering the period 1995–2019 to analyse: poverty ($1.90/day), child mortality as well as the degree to which children are malnourished, deprived of immunization, and lack education. The central aim is to test whether democracy contributes to the decrease in poverty and improvement of children's living conditions. We also test whether the impact of democratization is conditional on political ideology, GDP, and corruption, i.e., whether democratization only is beneficial if combined with policies influenced by socialistic ideology, economic growth, or low corruption. Using data on living conditions from the World Bank, Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), V-Dem project on democratization, and Global Leader Ideology database, we draw the following conclusions: Democratization does contribute to the decrease in poverty, child mortality, malnutrition and lack of immunization among children. However, the impact of democracy is conditioned on previous experience of leftist governments; democracy only improves living conditions in countries with a history of leftist governments. Least beneficial are leftist autocracies. We also conclude that democracy counterbalances the detrimental effects of corruption on children's school attendance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politische Vierteljahresschrift is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

An exceptional chain of events in science, technology, art and planning took place in Latin America in the 1970s. Does this wonder shed light upon our view of the basic roots of cultural, social and political blooming? This paper intends to adduce evidence on second-order cybernetics processes underlying five outstanding cases in real societies and to disclose the links between democracy and unfettering momentum for freedom and creativity. Namely, Oscar Varsavsky, national projects, styles of development, scientific and technological autonomy; Stefano Varese, cultural and political autonomy of indigenous people; Mario Pedrosa, creation of the Museum of Solidarity in Chile; Stafford Beer, Cybersyn project for cybernetics and self-management in Chile; and Humberto Maturana, concepts of autopoiesis, cognition, language and multiverse. The reasoning counts with the author's direct participation in all cases. The paper sets a similarity worthy of being noticed between Allende's Unidad Popular in Chile and Pericles' Golden Age in Greece and outlines why these historic realms albeit far apart have lasting importance and similar historical impetus. Highlights the essential and seminal features of each stream and comes to the conclusion that effective democracy is the necessary condition for participation and creativity. Upsurges in social participation and creativity are neither frequent nor cyclical. Still, such sudden and usually large increase in ingenuity, flair and aim to improve living conditions, although limited in time, remain in our mind as a joy forever. Nowadays, the world witnesses a contrary motion towards sterile art patterns and restrained behaviour. Hence, it becomes even more important to better understand the basic roots of cultural, social and political blooming. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is often claimed that social media accelerate political extremism by employing personalization algorithms that filter users into groups with homogenous beliefs. While an intuitive position, recent research has shown that social media users exhibit self-filtering tendencies. In this paper, I apply Hannah Arendt’s theory of political judgment to hypothesize a cause for self-filtering on social media. According to Arendt, a crucial step in political judgment is the imagination of a general standpoint of distinct yet equal perspectives, against which individuals compare their own judgments in order to test their defensibility. I argue that social media inhibit this step by gamifying the pursuit of social status, which encourages users to consider the perspectives of others not for the sake of a general standpoint but for the sake of improving their social status, resulting in self-filtering. Consequently, ameliorating political extremism on social media requires not just reforming the algorithms that deliver content to users, but the interfaces on which users present their social identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses distinctions between differing senses of "private," "public" and "political" in the United States to argue for the value of framing food issues as a collective problem that calls for broadscale demands for justice. We argue that food choices do not simply belong to the realm of private preferences and market transactions. Rather, they are a set of decisions that have systemic causes and public consequences. They are shaped and constrained by public policies that underwrite the transportation of food over long distances as well as particular crops and foodstuffs, and by the vendors and advertisers who try to convince us to eat more of the foods they produce. Because the consequences of eating an abundance of empty calories are not easily remedied at the personal level, citizens need to demand public, systemic solutions, including better food information, youth food education, and a healthier food supply. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Entrepreneurship and democracy are often considered complementary, but recent evidence points to a paradox that entrepreneurial activities have increased in undemocratic contexts. Exploring economic and political freedoms, this paper investigates the development of entrepreneurship in Vietnam, an economy characterised by low economic and very low political freedoms. It suggests changes in economic freedom over time influence opportunity perceptions and activities more than absolute levels. We identify key aspects of how culture and institutions have changed, which have been conducive to entrepreneurship. Overall, we show how even small increases in economic freedom stimulate entrepreneurship, even in the absence of political freedom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]