Principles of Sustainable Economic Growth and Development: A Call to Action in a Post-COVID-19 World

The analysis of sustainable economic growth and development often focuses on how to control the market process through coercive state intervention. While state interventionism may play a significant role in countries’ progress, entrepreneurship is the driving force behind sustainable growth and development. Entrepreneurship is the people’s judgment on ideas, plans, and projects, which promises profit in uncertain times. Its effects are the creation and transmission of information and social coordination as a dynamic process of identifying and solving human problems. Sustainable development is the widening range of entrepreneurial alternatives open to people, and sustainable growth is a phase of sustainable development that depends on genuine savings to finance increasingly capital-intensive production structures. The degree to which people are entrepreneurs and the direction genuine savings take depend on institutional arrangements. Some institutions are more conducive to sustainable growth and development than others. After reviewing principles of growth and development sustainability, how coercive state intervention influences economic performance is discussed, proposing novel policy conclusions and research avenues to cultivate entrepreneurship and genuine savings in a post-COVID-19 world.

PATTERNS OF DEMOBILIZATION: A QUALITATIVE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (QCA) OF FAR-RIGHT DEMONSTRATION CAMPAIGNS

Scholarship on social movement lifecycles has focused on mobilization processes, with relatively less attention on the ends, demobilization. The intuitive connection between origins and ends has sometimes led to a conceptualization of demobilization as simply the failure to continue mobilizing, obscuring the distinct causal processes underlying demobilization. This article adds to recent studies foregrounding demobilization by studying the negative demobilization of large, far-right, demonstration campaigns. Using a subset from this population of cases—campaigns in Germany, England, and Austria between 1990 and 2015—the article applies qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to this causally complex phenomenon. I find that demobilizing is conjunctural, with evidence of four patterns: closing opportunity, coercive state repression, civil countermobilization, and militant anti-far-right action. This article addresses an important—and conspicuously ubiquitous—population of cases, far-right demonstration campaigns and presents findings that reflect on critical issues in the study of far-right sociopolitics.

When Public Reason Falls Silent

Public reason theorists argue that coercive state action must be justified to those subject to such action. Doing so requires citizens to give only those reasons that all can accept. These reasons, the chapter argues, include scientific and social scientific considerations. One ineliminable and arguably salutary property of the modern administrative state is that the coercive policies it produces can be justified only on the basis of extremely complex scientific and social scientific considerations. Many of these considerations are neither understood by most ordinary citizens nor agreed upon by experts. This means that the overwhelming majority of citizens do not accept the reasons justifying coercive administrative policies. As a result, public reason is inconsistent with the administrative state. There are deep implications to this result: if public reason is inconsistent with the administrative state, then it is also inconsistent with forms of social organization that presuppose it. This, the chapter argues, includes egalitarianism, which many proponents of public reason also endorse. Public reason theorists thus must choose: justification through public reason, or distributive equality?

Gender Inequality Theories of Feminism

This chapter discusses liberal feminism, divided into liberal feminism and libertarian feminism. The liberal variant of liberal feminism sees freedom as personal autonomy and political autonomy. The exercise of personal autonomy depends on some enabling conditions that are insufficiently present in women's lives and other elements of women's flourishing. Autonomy deficits like these are due to the patriarchal nature of inherited traditions and institutions, and that the women's movement should work to identify and remedy them. Liberal feminists believe that the state should be the women's movement's ally in promoting women's autonomy. The libertarian variant of feminism sees freedom as freedom from coercive interference. It believes that both women and men have a right to such freedom due to their status as self-owners. Coercive state power is justified only to the extent necessary to protect the right to freedom from coercive interference. Feminism's political role is to bring an end not only to laws that limit women's liberty but also to laws that grant special privileges to women.

The Logic of Counterbalancing

This chapter presents the core of the argument. It begins by spelling out how coups d'état progress, from the initial plot to the consolidation of power by a new regime. It then describes how the presence of coercive institutions outside the military might affect the incentives facing relevant actors during each stage of a coup. In addition to considering the constraints facing officers in the regular military, it considers the preferences of those in other coercive state institutions. The discussion generates testable hypotheses about how counterbalancing affects the incidence and outcome of coup attempts, as well as the risk that coups will escalate to civil war. It also describes and addresses potential alternative arguments that focus on the strength of the military or the extent of coup risk faced by the incumbent regime. The chapter closes by discussing the strategies the book will use for testing the theory's predictions empirically, explaining the criteria used to select cases for closer analysis.

The Resources of Civilization

Borrowing from a phrase of Gladstone’s, this chapter offers thematic reflections on the long-term trajectory outlined in Chapters One and Two. It notes the general aggregation of coercive state power up until the advent of the ‘network society’ of the late twentieth century. Frustratingly for analysts, risk managers, and prophets, the early twen ty-first century looks set to remain open-ended. In any longer-term perspective, the domestic strength of Western governments remains massively impressive. Their coercive capabilities and bureaucratic information-processing capacities remain intact, if they have not actually been enhanced by the information-processing revolutions. States, in short, may not be intrinsically much weaker than they were before the 1990s. And the conspiracies they face remain, if anything, more primitive. But public moods are certainly more febrile: more alarmist, more confused, and more embittered.

Tinjauan Yuridis terhadap Pembelaan Terpaksa (Noodweer) sebagai Alasan Penghapus Pidana

Defending one’s self in a forced state, or in the Criminal Code known as “forced defense” (Noodweer), arose as a result of a situation where a victim of an act of crime was in a coercive situation or state so as to be forced to carry out self-defense. A person becoming a victim of a crime has the space to make use of power and efforts to defend and save his/her possessions, honor, and soul. This research highlights two issues related to this. First, which type of crime is included in forced defense? Second, what is the legal basis for the elimination of criminal acts against a person doing self-defense in a coercive state in a crime? To uncover these issues, this research was conducted using the design and method of normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. The results show that the concept contained in Article 49 Paragraph 1, interpreted as a noodweer, aims to protect oneself and others, the honor of one’s own morality or property, which when compared to the criminal acts of robbery referred to as being clearly considered the noodweer. ln addition, the legal basis for the elimination of criminality against the act of noodweer is the legal conclusion resulted from the facts revealed at the trial and the values to uphold, that is, to appraise and understand the sense of justice living in the community according to the judge’s point of view. Based on this fact, noodweer and the basis for the elimination of criminal acts against self-defense if compared to related cases have been considered as noodweer in accordance with Article 49 Paragraph 1. Further research is expected to further broaden the scope or coverage of research on the self-defense.