scholarly journals Mary Wollstonecraft's Political Political Theory

2019 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Frazer
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Political Judgment ◽  
Theoretical Justification ◽  
Complex Processes ◽  
Political Intervention ◽  
Civil And Political Rights

AbstractThis paper separates Wollstonecraft's critical concept of “machiavelian” power and the capacity for domination, from a neutral concept of politics as the complex processes surrounding the power to govern, from her normative account of popular sovereignty which emphasizes collective political power to ensure the discharge of natural duty by way of civil and political rights and duties. Wollstonecraft's voice as political judge—which is audible throughout her work, but particularly clearly in her book on the French Revolution—articulates the ways that political power can be abused and misused, and can also be effective. Her theory is political in several ways: she interrogates the nature of political power and its explanatory importance; she consistently articulates political judgment about matters both conventionally political and social; she offers a theoretical justification for the expansion of the scope of politics to cover relations that hitherto were thought to be outside its domain; and finally her work itself constitutes a political intervention.

Freiheit, Gleichheit, Sinnlichkeit–Jacques Rancière, Hegel und die holländische Malerei

2010 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leander Scholz
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Jacques Derrida ◽  
Traditional Concept ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
Political Intervention ◽  
The French Revolution

Der Aufsatz geht der These nach, daß die Fundierung der politischen Theorie in einer ästhetischen Theorie bei Jacques Rancière eine Aktualisierung der Losung der Brüderlichkeit aus der Französischen Revolution darstellt. Diese Aktualisierung der Brüderlichkeit als »ästhetische Gemeinschaft« erlaubt es Rancière, an den Klassenbegriff von Marx anzuschließen, ohne die damit verbundene Gemeinschaftserfahrung begrifflich bestimmen und damit an positive Merkmale binden zu müssen. Weil Rancière seine Demokratietheorie vor allem als eine Interventionstheorie angelegt hat, soll die »ästhetische Gemeinschaft« im Unterschied zum Klassenbegriff es ermöglichen, eine prinzipiell unabgeschlossene Reihe von politischen Subjektivierungsprozessen zu denken. Um diese These zu schärfen, wird Rancières Demokratietheorie mit der von Jacques Derrida verglichen, der auf ganz ähnliche Weise das Demokratische der Demokratie in einem Streit gegeben sieht, der jenseits von demokratischen Spielregeln stattfindet, die Losung der Brüderlichkeit jedoch für überaus problematisch hält.<br><br>This article argues that the foundation of political theory in aesthetics by Jacques Rancière can be seen as an actualization of the slogan of fraternalism during the French Revolution. This actualization of fraternalism as »aesthetic community« gives Rancière the possibility to operate with the Marxian concept of classes without positively defining the experience of community. Because Rancière understands democracy as the chance for political intervention, the concept of an »aesthetic community« (as opposed to the traditional concept of classes) allows him to posit an endless process of political subjectification. To sharpen this argument, the article compares Rancière’s understanding of democracy to Jacques Derrida’s, who also focuses on a democratic struggle beyond democratic rules, but is very skeptical about the slogan of fraternalism.

The Economic and Political Determinants of Human (Including Health) Rights

1978 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicente Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Individual Property ◽  
Socioeconomic Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Fair Wages ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S

This paper presents an analysis and critique of the U.S. government's current emphasis on human rights; and (a) its limited focus on only some civil and political components of the original U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, and (b) its disregard for economic and social rights such as the rights to work, fair wages, health, education, and social security. The paper discusses the reasons for that limited focus and argues that, contrary to what is widely presented in the media and academe: (1) civil and political rights are highly restricted in the U.S.; (2) those rights are further restricted in the U.S. when analyzed in their social and economic dimensions; (3) civil and political rights are not independent of but rather intrinsically related to and dependent on the existence of socioeconomic rights; (4) the definition of the nature and extension of human rights in their civil, political, social, and economic dimensions is not universal, but rather depends on the pattern of economic and political power relations particular to each society; and (5) the pattern of power relations in the U.S. society and the western system of power, based on the right to individual property and its concomitant class structure and relations, is incompatible with the full realization of human rights in their economic, social, political, and civil dimensions. This paper further indicates that U.S. financial and corporate capital, through its overwhelming influence over the organs of political power in the U.S. and over international bodies and agencies, is primarily responsible for the denial of the human rights of the U.S. population and many populations throughout the world as well.

History of civil and political rights in France

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (11-2) ◽  
pp. 141-146
Author(s):  
Veronika Kuzbagarova ◽  
Elena Maystrovich ◽  
Elizabeth Rozanova ◽  
Sergey Stepashkin ◽  
Igor Yur
Keyword(s):  
French Revolution ◽  
State Power ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
History Of ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Democratic Principles ◽  
Key Events ◽  
Revolutionary Science ◽  
The French Revolution

The article discusses the evolution of civil and political rights in the French Republic in historical retrospective and the key events, that influenced their formation in a modern way. The problems of freedom and equality in France in the late 18th - early 19th centuries. The article studied the views of representatives of pre-revolutionary science of law on the understanding of freedom and equality in France. The authors pay special attention to the French Revolution of 1789, the fall of absolutism, the process of establishing the constitutional order and new democratic principles of the organization of state power.

The Sovereignless State and Locke's Language of Obligation

2000 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 547-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Scott
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Power ◽  
The State ◽  
Natural Rights ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Liberal State ◽  
Sovereign Authority ◽  
Liberal Thought

Modern liberal states are founded on individual rights and popular sovereignty. These doctrines are conceptually and historically intertwined but are in theoretical and practical tension. Locke's political theory is a source for proponents of both doctrines, and the same tension that runs through modern liberal thought and practice can be found in his theory. Rather than define the state in terms of a single sovereign authority, Locke constructs a sovereignless commonwealth with several coexisting claimants to supreme authority. He rejects sovereignty as what unifies the state, and he wants to replace the discourse of sovereignty theory with a language of obligation that will help bind together the sovereignless state. This language permits its adherents to articulate the reasonable basis and limits of political power. An understanding of Locke's sovereignless state helps us better comprehend the tensions embodied in discourses about individual natural rights, popular sovereignty, and governmental authority heard in the liberal state.

scholarly journals How to think beyond sovereignty: On Sieyes and constituent power

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Rubinelli
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Political ◽  
Constituent Power ◽  
Theories Of Sovereignty ◽  
The French Revolution

Historians and political theorists have long been interested in how the principle of people’s power was conceptualised during the French Revolution. Traditionally, two diverging accounts emerge, one of national and the other of popular sovereignty, the former associated with moderate monarchist deputies, including the Abbé Sieyes, and the latter with the Jacobins. This paper argues against this binary interpretation of the political thought of the French Revolution, in favour of a third account of people’s power, Sieyes’ idea of pouvoir constituant. Traditionally, constituent power has been viewed as a variation of sovereignty, but I show it to be an independent conceptualisation of people’s power. Sieyes’ political theory led him to criticise and refuse contemporary theories of sovereignty in favour of what he understood as a fully modern account of people’s power. Based on extensive research in the archives, I show how Sieyes opposed the deployment of sovereignty by the revolutionary Assemblies and recommended replacing it with the idea of constituent power.

scholarly journals Democracia e ditadura na teoria política de Marx e Engels | emocracy and dictatorship in the political theory of Marx and Engels

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (41) ◽  
Author(s):  
Theófilo Codeço Machado Rodrigues
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Karl Marx ◽  
The Political ◽  
Theoretical Justification ◽  
Contemporary Debate ◽  
Friedrich Engels ◽  
The 19Th Century

O presente artigo analisa a forma como Marx e Engels, teóricos da política, inseriram-se no debate contemporâneo sobre a democracia no século XIX. Passada a Revolução Francesa de 1789, a democracia tornou-se o grande tema da agenda teórica do século XIX. Mas as interpretações foram, decerto, distintas. De modo bem diferente de seus contemporâneos liberais, Marx e Engels compuseram a justificativa teórica para a ação dos trabalhadores para além da democracia burguesa. Transitando entre temas como a “verdadeira democracia”, a “emancipação humana”, o “comunismo” e a “ditadura do proletariado”, os dois autores formularam teorias que não apenas informaram a grande polarização do século XX, mas que ainda referenciam debates sobre as possibilidades de uma alternativa ao capitalismo no século XXI. A hipótese aqui apresentada é a de que a tensão entre democracia e ditadura na obra dos dois permite interpretações díspares, o que garante sua permanência no debate atual.Palavras-Chave: teoria política; democracia; ditadura do proletariado; Karl Marx; Friedrich Engels.  Abstract − This article analyses how Marx and Engels, political theorists, entered the contemporary debate on democracy in the 19th century. After the French Revolution of 1789, democracy became the great theme of the theoretical agenda of the 19th century. But interpretations were certainly disparate. In a very different way from their liberal contemporaries, Marx and Engels composed the theoretical justification for the action of workers beyond the bourgeois democracy. Transitioning between topics such as “true democracy,” “Human Emancipation,” “communism,” and “dictatorship of the proletariat,” the two authors formulated theories that not only informed the great polarization of the 20th century, but which still are reference to debates about the possibilities of an alternative to capitalism in the 21st century. The hypothesis presented here is that the tension between democracy and dictatorship in the work of the two authors allows different interpretations that guarantee its permanence in the current debate.Keywords: political theory; democracy; dictatorship of the proletariat; Karl Marx; Friedrich Engels.

Popular sovereignty over natural resources: A critical reappraisal of Leif Wenar’sBlood Oilfrom the perspective of international law and justice

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
PETRA GÜMPLOVÁ
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Current System ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Liberal Conception ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Law And Justice

Abstract:The article discusses the concept of popular sovereignty over natural resources and its possible applicability to a broader account of natural resource justice based on a moral interpretation of international law. Leif Wenar’s recent proposal to entrench popular resource sovereignty as a counterclaim to illegitimate uses of natural resources by corrupt and authoritarian regimes serves as the starting point for the discussion of the possible meaning of popular resource sovereignty and its role in an account of natural resource justice. Three key aspects of Wenar’s conception are in focus: 1) the framing of popular resource sovereignty within the current system of sovereign territoriality, 2) the notion of collective ownership of natural resources as the content of popular resource sovereignty, and 3) civil and political rights as the key set of norms determining the conditions of legitimate exercise of resource sovereignty. The article argues that collective sovereignty claims over natural resources can neither be framed exclusively through boundaries of current sovereign states, nor understood in terms of full and unlimited property rights. Concerning civil and political rights, I argue we need to move past the liberal conception of legitimacy toward a more comprehensive human rights-based conception of justice serving as a standard for assessment of legitimacy of both sovereign and non-sovereign entities which have rights over natural resources.

Constituting Humanity: Democracy, Human Rights, and Political Community

2005 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 227-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bohman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Strongly Connected ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Democracy and human rights have long been strongly connected in international covenants. In documents such as 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1966 International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, democracy is justified both intrinsically in terms of popular sovereignty and instrumentally as the best way to “foster the full realization of all human rights.” Yet, even though they are human and thus universal rights, political rights are often surprisingly specific. In the Covenant, for example, “the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs” is equated with “the right to vote and to be elected.” More often then not, their realization is left to states and their constitutions, as for example in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. Political rights have a “peculiar” status among enumerated human rights, and this difficulty has to do with deep assumptions about the nature and scope of democracy and political community that remain unexamined by the drafters of these important declarations.

The Integral Nature of Ethnicity and Religion during Northern Ireland’s Troubles

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 9-18
Author(s):  
Peter Crowley
Keyword(s):  
Religious Identity ◽  
Historical Narratives ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
The Troubles ◽  
Religious Conflicts ◽  
The World ◽  
Sectarian Conflict ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Religious Other

Northern Ireland’s Troubles conflict, like many complex conflicts through the world, has often been conceived as considerably motivated by religious differences. This paper demonstrates that religion was often integrated into an ethno-religious identity that fueled sectarian conflict between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland during the Troubles period. Instead of being a religious-based conflict, the conflict derived from historical divides of power, land ownership, and civil and political rights in Ireland over several centuries. It relies on 12 interviews, six Protestants and six Catholics, to measure their use of religious references when referring to their religious other. The paper concludes that in the overwhelming majority of cases, both groups did not use religious references, supporting the hypothesis on the integrated nature of ethnicity and religion during the Troubles. It offers grounding for looking into the complex nature of sectarian and seemingly religious conflicts throughout the world, including cases in which religion acts as more of a veneer to deeply rooted identities and historical narratives.

A Virtue for Courageous Minds

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurelian Craiutu
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Moral Virtue ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Common Notion ◽  
History Of ◽  
Benjamin Constant ◽  
Intellectual Foundations

Political moderation is the touchstone of democracy, which could not function without compromise and bargaining, yet it is one of the most understudied concepts in political theory. How can we explain this striking paradox? Why do we often underestimate the virtue of moderation? Seeking to answer these questions, this book examines moderation in modern French political thought and sheds light on the French Revolution and its legacy. The book begins with classical thinkers who extolled the virtues of a moderate approach to politics, such as Aristotle and Cicero. It then shows how Montesquieu inaugurated the modern rebirth of this tradition by laying the intellectual foundations for moderate government. The book looks at important figures such as Jacques Necker, Germaine de Staël, and Benjamin Constant, not only in the context of revolutionary France but throughout Europe. It traces how moderation evolves from an individual moral virtue into a set of institutional arrangements calculated to protect individual liberty, and explores the deep affinity between political moderation and constitutional complexity. The book demonstrates how moderation navigates between political extremes, and it challenges the common notion that moderation is an essentially conservative virtue, stressing instead its eclectic nature. Drawing on a broad range of writings in political theory, the history of political thought, philosophy, and law, the book reveals how the virtue of political moderation can address the profound complexities of the world today.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document