Voting and Liberty

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kari Palonen

In this paper, the author takes up the opposition between liberty and dependence proposed by Quentin Skinner and applies it to the analysis of the debates involving voting rights and regulations. The goal here is to examine the rhetoric supporting different positions in favor and against the extension of suffrage, the exclusion of certain groups, etc. The author points out that dependence can be detected even in democratic societies that lack traditional hierarchies. A similar effort is made to think how commitment, deliberation, and contestation can take place in the context of today's representative democracy in ways that enhance freedom instead of endangering it.

Author(s):  
Banu Turnaoğlu

This concluding chapter discusses how the victorious radical vision of republicanism became a coherent theory in the single-party period and continues to claim the exclusive right to define and implement Turkish republicanism. Turkish historiography has conflated republicanism widely with Kemalism and seen it as the product of the Turkish Revolution, which started with the Turkish Independence War and resulted in the formation of a national secular Turkish state. The chapter also explains how, because of their fear of opposition, republicans resisted the full implications of representative democracy. They persisted in seeing politics as a site of antagonism and the exercise of a craft, requiring the deployment of skills and forms of judgment; not political principles readily imported from Western democratic societies.


2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
Milos Kovacevic

In Considerations on Representative Government Mill argues that representative democracy is the best form of the state organisation for societies which fulfil necessary conditions for maintaining it. In favour of his thesis, Mill offers two arguments. One of them shows that rights and interests of citizens are best guaranteed when they are protected by citizens themselves. He uses the other (educational) argument to show that representative democracy is the best state organisation, since it offers greatest opportunities for citizen education. In this paper, I will defend only the educational argument in favour of (representative) democracy from Arneson`s criticism. Arneson tries to show that the main source of paternalism in Mill`s theory of government lies in the education of citizens as the main criteria for the good government. Arneson argues that non-democratic societies can equally well educate citizens as democratic societies, which shows that the main goal of Mill`s government is paternalistic. Also, Arneson argues that even if non-democratic societies couldn?t educate citizens equally well as democratic one, educating citizens cannot be the main government goal, since it decreases liberties which are guaranteed by harm principle. I will defend Mill`s main goal of government from both lines of Arneson`s argumentation.


Author(s):  
Lucas A. Powe Jr.

Texas has created more constitutional law than any other state. In any classroom nationwide, any basic constitutional law course can be taught using nothing but Texas cases. That, however, understates the history and politics behind the cases. Beyond representing all doctrinal areas of constitutional law, Texas cases deal with the major issues of the nation. This book charts the rich and pervasive development of Texas-inspired constitutional law. From voting rights to railroad regulations, school finance to capital punishment, poverty to civil liberty, this book provides a window into the relationship between constitutional litigation and ordinary politics at the Texas Supreme Court, illuminating how all of the fiercest national divides over what the Constitution means took shape in Texas.


2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-63
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Niewiadomska-Cudak

Summary The article treats not only about the struggle of women to obtain voting rights. It is an attempt to answer the question as to why only so few women are in national parliaments. The most important matter of the countries in the world is to confront stereotypical perception of the roles of women and men in a society. It is necessary to promote gender equality in the world of politics.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-103
Author(s):  
Ágnes Vass

AbstractPolicy towards Hungarians living in neighbouring countries has been a central issue for Hungarian governments, yet Hungarian diaspora living mainly in Western Europe and North America have received very little attention. This has changed after the 2010 landslide victory of Fidesz. The new government introduced a structured policy focused on engaging Hungarian diaspora, largely due to the nationalist rhetoric of the governing party. The article argues that this change reflects a turn of Hungarian nationalism into what Ragazzi and Balalowska (2011) have called post-territorial nationalism, where national belonging becomes disconnected from territory. It is because of this new conception of Hungarian nationalism that we witness the Hungarian government approach Hungarian communities living in other countries in new ways while using new policy tools: the offer of extraterritorial citizenship; political campaigns to motivate the diaspora to take part in Hungarian domestic politics by voting in legislative elections; or the never-before-seen high state budget allocated to support these communities. Our analysis is based on qualitative data gathered in 2016 from focus group discussions conducted in the Hungarian community of Western Canada to understand the effects of this diaspora politics from a bottom-up perspective. Using the theoretical framework of extraterritorial citizenship, external voting rights and diaspora engagement programmes, the paper gives a brief overview of the development of the Hungarian diaspora policy. We focus on how post-territorial nationalism of the Hungarian government after 2010 effects the ties of Hungarian communities in Canada with Hungary, how the members of these communities conceptualise the meaning of their “new” Hungarian citizenship, voting rights and other diaspora programmes. We argue that external citizenship and voting rights play a crucial role in the Orbán government’s attempt to govern Hungarian diaspora communities through diaspora policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document