Smashing the state gently: Radical realism and realist anarchism

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 206-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gearóid Brinn
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Standard Representation ◽  
Radical Ideology ◽  
Realist Perspective ◽  
Anarchist Theory

The revival of realism in political theory has included efforts to challenge realism’s conservative reputation and argue that radical forms are possible. Nonetheless these efforts have been criticised as insufficient to overcome realism’s inherent conservatism. This article argues that radical forms of realism can be better appreciated by considering the application of the realist perspective within an existing radical ideology: anarchism. This may seem an unusual choice, considering anarchism’s standard representation as naïvely idealistic and paradigmatically non-realist. However, attention to the breadth of diversity in anarchist theory reveals a collection of positions that together represent a ‘realist anarchism’ which not only challenges anarchism’s reputation as uniformly committed to unrealistic and idealistic utopianism but also demonstrates the existence of genuinely radical forms of realism.

Political Theory and the Child: Problems of the Individualist Tradition

1979 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Haydon
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Obligation ◽  
Common Assumption ◽  
Legitimate Concern ◽  
The Status ◽  
Child Problems ◽  
Anarchist Theory

Consideration of the status and treatment of the child is a legitimate concern of political theory, and may lead to reappraisal of some commonly deployed arguments. Several respects are indicated in which decisions taken by adults and affecting children may properly be considered political. More specifically, it is argued that (i) anarchist theory; (ii) Nozick's arguments in Anarchy, State and Utopia; and (iii) consent theories of political obligation run into difficulties when the place of children is considered. The argument points, under (i) and (ii), to putative lines of justification of the state; and under (iii) to the conclusion, contrary to common assumption, that those who have not yet attained sufficient understanding to be considered as consenting are not morally obliged to obey the state's laws and agents.

Kropotkin

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Kinna
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
Political Change ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Analysis ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
Special Character ◽  
Revolutionary Politics

This book is designed to remove Peter Kropotkin from the framework of classical anarchism. By focusing attention on his theory of mutual aid, it argues that the classical framing distorts Kropotkin's political theory by associating it with a narrowly positivistic conception of science, a naively optimistic idea of human nature and a millenarian idea of revolution. Kropotkin's abiding concern with Russian revolutionary politics is the lens for this analysis. The argument is that his engagement with nihilism shaped his conception of science and that his expeditions in Siberia underpinned an approach to social analysis that was rooted in geography. Looking at Kropotkin's relationship with Elisée Reclus and Erico Malatesta and examining his critical appreciation of P-J. Proudhon, Michael Bakunin and Max Stirner, the study shows how he understood anarchist traditions and reveals the special character of his anarchist communism. His idea of the state as a colonising process and his contention that exploitation and oppression operate in global contexts is a key feature of this. Kropotkin's views about the role of theory in revolutionary practice show how he developed this critique of the state and capitalism to advance an idea of political change that combined the building of non-state alternatives through direct action and wilful disobedience. Against critics who argue that Kropotkin betrayed these principles in 1914, the book suggests that this controversial decision was consistent with his anarchism and that it reflected his judgment about the prospects of anarchistic revolution in Russia.

Domestic Colonies

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Arneil
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
Abraham Lincoln ◽  
The State ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Alexis De Tocqueville ◽  
Modern History ◽  
Peter Kropotkin

Colonization is generally defined as a process by which states settle and dominate foreign lands or peoples. Thus, modern colonies are assumed to be outside Europe and the colonized non-European. This volume contends such definitions of the colony, the colonized, and colonization need to be fundamentally rethought in light of hundreds of ‘domestic colonies’ proposed and/or created by governments and civil society organizations initially within Europe in the nineteenth and first half of the twentieth centuries and then beyond. The three categories of domestic colonies in this book are labour colonies for the idle poor, farm colonies for the mentally ill, and disabled and utopian colonies for racial, religious, and political minorities. All of these domestic colonies were justified by an ideology of domestic colonialism characterized by three principles: segregation, agrarian labour, improvement, through which, in the case of labour and farm colonies, the ‘idle’, ‘irrational’, and/or custom-bound would be transformed into ‘industrious and rational’ citizens while creating revenues for the state to maintain such populations. Utopian colonies needed segregation from society so their members could find freedom, work the land, and challenge the prevailing norms of the society around them. Defended by some of the leading progressive thinkers of the period, including Alexis de Tocqueville, Abraham Lincoln, Peter Kropotkin, Robert Owen, Tommy Douglas, and Booker T. Washington, the turn inward to colony not only provides a new lens with which to understand the scope of colonization and colonialism in modern history but a critically important way to distinguish ‘the colonial’ from ‘the imperial’ in Western political theory and practice.

Not In Their Name

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holly Lawford-Smith
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Public Services ◽  
The State ◽  
Alternative Conceptions ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Collective Agency ◽  
Single Individual ◽  
Collective Agent ◽  
Social Metaphysics ◽  
Ordinary Citizens

Given their size and influence, states are able to inflict harm far beyond the reach of a single individual. But there is a great deal of unclarity about exactly who is implicated in that kind of harm, and how we should think about both culpability and responsibility for it. The idea of popular sovereignty is dominant in classical political theory. It is a commonplace assumption that democratic publics both authorize and have control over what their states do; that their states act in their name and on their behalf. Not In Their Name approaches these assumptions from the perspective of social metaphysics, asking whether the state is a collective agent, and whether ordinary citizens are members of that agent. If it is, and they are, there is a clear case for democratic collective culpability. The book explores alternative conceptions of the state and of membership in the state; alternative conceptions of collective agency applied to the state; the normative implications of membership in the state; and both culpability (from the inside) and responsibility (from the outside) for what the state does. Ultimately, Not In Their Name argues for the exculpation of ordinary citizens and the inculpation of those working in public services, and defends a particular distribution of culpability from government to its members.

The Political Theory of the Disruption

1916 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harold J. Laski
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Authority ◽  
The State ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
Secular Society ◽  
The One ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Political Principles ◽  
The Church

“Of political principles,” says a distinguished authority, “whether they be those of order or of freedom, we must seek in religious and quasi-theological writings for the highest and most notable expressions.” No one, in truth, will deny the accuracy of this claim for those ages before the Reformation transferred the centre of political authority from church to state. What is too rarely realised is the modernism of those writings in all save form. Just as the medieval state had to fight hard for relief from ecclesiastical trammels, so does its modern exclusiveness throw the burden of a kindred struggle upon its erstwhile rival. The church, intelligibly enough, is compelled to seek the protection of its liberties lest it become no more than the religious department of an otherwise secular society. The main problem, in fact, for the political theorist is still that which lies at the root of medieval conflict. What is the definition of sovereignty? Shall the nature and personality of those groups of which the state is so formidably one be regarded as in its gift to define? Can the state tolerate alongside itself churches which avow themselves societates perfectae, claiming exemption from its jurisdiction even when, as often enough, they traverse the field over which it ploughs? Is the state but one of many, or are those many but parts of itself, the one?

scholarly journals The natural duty of justice in non-ideal circumstances: On the moral demands of institution building and reform

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Valentini
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
The State ◽  
Response Strategy ◽  
Macro Level ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Institutional Agents ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
The Status

Principles of distributive justice bind macro-level institutional agents, like the state. But what does justice require in non-ideal circumstances, where institutional agents are unjust or do not exist in the first place? Many answer by invoking Rawls's natural duty ‘to further just arrangements not yet established’, treating it as a ‘normative bridge’ between institutional demands of distributive justice and individual responsibilities in non-ideal circumstances. I argue that this response strategy is unsuccessful. I show that the more unjust the status quo is due to non-compliance, the less demanding the natural duty of justice becomes. I conclude that, in non-ideal circumstances, the bulk of the normative work is done by another natural duty: that of beneficence. This conclusion has significant implications for how we conceptualize our political responsibilities in non-ideal circumstances, and cautions us against the tendency – common in contemporary political theory – to answer all high-stakes normative questions under the rubric of justice.

The International Criminal Court’s Authority Crisis and Kant’s Political Ethics

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-215
Author(s):  
Antonio Franceschet
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Moral Problem ◽  
Legal Authority ◽  
Political Ethics ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Legal Actor

The International Criminal Court (icc) faces a profound authority crisis. This article explores the underlying conditions and ethical implications of this crisis in light of Immanuel Kant’s (1724–1804) political theory. The icc’s authority crisis is twofold: First, having been constructed as a purely legal actor, the Court’s inevitable role in politics has undermined perceptions of its legitimacy. Second, having been constructed as a supranational substitute for domestic legal authority, the icc has been subverted by other, political branches of the state, such as the executive. These problems have been particularly salient in Africa where states have vociferously challenged the Court’s investigations and prosecutions. Kantian political ethics show that the icc’s authority crisis is an intractable moral problem that must be addressed collectively and coercively by sovereign states acting upon a larger, cosmopolitan duty to enforce universal rights.

scholarly journals Civil Economy in the Social Market Economy: a Theoretical Perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-98
Author(s):  
Flavio Felice
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Market Economy ◽  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Market Economy ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Galaxy ◽  
Civil Economy ◽  
State And Market ◽  
Social Market

Abstract What do we mean by “civil” and “civil society”? This paper attempts to describe a complex notion of “civil economy” in Sturzo’s theoretical perspective of the social market economy. According to this political theory, “civil” is not opposed to “market,” which is not opposed to “the political” (the state). Rather, instead of being the transmission belt between the state and market, civil is the galaxy in which we find also the market and the state (but not only), each with its own functions. This tradition – rooted in Christianity – was able to oppose both Nazi and communist totalitarianism, while many Catholics made an impossible attempt to exhume corporatism.

scholarly journals The Political Theory of F. Guizot on the Nature of Power and the Opposition on the Example of Elections to the State Duma in 2016

nauka.me ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Vladislav Gritsay
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
The Political ◽  
Mutual Relations

The article analyzes the political theory of F.Gizo about the nature of power and opposition, about their mutual relations with each other and with the population. The author tries to consider this theory in the context of elections to the Russian Parliament in 2016.

scholarly journals Historia rozwoju Republiki Rzymskiej według Polibiusza

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-93
Author(s):  
Anna Ceglarska ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Roman Republic ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
The State ◽  
Mixed System ◽  
The Political ◽  
Mutual Relation ◽  
Perfect System ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Moment

History of the rise of the Roman Republic as described by Polybius The aim of this article is to refer Polybius’s political theory, included in Book VI of The Histories, to the history of the rise of the Roman Republic. This theme must have been particularly significant for Polybius. For him, Rome was the most perfect example of a mixed government system, and the aim of describing its history was to show the development of this perfect system. The article presents the mutual relation of theory and history, starting with the period of kingship, up to the emergence of the democratic element, i.e. the moment when Rome acquired the mixed system of government. Both the political and social contexts of the changes are outlined. The analysis suggests that Polybius related his political theory to the history of the state he admired, thus providing the theory with actual foundations. Reconstructing his analysis makes it possible to see the history of Rome in a different light, and to ponder the system itself and its decline, even though the main objective of both Polybius and this article is to present its development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document