STATE CRISIS AND REBUILDING: ADAPTATION AND CHANGE

2021 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 01-11
Author(s):  
Djamel Ben MERAR ◽  
Nassira MELLAH

The crises of the state and the rebuilding of the state waw linked to the shifting of contests and critical review, and the theoretical and methodological development of the study of the phenomenon, especially what was produced by the rapid developments of globalization and the challenges facing the state, and then there was an urgent necessity to review the foundation and characteristics of the state’s reconstruction and the levels of its analysis, which is what he sought the owners of contemporary political theory, including: Jurgen Habermas, John Rawls, in the study of this phenomenon, through the reconstruction of the model state according to the response of the individual and society. Globalization has imposed in its contexts theoretical and practical challenges through the lack of conformity and compatibility of the concept with the current reality in accordance with the changes occurring in international relation. This article aims to understand and realize these changes and adapt them to new development, which contribute to the reconsideration of the concept of the state to arrive at the true concept of state building.

1992 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Will Kymlicka

AbstractIn his most recent work, John Rawls argues that political theory must recognize and accomodate the ‘fact of pluralism’, including the fact of religious diversity. He believes that the liberal commitment to individual rights provides the only feasible model for accomodating religious pluralism. In the paper, I discuss a second form of tolerance, based on group rights rather than individual rights. Drawing on historical examples, I argue that this is is also a feasible model for accomodating religious pluralism. While both models ensure tolerance between groups, only the former tolerates individual dissent within groups. To defend the individual rights model, therefore, liberals must appeal not only to the fact of social pluralism, but also to the value of individual autonomy. This may require abandoning Rawls’s belief that liberalism can and should be defended on purely ‘political’, rather than ‘comprehensive’ grounds.


2019 ◽  
pp. 17-36
Author(s):  
Ana-Teodora Kurkina

State Boundaries in the Minds of Men: Bulgarian Intellectuals Dividing the Balkans in the mid-19th CenturyThe correlation between the political imagination of intellectuals and their social ties is rarely linked to the state-building projects they produce. In most cases, political and social realities in regions do not coincide with the state boundaries sketched by intellectuals. Nevertheless, they do reflect the ideas of a narrow stratum of interconnected individuals that are easy to target and follow.The current text introduces and analyses the individual ties that laid the foundation for state-building creativity in the context of the mid-19th century empires. It suggests that elites occupy a different place in the social hierarchy of the forming nations, creating their preliminary state boundaries mostly based on their own interconnections and personal considerations. While their plans do not necessarily succeed, they usually reflect the nature of the debates and concerns of a relatively small group that conceives them.The case of the Bulgarian public actors in the mid-19th century offers a concentrated picture of a predominantly mobile intellectual elite engaged in the division of the Balkans. That elite included not only revolutionary thinkers like Georgi Rakovski, but also poets and journalists like his younger contemporaries, Hristo Botev and Lyuben Karavelov. Following their writings, one can produce a picture illustrating the correlation between state boundary-making and the imagination of intellectuals. While the Bulgarian example is easy to follow, it is not unique. The hypothesis can be transferred to other cases and other elites engaged in state-building debates, especially those isolated from the reality of their target group due to their position in the social hierarchy, emigrant status or conflicting affiliations. Государственные границы в сознании людей: деление Балканов болгарскими интеллектуалами в середине 19 века Корреляция между политическим воображением интеллектуалов и их социальными связями редко ассоциируется с проектами по конструированию государства, которые они создают. В большинстве случаев, политические и социальные реалии в различных регионах не совпадают с государственными границами, начертанными полити- ческими активистами. Они отражают идеи узкой прослойки контак- тирующих индивидумов, чьи действия легко увидеть и проследить.Данный текст рассматривает и анализирует личные связи политических активистов, которые заложили основы проектов по конструированию государства в контексте империй середины 19 века. Автор утверждает, что интеллектуальные элиты занимали особое место в социальной иерархии формирующихся наций, создавая предварительные государственные границы, базируя их на своих личных связях и идеях. Их планы не венчались успехом во всех случаях, однако, они отражали природу дебатов и интересов маленькой группы, которая их выражала, но никак не всего населения.Случай болгарских политических активистов середины 19 века представляет собой пример преимущественно мобильной элиты, вовлеченной в раздел Балканского полуострова. Эта элита включала в себя не только революционных мыслителей как Георгий Раковский, но также поэтов и публицистов как его младшие современники Христо Ботев и Любен Каравелов. Анализируя оставленные ими письменные документы, можно воспроизвести модель, иллюстрирующую корреляцию между конструированием государственных границ и политическим воображением интеллектуалов. Болгарский пример предлагает достаточное количество материала для проведения исследования, однако, он далеко не уникален. Данная система может буть перенесена на другие случаи, в которых фигурируют элиты, причастные к конструированию государственных границ. Наиболее подробно данная модель иллюстрирует деятельность представителей элиты, которые находятся в изоляции от своей целевой группы из-за своего положения в социальной иерархии, статуса эмигранта или противоречивых идентичностей. Granice państwowe w umysłach ludzkich: dzielenie Bałkanów przez bułgarskich intelektualistów w połowie XIX wiekuKorelacja między polityczną wyobraźnią intelektualistów a ich więziami społecznymi rzadko jest kojarzona z tworzonymi przez nich projektami budowy państwa. W większości przypadków regionalne realia polityczne nie pokrywają się z granicami państwowymi wyznaczonymi przez działaczy politycznych. Odzwierciedlają one idee wąskiej warstwy wzajemnie powiązanych jednostek, których działania można łatwo dostrzec i prześledzić.Niniejszy tekst analizuje osobiste powiązania aktywistów politycznych, którzy stworzyli podstawy dla projektów budowy państw w epoce imperiów połowy XIX wieku. Autorka twierdzi, że elity intelektualne zajmowały szczególne miejsce w społecznej hierarchii formujących się narodów, tworząc wstępne granice państwowe w oparciu o osobiste więzi i idee. Ich plany nie we wszystkich przypadkach były zwieńczone sukcesem, lecz odzwierciedlały specyfikę debat i interesów małej grupy, która je wyrażała, a nie całej ludności.Przypadek bułgarskich aktywistów politycznych połowy XIX wieku stanowi przykład mobilnej elity zaangażowanej w podział Półwyspu Bałkańskiego. W skład tej elity weszli nie tylko rewolucyjni myśliciele jak Georgi Rakovski, ale także poeci i publicyści jak Christo Botev i Luben Karavelov. Analizując pisane przez nich dokumenty, można odtworzyć model ilustrujący korelację pomiędzy konstruowaniem granic, a polityczną wyobraźnią intelektualistów. Bułgarski przykład oferuje wystarczającą ilość materiału do badania, lecz jest daleki od bycia wyjątkowym. Model ten może być przeniesiony do innych przypadków, w których biorą udział elity zaangażowane w konstruowanie granic państwowych, jednocześnie znakomicie ilustruje działalność przedstawicieli elit, którzy są odizolowani od grupy docelowej ze względu na sprzeczną z nią tożsamość, status emigranta lub pozycję w hierarchii społecznej.


2006 ◽  
pp. 29-56
Author(s):  
Michal Sládecek

In first chapters of this article MacIntyre?s view of ethics is analyzed, together with his critics of liberalism as philosophical and political theory, as well as dominant ideological conception. In last chapters MacIntyre?s view of the relation between politics and ethics is considered, along with the critical review of his theoretical positions. Macintyre?s conception is regarded on the one hand as very broad, because the entire morality is identified with ethical life, while on the other hand it is regarded as too narrow since it excludes certain essential aspects of deliberation which refers to the sphere of individual rights, the relations between communities, as well as distribution of goods within the state.


Author(s):  
Shahrough Akhavi

The doctrine of salvation in Islam centers on the community of believers. Contemporary Muslim political philosophy (or, preferably, political theory) covers a broad expanse that brings under its rubric at least two diverse tendencies: an approach that stresses the integration of religion and politics, and an approach that insists on their separation. Advocates of the first approach seem united in their desire for the “Islamization of knowledge,” meaning that the epistemological foundation of understanding and explanation in all areas of life, including all areas of political life, must be “Islamic.” Thus, one needs to speak of an “Islamic anthropology,” an “Islamic sociology,” an “Islamic political science,” and so on. But there is also a distinction that one may make among advocates of this first approach. Moreover, one can say about many, perhaps most, advocates of the first approach that they feel an urgency to apply Islamic law throughout all arenas of society. This article focuses on the Muslim tradition of political philosophy and considers the following themes: the individual and society, the state, and democracy.


Author(s):  
Noah Dauber

This chapter examines Thomas Hobbes' views on the tradition of commonwealth and its relationship to the state by offering a reading of his book The Elements of Law. It argues that Hobbes, by drawing on his understanding of the theory of sanctification and the doctrine of justification, developed a political theory that split the difference between two rival groups: the supporters of the personal rule, who insisted that the law was binding in conscience, and the puritan opposition, who believed that conscience provided a reason for noncompliance. The chapter first considers the most controversial aspects of state building during Charles I's personal rule, the forced loan and the collection of ship money, before discussing Hobbes's ideas on the issue of taxation, his critique of the claims of distributive justice, and his understanding of the persistence of sovereignty as a dynamic relationship between the state and society.


2001 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-114
Author(s):  
George Klosko

Though questions of political obligation have long been central to liberal political theory, discussion has generally focused on voluntaristic aspects of the individual's relationship to the state, as opposed to other factors through which the state is able to ground compliance with its laws. The individual has been conceptualized as naturally without political ties, whether or not formally in a state of nature, and questions of political obligation have centered on accounting for political bonds.


1983 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Vincent

It is a characteristic of political theory and international politics that certain wellworn stereotypes are perennially wheeled out for generations of students. Some of these may be useful landmarks for scholarship, others offer only partial insights. This paper addresses one of these stereotypes which does not dissolve with more intensive study. It attaches to the Hegelian concept of the state in relation to international politics. I refer to the view that Hegel's concept of the state, elaborated in the Philosophy of Right, is the final unit of analysis for any theory of international politics; that it is impossible to go beyond the nation state; that it possesses a finality in that international affairs are only to be understood through the relation between nation states. One of the conclusions which is sometimes drawn from this stereotype. is that Hegel's account of international politics is Hobbesian in character; that is to say, the relation between states is rather like that between individuals in Hobbes’ state of nature. The ruling principle would thus be that ‘clubs are trumps’; or, more conveniently, that might is right. For an Hegelian there cannot be a legitimate concept of international order, because order only exists in the individual state. Each state has its own legal system and concept of right, therefore the relationship between states is simply the conflict of rights. To put this in a moral perspective: states are neither right nor wrong; this is simply how things are. This has often led to the paradoxical conclusion that Hegel is a realist as regards international affairs, though perhaps a better term would be ‘idealist-realist’. The aim of this paper is to examine the arguments for and against such a stereotype.


1977 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vernon Van Dyke

Liberal political theory and contemporary expositions of human rights focus largely on the individual. Some liberal theorists even deny that ethnic communities and other groups, as collective entities, can have moral rights at all. The outlook is narrow and unfortunate. It reflects a preoccupation with domestic politics and a model of domestic politics that neglects the common fact of heterogeneity. It ignores widespread practices and urgent problems, for in many countries groups identified by race, language, or religion make moral claims, and their claims are sometimes conceded. It ignores the common view that nations or “peoples” have a (moral) right of self-determination, and it even leaves the state itself without justification. If theory is to give adequate guidance, its focus must be broadened. The question of group rights needs to be explored, and interrelationships between the rights of individuals, of groups, and of the state need to be clarified.


Etyka ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 137-157
Author(s):  
Sebastian Michalik

The subject of this article are two fundamental concepts of Hobbes’ political philosophy: “war of all against all” and political power. The analysis of anthropological basis of Hobbes’ political theory is of crucial importance for these considerations. It shows that the state of nature and the political state create dialectical relationship, not an insurmountable opposition. The further exploration leads to the conclusion that the sovereign power is identical with the rights and brutal actions of the individual living in the state of nature. In other words, political state is merely a continuation of conflicts taking place in the “war of all against all”. In order to conceal this fact Hobbes provides the sovereign power with the ideological effect of objectivity. The power based in sheer violence is masked as Leviathan who exists in the minds of its subject, creating an illusion of a cohesive social order devoid of any antagonisms and, therefore, objective.


Author(s):  
R.A. TATAROV ◽  
А.S. FRANZ

The article is a scientific study of the formation and functioning of the political regime in the dynamics of the state building of the Transnistrian Republic. The analysis of the Transnistrian statehood phenomenon is fully based on the existing methods of political theory and sociological Sciences. The authors present the Genesis of the political and legal world in the Transnistrian realities through the prism of the implementation of the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic. The variety of approaches to the interpretation and typology of the political regime in the mirror of Transnistrian realities made it possible to identify and justify the existing trends in the political process of Transnistria.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document