Introduction: Black Swans and Sinatra Inferences

Public mismanagement as a threat to life and limb is a rare and highly improbable phenomenon—the proverbial Black Swan. Bridges and buildings collapse, claiming the lives of people who had every reason to believe that governmental agencies protect their physical integrity through public oversight and maintenance. Properly analyzed, however, these unlikely events reveal causal mechanisms of a general nature, strong enough to trigger fateful mismanagement even under the restrictive conditions of professional bureaucracies and democratic government. Hence the “Sinatra Inference”: When a mechanism is powerful enough ‘to make it there’—i.e., where causal leverage is supposedly low—it is likely to ‘make it everywhere’ as soon as leverage is enlarged by weaker accountability structures, lower professional standards and lesser values than human safety.

Introduction: How to Fix What Ails Democracy?

This chapter introduces the main topics of Debating Democracy. Brennan and Landemore agree that democracy should largely be judged by its results. However, they dispute whether the problems contemporary democracies face can be solved by increasing citizens’ involvement in politics or, instead, by limiting the scope of politics and experimenting with less democratic forms of governments. Brennan argues that voters in democracies are often ignorant, misinformed, or vote for their parties for tribalistic reasons rather than to advance their interests. He believes experts should make certain decisions and suggests experimenting with less democratic government. Landemore, on the other hand, believes the best decisions are made when everyone is involved. She promotes “open democracy” where all citizens have equal and far more substantive deliberative input than they do in contemporary democracies, in which citizens’ involvement is heavily constrained.

Can the EU be a federal democracy? Assessing the horizontal and vertical dimension of the EU government from comparative perspective

The European Union remains an ambivalent polity. This uncertainty complicates the assessment of its democratic and federal quality. Drawing on comparative federalism research can contribute not only to making sense of whether, or rather which kind of federalism the EU has developed. It can also enable addressing such a compounded, but necessary inquiry into the federal and democratic character of the EU and how to ascertain which type of democratic government for which type of federal union may be appropriate. The article first elaborates a framework to assess the dimensions of federal and democratic government, drawing on comparative federalism research to delineate basic types of federal democracy. Here the democratic dimension of government is taken as referring primarily to the horizontal division of powers (among ‘branches’) of government, the federal dimension to the vertical division of powers (among ‘levels’) of governments. The framework is applied to the government of the EU in order to gauge its own type(s) of division of power arrangements and the interlinkage between them. Finally, the discussion reflects on whether or rather how the EU could comprise a federal democracy, especially in light of recent crisis challenges and subsequent institutional developments in EU governance.

Do sponsors and democratic government influence the flipping activity of Pakistan IPO? Evidence from developing market

Purpose This study aims to examine the impact of sponsors and democratic government on the flipping activity of initial public offerings (IPOs). Design/methodology/approach Based on the sample of 95 IPOs listed on the Pakistan Stock Exchange between January 2000 and December 2019, this study used multiple cross-sectional regression to examine the relationship between sponsors and democratic government on flipping activity. Findings The findings indicate a significant negative association between sponsors and the flipping activity of IPOs. Sponsor(s) signal quality by trying to share accurate information about company values. As a result, the confidence of rational investors in the company’s future prospectus increases and they hold their shares for future gains, which reduces the flipping activity. Also, democratic government, along with sponsors' participation, provides investors with liquidity immediately after listing. Practical limitations/implications The findings of this study have implications for investors as they may assist them make informed decisions about whether or not to invest in an IPO with high sponsor(s) ownership. In addition, issuers should consider the disclosure of sponsor information(s) as such information may directly affect the first day’s trading volumes. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research study that explores the correlation between sponsors and democratic government and flipping activity of IPO. This study is important for investors and issuers.

EL CONCEPTO DE DEMOCRACIA: UN ANÁLISIS MULTIDIMENSIONAL

This article starts with the semantic decomposition of the phrase demokratos, which states a subordination of “kratos” (government) to “demos” (people), and analyzes the concept of democracy from a multi-dimensional key. In order to elaborate on the concept of democracy, an analytical distinction was established around three dimensions of government subordination to the people: democracy is understood as (i) the government of the people, (ii) the government by the people, and (iii) the government for the people or the government that serves the people. This kind of analysis can establish a good state of art for contemporary discussions on democratic theory, and determine the main ways to improve the existing democratic government systems.

Plato's Statesman

Plato’s Statesman reconsiders many questions familiar to readers of the Republic: questions in political theory – such as the qualifications for the leadership of a state and the best from of constitution (politeia) – as well as questions of philosophical methodology and epistemology. Instead of the theory of Forms that is the centrepiece of the epistemology of the Republic, the emphasis here is on the dialectical practice of collection and division (diairesis), in whose service the interlocutors also deploy the ancillary methods of myth and of models (paradeigmata). Plato here introduces the doctrine of due measure (to metrion) and a conception of statecraft (politikē) as an architectonic expertise that governs subordinate disciplines such as rhetoric and the military – doctrines later developed by Aristotle. Readers will find a sustained defence of the importance of expertise (technē or epistēmē) in the conduct of affairs of state, a robust (although not unqualified) defence of the rule of law, and an unsparing but nuanced critique of democratic government. The chapters in this volume provide a comprehensive and detailed philosophical engagement with the entirety of Plato’s wide-ranging dialogue, with successive chapters devoted to the sections of the dialogue as it unfolds, and an introduction that places the dialogue in the context of Plato’s philosophy as a whole. While not a commentary in the traditional sense, the volume engages with Plato’s Statesman in its entirety.

Critical analysis of transformative interventions redressing apartheid land discrimination and injustices in South Africa: From land segregation to inclusivity

In 1994, as soon as South Africa became a democratic country, the first step taken by the new democratic government was to introduce various transformative constitutional and legislative interventions that sought to redress all the past apartheid discriminatory laws. This paper looks at these interventions by critically showcasing how they are being used to transform and reform land by ensuring inclusivity and equity in South Africa where the previously denied, disposed and segregated Black majority have access and are benefitting broadly.