Reconstruction and indignation: On the transformative potential of the latest model of Axel Honneth’s Critical Theory

This paper analyses the transformative potential of Axel Honneth’s latest model of Critical Theory and is divided in three sections. Firstly, it will be presented the criticisms towards Honneth’s latest model of Critical Theory revealing the largely shared assumption that normative reconstruction is responsible for a conservative bias. The second section will focus on Honneth’s “reconstrutive turn” exposing its reasons and outcomes. (II). The third section will then discuss how reconstructive critique is related to a genealogical proviso that will metacritically denounce the increasing gap between historical promises and the institutional provisions for their fulfillment; a gap that will be the source of the potentially revolutionary sentiment of moral indignation (III). Finally, the text will sketch some brief considerations on the relation of this feeling of indignation and Honneth’s commitment to a renewed idea of socialism.

US Supreme Court-packing unlikely

Significance Rubio's move comes as several candidates for the Democratic Party's 2020 presidential nomination are discussing 'packing' the Supreme Court -- adding justices intended to nullify the perceived long-term conservative bias of the Court following Trump-era appointments. Impacts A constitutional change to limit the Supreme Court to nine justices is unlikely: amendments are purposely hard. Court-packing would not guarantee 'Democratic' or 'Republican' rulings: much depends on the case and how justices feel. Packing the courts would likely increase their politicisation, and potentially slow their deliberative capacity. If Trump wins a second term and Republicans keep the Senate, they will appoint further conservative justices. If the Democrats win the White House and Senate in 2020, they might 'pack' the lower courts.