In The Struggle for Democracy, Christopher Meckstroth looks at history and context in the development of democratic theory to provide a principled way of sorting out deep conflicts over who has the right to speak for the democratic people. He tests this theory by applying it to contemporary debates over same-sex marriage, military intervention, and gun control.

Kant’s theory of international politics and his right of hospitality are commonly associated with expansive projects of securing human rights or cosmopolitan governance beyond state borders. This article shows how this view misunderstands Kant’s criticism of the law of nations tradition as handed down into the eighteenth century as well as the logic of his radical alternative, which was designed to explain the conditions of possibility of global peace as a solution to the Hobbesian problem of a war of all (...) against all in the state of nature. I resolve longstanding confusion over the meaning and justification of Kant’s right of “hospitality” by showing how it functions not as a freestanding positive claim demanding enforcement but as a way of ruling out specious justifications for war against those the traditional law of nations permitted one to label “enemies.” This poses important questions for contemporary theories of global justice. (shrink)

Jan-Werner Müller’s Democracy Rules advances the debate over populism beyond politicised arguments over definitions. His refusal to blame populism on unenlightened masses points to the need for a coalition of democrats and liberals if liberal democracy is to be saved. But are these enough? Or does the uneven history of democracy in the twentieth century, recounted in Müller’s other works, suggest the need for coalitions that also reach moderates and other blocs less moved by either democratic or liberal ideals? Though (...) distorting media and unresponsive parties may share some blame, what if committed liberals and democratic constitutionalists sometimes really aren't in the majority? And when is polarising between ‘true’ and ‘false’ democrats, and daring to ‘fight fire with fire’, more likely to succeed than to further the hyper-polarisation populists rightly see as their own best strategy? Müller’s book moves debate beyond issuing warnings to raise important questions like these. (shrink)

This article argues that populism, cosmopolitanism, and calls for global justice should be understood not as theoretical positions but as appeals to different segments of democratic electorates with the aim of assembling winning political coalitions. This view is called democratic realism: it considers political competition in democracies from a perspective that is realist in the sense that it focuses not first on the content of competing political claims but on the relationships among different components of the coalitions they work to (...) mobilise in the pursuit of power. It is argued that Laclau’s populist theory offers a sort of realist critique of other populists, but that his view neglects the crucial dynamics of political coalition-building. When the relation of populism to global justice is rethought from this democratic realist angle, one can better understand the sorts of challenges each faces, and also where and how they come into conflict. (shrink)