The Future of Representative Democracy poses important questions about representation, representative democracy and their future. Inspired by the last major investigation of the subject by Hanna Pitkin over four decades ago, this ambitious volume fills a major gap in the literature by examining the future of representative forms of democracy in terms of present-day trends and past theories of representative democracy. Aware of the pressing need for clarifying key concepts and institutional trends, the volume aims to break down barriers among (...) disciplines and to establish an interdisciplinary dialogue among scholars. The contributors emphasise that representative democracy and its future is a subject of pressing scholarly concern and public importance. Paying close attention to the unfinished, two-centuries-old relationship between democracy and representation, this book offers a fresh perspective on current problems and dilemmas of representative democracy and the possible future development of new forms of democratic representation. (shrink)

In this provocative book, John Keane calls for a fresh understanding of the vexed relationship between democracy and violence. Taking issue with the common sense view that 'human nature' is violent, Keane shows why mature democracies do not wage war upon each other, and why they are unusually sensitive to violence. He argues that we need to think more discriminatingly about the origins of violence, its consequences, its uses and remedies. He probes the disputed meanings of the term violence, and (...) asks why violence is the greatest enemy of democracy, and why today's global 'triangle of violence' is tempting politicians to invoke undemocratic emergency powers. Throughout, Keane gives prominence to ethical questions, such as the circumstances in which violence can be justified, and argues that violent behaviour and means of violence can and should be 'democratised' - made publicly accountable to others, so encouraging efforts to erase surplus violence from the world. (shrink)

Este ensayo se propone plantear una nueva perspectiva acerca de una tendencia inquietante que está configurando nuestro mundo en estos primeros años del siglo XXI: el auge del despotismo. Nos preguntamos si los regímenes de poder que se ponen de manifiesto en países como Rusia, Vietnam, Arabia Saudita, Turkmenistán, China y Brunéi, y los Emiratos Árabes Unidos tienen características en común, a pesar de ser a su vez tan diferentes en otros aspectos. La respuesta es afirmativa; empezando por su concentración (...) geográfica en la región Euroasiática, definida ampliamente de tal suerte que incluya el espacio territorial que se extiende a lo largo de Rusia, Turquía, las monarquías del Golfo e Irán en el oeste, atravesando las repúblicas de Asia central, China y Japón, hasta Indonesia, Australia, Nueva Zelanda y Fiji en el extremo este. Esta región es el nuevo centro gravitacional geopolítico del planeta. Este ensayo explica por qué el despotismo, término en desuso, merece ser retomado, y porqué los regímenes despóticos de nuestro tiempo no deben considerarse simplemente como un tipo de estado territorial.This essay sets out to make new sense of a disturbing trend shaping our world in these early years of the 21stcentury: the rise of despotism. It asks whether the regimes of power displayed in countries otherwise as different as Russia, Vietnam, Iran; Saudi Arabia; Turkmenistan; China and Brunei, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates share things in common. It answers that they do, beginning with their geographic concentration in the Eurasian region, broadly defined to include the territorial spaces stretching from Russia, Turkey, the Gulf states and Iran in the west through to the central Asian republics, China and Japan, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand and Fiji in the far east. The region is the new geo–political centre of gravity of our planet. It is also the heartland of the new despotisms, which are proving to be powerful actors, both in the region and within a wide range of global settings. The essay explains why the old–fashioned term despotism deserves to be revived, and why the new despotisms of our time should not be thought of simply as a type of territorial state. (shrink)

Schmittova strategija kritike parlamentarizma je zasnovana na poskusu histo-riziranja parlamentarnega diskurza, na tem, da ga opazuje kot produkt liberalnih poskusov depolitiziranja modernega sveta. Na tej podlagi skuša Schmitt, metafizik, razgaliti pojave, ki so vezani na parlament, in s tem razkriti in razložiti njegovo bistvo. Fenomen parlamenta hoče demaskirati z vprašanjem po njegovih temeljnih načelih. Schmittov opis parlamenta temelji na poenostavljenih konceptualnih abstrakcijah in zaradi tega selektivno, to je — enostransko, preučuje in poudarja le nekatere od značilnosti in zagat parlamenta. Ta (...) enostranskost Schmittove interpretacije se kaže na več načinov: prvič v njegovem očitnem neupoštevanju predliberalne zgodovine parlamenta; drugič v tem, da mu ni uspelo dojeti globokega prepada med liberalnimi načeli parlamentov devetnajstega stoletja; in končno v njegovem slepem zavračanju možnosti, da bi se demokratično reformiralo parlament in okrepilo njegove moči v nasprotju s »totalno državo«. (shrink)

La relación entre las ideas de identidad nacional, nacionalismo y democracia es el tema central del artículo. El concepto de "nación" en la Edad Moderna, especialmente en la teoría de T. Paine sobre la indisoluble unidad de los conceptos de nación y de gobierno democrático y la doctrina de la autodetenninación nacional del siglo XIX son los puntos de partida para una explicación del nacimiento del nacionalismo, resaltando cómo en la idea original no existía una percepción de la diferencia entre (...) identidad nacional y nacionalismo y cómo se infravalora el potencial antidemocrático de la lucha por la identidad nacional. El autor presenta su tesis de que ya que los mecanismos democráticos facilitan la transfonnación de la identidad nacional en nacionalismo, la democracia es mejor servida abandonando la doctrina de la autodetenninación nacional y considerando un sentido compartido de identidad nacional como una legítima pero limitada forma de vida. El corolario de esta tesis es que la identidad nacional, un sopone imponante de las instituciones democrálicas, es preservada mejor restringiendo su ámbito en favor de las identidades no nacionales, lo cual puede reducir la posibilidad de su transfonnación en nacionalismo antidemocrático. En este senlido el autor señala cómo la emergencia en el contexto europeo de una Ciudadanía Europea puede servir como antídoto contra los peligros del nacionalismo. (shrink)

There is growing agreement among scholars and citizens that our planet and its peoples are presently living through an era of great political uncertainty. Global pestilence, species destruction, shrinking US power and the birth of a new Chinese global empire are among the forces said to be responsible for the rising tides of uncertainty. Some observers even speak of a great leap backwards, a regression towards catastrophe, a rebirth of the disquiet and fear that marked the world of the 1920s (...) and 1930s. They are sure that the future will bring only threats, rather than new opportunities to live well. This essay notes the seriousness of things, but it raises doubts about these pessimistic claims of a new age of uncertainty. Historical comparisons are needed. So is greater clarity about the role played by communicative abundance in inflating our collective sense of doom. And a paradox is noted: calamities do more than stir up questions about how best to classify and measure the experience of uncertainty. Definitions of uncertainty also become uncertain. This should be unsurprising. Only institutions and everyday experiences unaffected by the flow of time could be defined and lived with any certainty. The insight not only has rich implications for the way we think about politics and democracy and its vulnerability to morbid backlashes and yearnings for demagogues. Doubt can generate fresh ideas and positive practical breakthroughs. Disquiet and incertitude are fickle characters, but they are also challengers of all forms of human arrogance, including the dogmatic conviction that our world is now headed for hell. (shrink)

"More than any other public figure of the eighteenth century, Tom Paine strikes our times like a trumpet blast from a distant world." So begins John Keane's magnificent and award-winning (the Fraunces Tavern Book Award) biography of one of democracy's greatest champions. Among friends and enemies alike, Paine earned a reputation as a notorious pamphleteer, one of the greatest political figures of his day, and the author of three best-selling books, Common Sense, The Rights of Man, and The Age of (...) Reason. Setting his compelling narrative against a vivid social backdrop of prerevolutionary America and the French Revolution, John Keane melds together the public and the shadowy private sides of Paine's life in a remarkable piece of scholarship. This is the definitive biography of a man whose life and work profoundly shaped the modern age. "Provide[s] an engaging perspective on England, America, and France in the tumultuous years of the late eighteenth century." -- Pauline Maier, The New York Times Book Review "It is hard to imagine this magnificent biography ever being superceded.... It is a stylish, splendidly erudite work." -- Terry Eagleton, The Guardian. (shrink)

QUESTION: We would like to begin this discussion of the welfare state and the future of socialism by asking you about several substantive aspects of your work on the limitations of the welfare state. To begin with, why do you often say that late capitalist systems can neither live with nor without the welfare state? Do you consider this to be their fundamental contradiction?OFFE: A short-hand defintion of a contradiciton is that it is a condition in which certain indispensable elements (...) of a social structure cannot be integrated because they are at odds with each other. So to speak, the social structure paralyzes itself because the elements necessary for its survival at the same time render it impossible. (shrink)