Democracy and deliberation
- At 30 April, 2013
- By admin
- In Articles
DEMOCRACY AND DELIBERATION: TWO MODELS OF PUBLIC JUSTIFICATION
[Democracia y deliberación: dos modelos de justificación pública]
Mariano Garreta Leclercq
National Research Council of Argentina
Buenos Aires University
Political Philosophy Group
mgarreta@filo.uba.ar
Miñones 2073, C1428ATE, CABA, Argentina
ABSTRACT
The commitment to provide an “adequate justification” of binding political decisions that is accepted or proves acceptable by all citizens concerned, appears to be one of the distinctive features of the idea of deliberation in the public arena as it is conceived by many deliberative conceptions of democracy. Having said that, however, not only is it not at all clear what exactly would qualify as “adequate justification” but also something even more basic: how are we to interpret the term “justification” in political contexts? In this essay I shall present two models of public justification. The first one, is associated with a traditional epistemological idea of justification of beliefs and involve some common sense notions about the subject. The second model, particularly influential in recent liberal political philosophy, stipulates that providing good reasons (relevant evidence, arguments with no formal flaws, intuitions or duly considered moral convictions, etc.) does not suffice to justify a belief or set of beliefs before others. There must be an appeal to reasons that are accepted –or may come to be accepted as a result of the deliberative process itself– by the subject providing the justification as well as by those he addresses. The aim of this essay is to develop an argument in support of this second model of public justification.
Key words: Deliberation, Public justification, liberalism, belief, acceptance.
Human rights in a globalized world
- At 26 March, 2013
- By admin
- In Articles
IS THE STATE-CENTRIC CONCEPTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS SUITABLE FOR A GLOBALIZED WORLD? A RESPONSE TO CRISTINA LAFONT
[¿La concepción estado-céntrica de los derechos humanos es adecuada para un mundo globalizado? Una respuesta a Cristina Lafont]
Julio Montero
National Research Council of Argentina
Buenos Aires University
Political Philosophy Group
jmnormandia@gmail.com
Miñones 2073, C1428ATE, CABA, Argentina
ABSTRACT
In her article “Human Rights and the Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions” published in this volume of RLPF, Cristina Lafont argues that in order to impose human rights obligations to global governance institutions, the state-centric conception of human rights that pervades current international politics must be replaced by an alternative, pluralist account. In this response I claim that, when properly interpreted, the state-centric conception is not only perfectly compatible with imposing on global governance institutions the kind of obligations Lafont has in mind, but may also lead us to a better understanding of the nature of these responsibilities in a globalized world.
Key words:Cosmopolitanism, Human rights, States, Political authority, Responsibility
Comments to Osvaldo Guariglia’s…
- At 19 March, 2013
- By admin
- In Articles
COMMENTS TO OSVALDO GUARIGLIA’S “DEMOCRACY UNDER SIEGE”
[Comentarios a “La democracia asediada”, de Osvaldo Guariglia]
Facundo García Valverde
National Research Council of Argentina
Buenos Aires University
Political Philosophy Group
fgarciavalverde@gmail.com
Miñones 2073, C1428ATE, CABA, Argentina
ABSTRACT
These comments analyze the transnational democratic institutions that, in an article published in this volume of RLFP, Guariglia defends as a limit to the two oligarchic groups that menace the contemporary democracies. This analysis raises doubts concerning two features of Guariglia’s defense. First, it questions his conceptual foundations –the human right to democracy– and, second, it questions its democratic nature, which is problematic when it is assessed from the viewpoint of radical democrat views.
Key words: Democracy – Global Justice – Political Participation.
Human Rights and the Legitimacy…
- At 22 January, 2013
- By admin
- In Articles
HUMAN RIGHT AND THE LEGITIMACY OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONS
[Los derechos humanos y la legitimidad de las instituciones de gobernanza global]
Cristina Lafont
Northwestern University
clafont@northwestern.edu
1860 Campus Drive, Crowe 1-141, Evanston, Illinois 60208, Estados Unidos
ABSTRACT
In a recent article Allan Buchanan and Robert Keohane defend the view that one of the necessary conditions for the legitimacy of global governance institutions such as the WTO and the IMF is that they respect basic human rights. I certainly agree that setting the minimal threshold of moral acceptability any lower would be entirely unreasonable. But, unfortunately, the view that global governance institutions have human rights obligations is far from uncontroversial. These institutions themselves go to great lengths to deny such a claim. Their official stance finds strong normative support in the state-centric conception of human rights that dominates both normative debates about human rights and current human rights practice. In this article I challenge some of the normative assumptions behind the state-centric conception in order to defend a pluralist conception that ascribes human rights obligations not only to states but also to non-state actors such as global governance institutions. After briefly analyzing some of the proposals currently under discussion about how to legally entrench the obligation to respect human rights in those institutions, I will defend the feasibility of those proposals against the objection that their implementation is incompatible with the current state-system and thus it would require the creation of a world state.
Key words: Global governance institutions, Human rights, Human rights due diligence, Legitimacy, State-centric conception of human rights
Democracy under siege
- At 12 December, 2012
- By admin
- In Articles
DEMOCRACY UNDER SIEGE
[La democracia sitiada]
Osvaldo Guariglia
Centre for Philosophical Research (Argentina)
National Research Council for Science and Technology (Argentina)
osvaldoguariglia@speedy.com.ar
Miñones 2073, C1428ATE, CABA, Argentina
ABSTRACT
Modern democracy attempted to solve the dilemmas posed by opposing features from various traditions through two strategies: representation, which allowed it to incorporate citizens’ conflicting interests within a restricted collegiate group that permitted deliberation and agreement, on one side, and universal choice of representatives and governments for limited periods of time, on the other. Since the first decades of the 20th century, this notion of democracy within the framework of a republican constitution was opposed by another one that rejected all forms of parliamentarianism, discussion and public deliberation in the name of a “democracy” based on the identity and homogeneity of a mass of people under the hegemonic leadership of a party, centered around the will and decisions of a managing elite and a charismatic leader, viewed as the sole representative of the people themselves. Both forms of democracy –strict and perverted – are being harassed by the powers unleashed by globalization and transnationalisation that are becoming alien oligarchies, opposed to the notion of citizenship and restrictive of its rights.
In liberal parliamentary democracies the functional imperative issued by the financial sector is channeled through a crisis cabinet that assimilates demands and transforms them by managing an ever-changing budget whose aim is to add new sufferings to the bulk of the population that can only counteract through protest. Given the constitutional backdrop of these societies, with their deep democratic network, the gradual transformation of the European Union into a transnational arena fuelled by “a club of chiefs of state” has only made yet more patent the oligarchic turn of its post-crisis evolution.
In plebiscite democracies the turn was operated through a sovereign entrenchment of the power of the oligarchy on the pretext of resistance to the pressure set by globalization. Since the onset of the 90s, Latin America as well as countries in Eastern Europe have witnessed a gradual turn toward what O’Donnell has termed “delegative democracies”, or neo-populism, according to other authors. These regimes are characterized by exalting a populist leader, upholding him as a savior who will gauge the needs and wishes of the mass of individuals without intermediaries, focusing mainly on those who feel excluded from the mainstream of institutionalized democracy. This ensures feedback to populist regimes supported by a hegemonic political party that lives on State resources and on the rampant corruption it protects in order to finance ‘clientelism’ among those excluded from the system by the policies of the State itself.
Key words: Democracy – Oligarchy – Globalization – Finantial Capitalism – Crisis – Populism
Is there a human right for democracy?
- At 16 October, 2012
- By admin
- In Articles
IS THERE A HUMAN RIGHT TO DEMOCRACY? A RESPONSE TO JOSHUA COHEN
[¿Hay un derecho humano a la democracia? Una respuesta a Joshua Cohen]
Pablo Gilabert
Concordia University
Pablo.Gilabert@concordia.ca
S-M 210-00, M Annex, 2135 Mackay St, Montreal, Canadá
ABSTRACT
Is democracy a human right? There is a growing consensus within international legal and political practice that the answer is “Yes.” However, some philosophers doubt that we should see democracy as a human right. In this paper I respond to the most systematic challenge presented so far, which was recently offered by Joshua Cohen. His challenge is directed to the view that democracy is a human right, not to the view that democracy is part of what justice demands. It is instructive because it forces us to consider important questions about the nature and justification of human rights, including the putative human right to democracy. There is a tendency to see every claim of justice as a human right, and Cohen presses us to face the risk that this slip may occur in the case of democracy. Thus my aim is not simply to refute Cohen’s arguments but to engage the questions he forcefully and helpfully puts on the table. I start in section 2 by analyzing Cohen’s account of human rights. In section 3 I defend the human right to democracy against his challenge. I conclude in section 4 by articulating some reasons for the claim that democracy is a human right that mobilize and elaborate on some of Cohen’s own key premises.
Key words: Democracy – Global Justice – Human Rights – Joshua Cohen
Repressed Democracy
- At 30 July, 2012
- By admin
- In Articles
REPRESSED DEMOCRACY: LEGITIMACY PROBLEMS IN WORLD SOCIETY
[Democracia reprimida: problemas de legitimidad en la sociedad global]
Regina Kreide
Justus Liebig University Giessen
regina.kreide@sowi.uni-giessen.de
Room E 116, Karl-Glöckner Str. 21 E, 35394 Gießen, Alemania
ABSTRACT
Democracy seems to be no longer self-evident. Colin Crouch and others describe a growing sense of alienation in politics: democratic institutions and procedures may be working properly, yet they themselves promote non-democratic values such technocracy, oligarchy, elitism. For the citizens, only an illusion of democracy persists. The article argues that the weakening of democracy in practice mirrors the vanishing of democracy in political theory and philosophy. We may face a crisis of democratic politics as a result of a crisis of democratic theory. Predominant theories of democracy fail, for the most part, to adequately reflect the changing social conditions in democratic societies and to offer a conception of democratic politics that would address current legitimacy deficits. The article discusses prominent theoretical approaches (idealist theory vs. realism; consensus vs. Dissent theory) and points out that all have difficulties conceptualizing possible resources for democratization adequate to contemporary issues and conditions. A new version of political theory is outlined and defended, such that builds upon a redefined notion of democratic sovereignty and communicative power, complex enough to reflect the sociological reality of today’s politics and to reach beyond the institutionalized and formalized setting of democracy.
Key words: radical democracy, legitimacy, communicative power, repression, the political
view pdf
ePub (Kindle, iPad, eBook Readers)
From the editor
- At 26 July, 2012
- By admin
- In Uncategorized
THE SPIRIT OF THE NEW
Latin-American Journal of Political Philosophy
Osvaldo Guariglia
After several decades as one of the editors of a general journal of philosophy, I recognized the need often brought to my attention by a group of young researchers in political philosophy, public ethics, philosophy of right and of economics. Latin America and Spanish speaking countries should have a site of high academic level focused on a specific area where to publish and discuss the various issues and problems open to reflection in the ever changing world of global politics…
International Symposium
- At 23 July, 2012
- By admin
- In News and Comments
International Symposium: “Human Rights and Democracy in a Globalized World”. November, 12-14, 2012.
Symposium organized by the Centre for Philosophical Research (Argentina) and Torcuato Di Tella University (Argentina) with the support of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.
International keynote speakers:
– Hauke Brunkhorst (University of Flensburg, Germany)
– Regina Kreide (Giessen University, Germany)
– Cristina Lafont (Northwestern University, USA)
– Saladin Meckled-García (University College London, UK).
National main speakers:
– Marcelo Alegre (Buenos Aires University, Argentina)
– Alejandro Chehtman (Di Tella University, Argentina)
– Mariano Garreta Leclercq (National Research Council, Argentina)
– Osvaldo Guariglia (National Research Council, Argentina)
– Julio Montero (National Research Council, Argentina)
– Eduardo Rivera López (Di Tella University, Argentina)
REPRESSED DEMOCRACY
- At 3 July, 2012
- By admin
- In Articles
REPRESSED DEMOCRACY:
LEGITIMACY PROBLEMS IN WORLD SOCIETY
Regina Kreide
Justus Liebig University Giessen
La regresión de la democracia: problemas de legitimidad en la sociedad mundial.
La democracia parece ya no ser autoevidente. Colin Crouch y otros autores describen un creciente sentido de alienación en la plítica: las instituciones y procedimientos democráticos podría estar trabajando adecuadamente, pero podrían promover valores no democráticos tales como la tecnocracia, la oligarquía, el elitismo. Para los ciudadanos, solo persiste una ilusión de democracia. Este artículo argumenta que el debilitamiento de la democracia en la práctica espeja el desvanecimiento de la democracia en la teoría política y la filosofía. Podríamos enfrentar una crisis de la política democrática como resultado de una crisis de la teoría democrática. La teorías predominantes de la democracia no consiguen, en su mayoría, reflejar adecuadamente las condiciones sociales cambiantes en las sociedades democráticas ni ofrecer una concepción de la política democrática que pueda abordar los actuales déficits de legitimidad. Este artículo discute enfoques teóricos destacados (teoría ideal vs. realismo; consenso vs. teoría del desacuerdo) y sostiene que todas tienen dificultades para conceptualizar posibles recursos para la democratización que sean adecuados para las condiciones y problemas contemporáneos. Una nueva versión de teoría política es esbozada y defendida. Se trata de una teoría que constriuye sobre una redefinida noción de soberanía democrática y poder comunicativo, lo bastante compleja como para reflejar la realidad sociológica de la política actual trascender el formalismo de la democracia.
Palabras clave: democracia radical, legitimidad, poder comunicativo, represión, lo político