Struggles against Injustice:: Contemporary Critical Theory and Political Violence

This article investigates a significant problem in contemporary critical theory, namely its failure to address effectively the possibility that a campaign of political violence may be a legitimate means of fighting grave injustice. Having offered a working definition of ‘political violence’, I argue that critical theory should be focused on experiences of injustice rather than on ideals of justice. I then explore the reasons as to why, save for some intriguing remarks on retrospective legitimation, Jürgen Habermas has not addressed this issue directly. While Axel Honneth's recognition theory may have greater potential here, the absence of explicit consideration of the matter by him leaves considerable work to do. I introduce five questions in the concluding section that provide a starting point in setting out an appropriately stringent, normative test for claims that support violent action against injustice.

Deliberative Perfectionism: Why We Can and Should Talk about the Good

In contemporary political theory, perfectionists believe that the state should promote substantive conceptions of the good through its legislation. Supporters of neutrality, instead, claim that the state should refrain from doing so. In this article I analyse perfectionism in relation to Jürgen Habermas’ theory of discourse and deliberative politics (1996) and critique Habermas’ distinction between ‘ethical’ and ‘moral’ discourses (1984, 1990). By relating Habermas’ theory to George Sher’s account of perfectionism (1997), I argue that we can establish the meta-ethical grounds for a model of deliberation encompassing ethical matters (that is, questions concerning the good life) not confined to the limits of specific communities. I conclude by arguing that ethical deliberation is not only feasible but also desirable. Given the fact of ethical pluralism, and in order to show respect towards their fellow citizens, political perfectionists ought to be ready to show how their ethical claims (which they want to see translated into state policy) relate to deeper meta-ethical human goals on which we can ideally find a consensus through deliberation.

Gender and Cosmopolitanism in Europe: A Feminist Perspective

Gender and Cosmopolitanism in Europe combines a feminist critique of contemporary and prominent approaches to cosmopolitanism with an in-depth analysis of historical cosmopolitanism and the manner in which gendered symbolic boundaries of national political communities in two European countries are drawn. Exploring the work of prominent scholars of new cosmopolitanism in Britain and Germany, including Held, Habermas, Beck and Bhabha, it delivers a timely intervention into current debates on globalisation, Europeanisation and social processes of transformation in and beyond specific national societies.

A rigorous examination of the emancipatory potential of current debates surrounding cosmopolitanism in Europe, this book will be of interest to sociologist and political scientists working on questions of identity, inclusion, citizenship, globalisation, cosmopolitanism and gender.
Contents: Introduction: gendered cosmopolitanism: the scope of this book; Who belongs? Who is the Other?; Recognition, social equality and the current EU anti-discrimination policy; Kulturnation and the homogenised notion of community belonging: Jürgen Habermas's and Ulrich Beck's approaches to 'European' cosmopolitanism; Global trade, the city and commercial cosmopolitanism: David Held's and Homi K. Bhabha's approaches to new cosmopolitanism; About dead-ends, one-way streets and critical crossroads; Transversal conversations on the scope of new cosmopolitanism beyond the Eurocentric framework; Bibliography; Index.

Communication, recognition and social work: Aligning the ethical theories of Habermas and Honneth

The modern world is replete with ethical challenges of Orwellian proportions. The violation of human rights and misrecognition of identities are two of the most pressing examples. In this paper, the ethical theories of Habermas and Honneth are aligned as a way of addressing these specific challenges within social work. It is suggested that these theories are complementary, mutually rectifying and concordant at the meta-ethical level of analysis. The alignment is also justified, pargmatically, through the construction of three hypothetical vignettes demonstrating different kinds of practice dilemmas. The need for egalitarian communication and the imperative to recognise human identity in all its dimensions subsequently emerge as the two foundation stones for ethical deliberation in social work.

Further reflections on Habermas's contribution to discourse in child protection: An examination of power in social life

Hayes and Houston's positive review of Habermas's contribution to discourse in family group conferences (in this journal) has been challenged by Garrett. In this paper, one of the authors replies to Garrett but extends the analysis through a more considered, developed and detailed examination of Habermas's thoughts on power in social life. This leads to a conceptual framework that enables the participants in the conference to exercise power in a positive manner. In developing this earlier analysis, the paper also acknowledges Garrett's argument that Bourdieu helps us to understand the nature of constraining social structures in child protection. However, Bourdieu's ideas are subsequently challenged on the grounds that they lack a competent formulation on human agency - a faculty that Habermas cogently elucidates. This enlarged understanding of agency, it is argued, offers a theoretical resource that fits better with the ethos of emancipatory social work.

The Equalization of Effective Communicative Freedom: Democratic Justice in the Constitutional State and Beyond

Jurgen Habermas takes the realization of rights through the democratic self-organization of legal communities to be the normative core of emancipatory politics. In this article I explore the implications of this claim in relation to the requirements of justice. I argue that Habermas's discourse theory of democratic legitimacy presupposes a substantive principle of justice that demands the equalization of effective communicative freedom for all structurally constituted social groups in any constitutional state. This involves the elimination of a range of structural injustices rooted in the complex interrelationships between political, economic and cultural orders. In the final section I sketch briefly the implications of this analysis in the context of ongoing globalization processes. It is suggested that the most effective way to establish a just system of global governance is to equalize effective communicative freedom among nation-states.

Developing critical social work in theory and in practice: child protection and communicative reason

This paper argues that a critical analysis of the ideologies that inform contemporary child care has been missing from the ‘re-focusing debate’. Such an analysis points up the necessity of reasserting a critical social work position in order to provide a basis for reconstructing practice and engaging with other social actors and their ideologies in an open and creative fashion compatible with Habermas’ aspiration of ‘communicative reason’.

Prognostic significance of combined MN1, ERG, BAALC, and EVI1 (MEBE) expression in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

Overexpression of MN1, ERG, BAALC, and EVI1 (MEBE) genes in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients is associated with poor prognosis, but their prognostic effect in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) has not been studied systematically. Expression data of the four genes from 140 MDS patients were combined in an additive score, which was validated in an independent patient cohort of 110 MDS patients. A high MEBE score, defined as high expression of at least two of the four genes, predicted a significantly shorter overall survival (OS) (HR 2.29, 95 % CI 1.3-4.09, P?=?.005) and time to AML progression (HR 4.83, 95 % CI 2.01-11.57, P?